This article investigates differences in yields on identical Treasury notes and bills and shows that they reflect differences in liquidity (immediacy) risk and taxes. It proposes an empirical measure for differences in the liquidity risk of notes and bills: the volatility of the underlying rate times the ratio of bills' turnover to notes' turnover. Because differential taxes affect sellers but not buyers of bills and notes, the results reject, free of informational problems, the hypothesis that the notes' demand curve is horizonta. Note-bill yield differences also decrease with inventories of notes—the less liquid asset.

This paper examines the effects of the delivery basis risk embedded in nearly all futures contracts on efficiency tests of these markets. Examining soybean futures contracts, we show that delivery basis risk has important implications for market efficiency tests. Assuming no delivery basis risk, the market efficiency hypothesis is rejected. However, futures prices contain significant time-varying expected delivery basis and time-varying expected delivery risk premiums. Once these expected delivery basis and delivery risk premiums are accounted for, the apparent inefficiency is eliminated. Equilibrium spot prices also contain significant time-varying expected delivery risk premiums.

We study a dynamic model where uncertainty about interim output adjustments causes producers to face price, cost and output uncertainty. Stochastically separable production decisions are independent of the producer’s risk preferences and expectations and are based on the prevailing futures price as a certain output price. Conditions under which futures contracts achieve stochastic separation are established. Optimal hedging and maturity structure of futures contracts, equilibrium futures prices, and the effects of futures trading on output are studied. The systematic risk premium depends on the product of the futures beta and the covariance of the market return with production revenues.

Journal Article Market Trading Structures and Asset Pricing: Evidence from the Treasury-Bill Markets Get access Avraham Kamara Avraham Kamara University of Washington Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Financial Studies, Volume 1, Issue 4, October 1988, Pages 357–375, https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/1.4.357 Published: 14 March 2015

ABSTRACT The relation between default‐free interest rates and expected economic growth is substantially stronger than suggested by extant literature. Futures‐implied Treasury bill yield spreads are more highly correlated with future real consumption, investment, and GNP growth than spot spreads. This stronger relation arises because using futures removes a component of the spot term structure that covaries negatively with real economic growth. Treasury forward rates from spot bills contain a premium for the risk that short‐sellers will default. This risk premium is negatively related to expected economic growth.

Existing empirical studies of the put-call parity condition report frequent, substantial violations. An important problem in interpreting these results is that these studies all investigate American options. While some of these studies attempt to reduce the effects of possible early exercise on their tests, they cannot fully account for the effect of early exercise. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude from these studies whether, or to what extent, observed put-call parity violations are due to market inefficiency or due to the value of early exercise. We avoid the early exercise problem by testing put-call parity using European options. We find violations that are much less frequent and smaller than the studies using American options. Moreover, these violations reflect premia for liquidity (immediacy) risk.

ABSTRACT Nearly all futures contracts allow delivery of any of several qualities of the underlying asset. Consequently, the price of the futures contract is associated more with the price of the expected cheapest deliverable variety than with the price of the par‐delivery variety. The delivery specifications introduce a delivery risk for every hedger in the market. We derive the optimal hedging strategies in these markets. Their hedging effectiveness is evaluated for wheat futures contracts in Chicago. Hedging optimally would have significantly reduced the variance of the rates of return on hedges while yielding similar mean returns.

Nearly all futures contracts allow delivery of any of several qualities of the underlying asset. Consequently, the price of the futures contract is associated more with the price of the expected cheapest deliverable variety than with the price of the par-delivery variety. The delivery specifications introduce a delivery risk for every hedger in the market. We derive the optimal hedging strategies in these markets. Their hedging effectiveness is evaluated for wheat futures contracts in Chicago. Hedging optimally would have significantly reduced the variance of the rates of return on hedges while yielding similar mean returns.

We model how firms releasing information on different dates causes the CAPM to fail, requiring an additional factor based on the information structure to price assets. We exemplify this mechanism’s empirical relevance using quarterly earnings announcements, which cluster across months along size and book-to-market. Seventy percent of the alpha reduction from including SMB and HML occurs in the four main earnings announcement months. The information structure factor accounts for all of SMB and HML’s seasonal alpha reduction and one third of their overall alpha reduction. Controlling for size and book-to-market, exposures to SMB and HML vary with firms’ earnings announcement month.