The equity variance risk premium is the expected compensation earned for selling variance risk in equity markets. The variance risk premium is positive and shows only moderate persistence. High variance risk premiums coincide with the left tail of the consumption growth distribution shifting down. These facts, together with risk-neutral skewness being substantially more negative than physical return skewness, refute the bulk of the extant consumption-based asset pricing models. We introduce a tractable habit model that does fit the data. In the model, the variance risk premium depends positively (or negatively) on “bad” (or “good”) consumption growth uncertainty.

We investigate the expectations hypotheses of the term structure of interest rates and of the foreign exchange market using vector autoregressive methods for U.S. dollar, Deutsche mark, and British pound interest rates and exchange rates. We examine Wald, Lagrange multiplier, and distance metric tests by iterating on approximate solutions that require only matrix inversions. Bias‐corrected, constrained VARs provide Monte Carlo simulations. Wald tests grossly overreject the null, Lagrange multiplier tests slightly underreject, and distance metric tests overreject. A common interpretation emerges from the small sample statistics. The evidence against the expectations hypotheses is much less strong than under asymptotic inference.

We study a new class of unconditional and conditional mean‐variance spanning tests that exploits the duality between Hansen‐Jagannathan bounds (1991) and mean‐standard deviation frontiers. The tests are shown to be equivalent to standard spanning tests in population, but we document substantial differences in the small sample performance of alternative tests. Our empirical application examines the diversification benefits from emerging equity markets using an extensive new data set on U.S. and U.K.‐traded closed‐end funds. We find significant diversification benefits for the U.K. country funds, but not for the U.S. funds. The difference appears to relate to differences in portfolio holdings rather than to the behavior of premiums in the United States versus the United Kingdom.

We distinguish between "good" and "bad" carry trades constructed from G-10 currencies. The good trades exhibit higher Sharpe ratios and sometimes positive return skewness, in contrast to the bad trades that have both substantially lower Sharpe ratios and highly negative return skewness. Surprisingly, good trades do not involve the most typical carry currencies like the Australian dollar and Japanese yen. The distinction between good and bad carry trades significantly alters our understanding of currency carry trade returns, and invalidates, for example, explanations invoking return skewness and crash risk.

It appears that volatility in equity markets is asymmetric: returns and conditional volatility are negatively correlated. We provide a unified framework to simultaneously investigate asymmetric volatility at the firm and the market level and to examine two potential explanations of the asymmetry: leverage effects and time-varying risk premiums. Our empirical application uses the market portfolio and portfolios with different leverage constructed from Nikkei 225 stocks, extending the empirical evidence on asymmetry to Japanese stocks. Although volatility asymmetry is present and significant at the market and the portfolio levels, its source differs across portfolios. We find that it is important to include leverage ratios in the volatility dynamics but that their economic effects are mostly dwarfed by the volatility feedback mechanism. Volatility feedback is enhanced by a phenomenon that we term covariance asymmetry: conditional covariances with the market increase only significantly following negative market news. We do not find significant asymmetries in conditional betas.

We study the economic sources of stock-bond return comovements and their time variation using a dynamic factor model. We identify the economic factors employing a semistructural regime-switching model for state variables such as interest rates, inflation, the output gap, and cash flow growth. We also view risk aversion, uncertainty about inflation and output, and liquidity proxies as additional potential factors. We find that macroeconomic fundamentals contribute little to explaining stock and bond return correlations but that other factors, especially liquidity proxies, play a more important role. The macro factors are still important in fitting bond return volatility, whereas the "variance premium" is critical in explaining stock return volatility. However, the factor model primarily fails in fitting covariances. (JEL G11, G12, G14, E43, E44) Stock and bond returns in the United States display an average correlation of about 19% during the post-1968 period. Shiller and Beltratti (1992) underestimate the empirical correlation using a present value with constant discount rates, whereas Yet, these models generate realistically positive correlations using economic state variables.

We propose a measure of capital market integration arising from a conditional regime‐switching model. Our measure allows us to describe expected returns in countries that are segmented from world capital markets in one part of the sample and become integrated later in the sample. We find that a number of emerging markets exhibit time‐varying integration. Some markets appear more integrated than one might expect based on prior knowledge of investment restrictions. Other markets appear segmented even though foreigners have relatively free access to their capital markets. While there is a perception that world capital markets have become more integrated, our country‐specific investigation suggests that this is not always the case.

We document extreme bias and dispersion in the small-sample distributions of four standard regression-based tests of the expectations hypothesis of the term structure of interest rates. The biases arise because of the extreme persistence in short interest rates. We derive approximate analytic expressions for the biases under a simple first-order autoregressive data generating process for the short rate. We then conduct Monte Carlo experiments based on a bias-adjusted first-order autoregressive process for the short rate and for a more realistic bias-adjusted VAR-GARCH model incorporating the short rate and three term spreads. Conducting inference with the small-sample distributions of test statistics rather than with their asymptotic distributions provides a more consistent rejection of the expectations hypothesis. Plausible sources of measurement error in short and long yields do not salvage the expectations hypothesis.

Changes in nominal interest rates must be due to either movements in real interest rates, expected inflation, or the inflation risk premium. We develop a term structure model with regime switches, time‐varying prices of risk, and inflation to identify these components of the nominal yield curve. We find that the unconditional real rate curve in the United States is fairly flat around 1.3%. In one real rate regime, the real term structure is steeply downward sloping. An inflation risk premium that increases with maturity fully accounts for the generally upward sloping nominal term structure.

We provide a formal treatment of both static and dynamic portfolio choice using the Disappointment Aversion preferences of Gul (1991. Econometrica 59(3), 667–686), which imply asymmetric aversion to gains versus losses. Our dynamic formulation nests the standard CRRA asset allocation problem as a special case. Using realistic data generating processes, we find reasonable equity portfolio allocations for disappointment averse investors with utility functions exhibiting low curvature. Moderate variation in parameters can robustly generate substantial cross-sectional variation in portfolio holdings, including optimal non-participation in the stock market.