Using a multivariate vector-autoregression (VAR) approach, this paper investigates causal relations and dynamic interactions among asset returns, real activity, and inflation in the postwar United States. Major findings are (1) stock returns appear Granger-causally prior and help explain real activity, (2) with interest rates in the VAR, stock returns explain little variation in inflation, although interest rates explain a substantial fraction of the variation in inflation, and (3) inflation explains little variation in real activity. These findings seem more compatible with Fama (1981) than with Geske and Roll (1983) or with Ram and Spencer (1983).

Using a multivariate vector‐autoregression (VAR) approach, this paper investigates causal relations and dynamic interactions among asset returns, real activity, and inflation in the postwar United States. Major findings are (1) stock returns appear Granger‐causally prior and help explain real activity, (2) with interest rates in the VAR, stock returns explain little variation in inflation, although interest rates explain a substantial fraction of the variation in inflation, and (3) inflation explains little variation in real activity. These findings seem more compatible with Fama (1981) than with Geske and Roll (1983) or with Ram and Spencer (1983) .

We examine three aspects of the relation between dividend initiation and increase announcements and idiosyncratic volatility. First, consistent with dividend signaling, we find that firms with higher levels of idiosyncratic volatility are associated with higher announcement abnormal returns when initiating or increasing dividends. Second, firms on average experience an ex post reduction in idiosyncratic volatility following dividend initiations that is associated with announcement and long-term abnormal returns. Finally, high idiosyncratic volatility firms are associated with stronger positive post event return drift.

We investigate the determinants of executive stock options (ESOs) and their impact on risky investment and subsequent firm performance in a dynamic setting. We find that, first, the dynamic response of ESOs to growth opportunity and risk is positive and lasts for two to three years. Second, the dynamic response of risky investments to option compensation is positive but converges to zero after three years. More importantly, the positive effect of ESOs on risky investments is observed when CEOs' personal risk-aversion is taken into account. Third, accounting performance responds positively to the risky, option-induced investment, but the dynamic effect lasts only for one year. Meanwhile, when managers undertake more risky investments than what ESOs imply, accounting performance responds negatively to the over-investment.

This paper develops a two-country micro-theoretic model consistent with the Ricardian equivalence hypothesis. Specifically, tax increases used to retire government debt will not affect private spending or the current account balance. However, increases in government spending, regardless of the means of finance, can be expected to induce a current account deficit. An unconstrained vector autoregression shows some patterns in the recent U.S. data that appear to be inconsistent with the Ricardian equivalence hypothesis. Rigorous testing of the model, however, does not allow the authors to reject the independence of the record federal government budget and current account deficits.

A dividend yield model has been widely used in previous research that relates stock market valuations to cash flow fundamentals. Given controversies about using dividends as a proxy for cash flows, a loglinear book-to-market model has recently been proposed. However, these models rely on the assumption that dividend yield and book-to-market ratio are both stationary, and empirical evidence for this is, at best, mixed. We develop a new model, the loglinear cointegration model, that explains future profitability and excess stock returns in terms of a linear combination of log book-to-market ratio and log dividend yield. The loglinear cointegration model performs better than the log dividend yield model and the log book-to-market model in terms of cross-equation restriction tests and forecasting performance comparisons. The superior performance of the loglinear cointegration model suggests that the linear combination may be a better indicator of intrinsic fundamentals than the dividend yield or the book-to-market ratio separately.

In this paper, we present economic forces that affect the closed-end fund share price using a simple two-period model with limited participation. We characterize three economic forces: management fee, principal-agent problem effect and diversification benefit effect. The role of the management fee is consistent with recent studies by Ross [Ross S., 2002. Neoclassical finance, alternative finance and the closed end fund puzzle. European Financial Management 8, 129–137, Ross, S., 2002. A neoclassical look at behavioral finance: closed end funds. The Princeton lectures in finance III] and findings of various empirical studies [e.g., Kumar, R., Noronha, G.M., 1992. A re-examination of the relationship between closed-end fund discounts and expenses. Journal of Financial Research 15(2) Summer, 139–147; Russel, P.S., 2005. Closed-end fund pricing: The puzzle, the explanations, and some new evidence, Journal of Business and Economic Studies 11(1), 34–49; Gemmill, G., Thomas, D.C., 2002. Noise trading, costly arbitrage, and asset prices: Evidence from closed end funds. Journal of Finance 57(6), 2571–2594]. The model’s principal-agent problem effect is consistent with empirical findings by Brickley et al. [Brickley, James, Steven Manaster, Schallheim, James, 1991. The tax-timing option and the discounts on closed-end investment companies. Journal of Business 64, 287–312] of positive relation between the fund discount and the average variance of the constituent assets in the fund portfolio. In addition, it provides a theoretical framework for empirical studies, which examine the role of agency costs [Barclay, Michael J., Clifford G. Holderness, Jeffrey Pontiff, 1993. Private benefits from block ownership and discounts on closed-end funds. Journal of Financial Economics 33, 263–291] and compensation contracts [Coles, J., Suay, J., Woodbury, D., 2000. Fund advisor compensation in closed-end funds. Journal of Finance 55 (3), 1385–1414; Deli, Daniel N., 2002. Mutual fund advisory contracts: An empirical Investigation. Journal of Finance 57(1), 109–133] on the behavior of fund managers and fund discounts. The model’s diversification benefit effect supports the result in [Bonser-Neal C., Brauer,G., Neal, R.., Wheatley, S., 1990. International investment restrictions and closed-end country fund prices. Journal of Finance 45, 523–547] that announcement of financial market liberalization is associated with a decrease in the fund premium. It also supports the findings of [Kumar, R., Noronha, G.M., 1992. A re-examination of the relationship between closed-end fund discounts and expenses. Journal of Financial Research 15(2) Summer, 139–147; Chay, J.B., Trzcinka, Charles A., 1999. Managerial performance and the cross-sectional pricing of closed-end funds. Journal of Financial Economics 52, 379–408] of a positive relation between current premium and the risk-adjusted return over the following year.

Given the growth in the importance and popularity of share repurchases, we use an alternative time-series approach to test two hypotheses on the motives for share repurchases and dividends: the flexibility hypothesis and the substitution hypothesis. By investigating both share repurchase and dividend payout policies in the context of a time-series vector autoregression, we account for the dynamic and multi-dimensional nature of the two payout policies. We find that share repurchases are associated with temporary components of earnings, whereas dividends are not, and that share repurchases and dividends are imperfect substitutes.

We examine whether the market demand curve for equities is dawnward sloping. Unlike previous studies that examine individual stocks' demand curves, we look at the aggregate demand curve. As a proxy for aggregate demand, we employ equity mutual fund flows. Unlike previous studies that focus on events that are unlikely to convey new information to the market, we devise an empirical framework that disentangles the price-pressure effect and the information effect. We do not find evidence for the price-pressure effect that equity fund flows directly affect stock market prices in the presence of fundamentals of firms. Instead, we find that equity fund flows seem to be influenced by the performance of the stock market and that investors try to forecast fundamentals of firms and change their demand for stocks accordingly. Overall, these findings are with a horizontal market demand curve for equities.