Knowledge that Transforms

Cover Get access The Review of Asset Pricing Studies, Volume 1, Issue 1, December 2011, Page NP, https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/rar006 Published: 01 December 2011

We provide a model in which a single psychological constraint, limited attention, explains both under- and overreaction to different earnings components. Investor neglect of earn-ings induces post-earnings announcement drift and the profit anomaly. Neglect of earnings components causes accrual and cash flow anomalies. The model offers empirical implica-tions relating the strength of earnings-related anomalies to the forecasting power of current earnings-related information for future earnings, investor attentiveness, and the volatilities of and correlation between accruals and cash flows. We also show that, owing to atten-tion costs, in equilibrium not all investors choose to attend to earnings or its components. (JEL G12, G14, M41, M43) Market reactions to earnings and earnings components present a striking puzzle. Stock prices on average underreact to earnings surprises (post-earnings an-nouncement drift), but overreact to the operating accruals component of earn-ings.1 Earnings- and accruals-related patterns of return predictability are often referred to as “anomalies, ” “under- ” and “overreaction, ” or reflecting investor “optimism, ” “pessimism, ” or “naı̈veté. ” Such labels offer little guidance as to

Classical approaches to estimation and decisions requiring estimation often are at odds. When values critical to the decision are convex or concave functions of unknown parameters, the statistician's estimation error adjustments are the opposite of what is appropriate for the decision. We illustrate the conflict by studying multi-period investment problems. The proper application of Jensen's inequality to the decision turns finance intuition on its head: Multi-period investments with negative risk premia can be profitable, risk-averse investors can have infinite demand for risky securities, settings exist in which risk-averse investors should not diversify, and demand for mutual funds with negative alphas may be rational.

We present a novel methodology for estimating/testing the Bansal and Yaron (2004) and related long-run risks (LRR) models based on the observation that the latent state variables are known functions of observables. The large standard error of the estimated elasticity of intertemporal substitution explains the controversy on its magnitude. The model requires higher persistence of consumption and dividend growth to explain the cross-section of returns than that observed in the data. The model matches the unconditional moments of consumption and dividend growth, but implies a higher risk-free rate and lower volatility of the price/dividend ratio, risk-free rate, and market return than those observed in the data. Contrary to the model implications, the conditional variance of the LRR variable fails to capture the large time variation in the equity premium.

We show whether central clearing of a particular class of derivatives lowers counterparty risk. For plausible cases, adding a central clearing counterparty (CCP) for a class of derivatives such as credit default swaps reduces netting efficiency, leading to an increase in average exposure to counterparty default. Further, clearing different classes of derivatives in separate CCPs always increases counterparty exposures relative to clearing the combined set of derivatives in a single CCP. We provide theory as well as illustrative numerical examples of these results that are calibrated to notional derivatives position data for major banks.