We propose a novel approach to measuring firm-level risk exposures and costs of equity. Using a simple consumption-based asset pricing model that explains nearly two-thirds of the variation in average returns across 55 anomaly portfolios, we map the relation between exposures to consumption risk and portfolio-level characteristics. We use this relation to calculate exposures to consumption risk at the firm level and show that the calculated consumption risk exposures yield portfolios with large differences in average returns and ex post consumption risk exposures consistent with those predicted by our calculated betas. Further, industry betas and risk premia implied by our procedure display economically intuitive variation over time. Finally, Fama-MacBeth regressions suggest that risk exposures calculated using our procedure dominate those from alternative factor models at explaining cross-sectional variation in returns.

We argue that the cointegrating relation between dividends and consumption, a measure of long-run consumption risks, is a key determinant of risk premia at all investment horizons. As the investment horizon increases, transitory risks disappear, and the asset's beta is dominated by long-run consumption risks. We show that the return betas, derived from the cointegration-based VAR (EC-VAR) model, successfully account for the cross-sectional variation in equity returns at both short and long horizons; however, this is not the case when the cointegrating restriction is ignored. Our evidence highlights the importance of cointegration-based long-run consumption risks for financial markets.

This paper proposes a new method of forming basis assets. We use return correlations to sort securities into portfolios and compare the inferences drawn from this set of basis assets with those drawn from other benchmark portfolios. The proposed set of portfolios appears capable of generating measures of risk–return trade-off that are estimated with a lower error. In tests of asset pricing models, we find that the returns of these portfolios are significantly and positively related to both CAPM and Consumption CAPM risk measures, and there are significant components of these returns that are not captured by the three-factor model.

We assess the profitability of momentum strategies using a stochastic discount factor approach. In unconditional tests, approximately half of the strategies' profitability is explained. In conditional tests we see a further slight decline in profits. We argue that the risk of these strategies should be increasing in the market risk premium. Empirically, while their risk measures estimated relative to the stochastic discount factor behave as predicted, market betas do not; thus capital asset pricing model (CAPM)-like benchmarks may lead to incorrect inferences. Given that our nonparametric risk adjustment explains roughly half of momentum strategy profits, we cannot rule out the possibility of residual mispricing.

ABSTRACT We examine the relative pricing of nominal Treasury bonds and Treasury inflation‐protected securities in the presence of U.S. default risk. Hedged breakeven inflation is significantly positively related to U.S. default risk, driven by correlation between shocks to default risk and both shocks to inflation swap premia and Treasury yields. To understand the mechanisms through which default risk is related to inflation swaps and sovereign yields, we estimate an affine term structure model to capture their joint dynamics. Our estimation implies that the interaction between inflation dynamics and default is the primary source of differential pricing.

This article theoretically explores the characteristics underpinning quadratic term structure models (QTSMs), which designate the yield on a bond as a quadratic function of underlying state variables. We develop a comprehensive QTSM, which is maximally flexible and thus encompasses the features of several diverse models including the double square-root model of Longstaff (1989), the univariate quadratic model of Beaglehole and Tenney (1992), and the squared-autoregressive-independent-variable nominal term structure (SAINTS) model of Constantinides (1992). We document a complete classification of admissibility and empirical identification for the QTSM, and demonstrate that the QTSM can overcome limitations inherent in affine term structure models (ATSMs). Using the efficient method of moments of Gallant and Tauchen (1996), we test the empirical performance of the model in determining bond prices and compare the performance to the ATSMs. The results of the goodness-of-fit tests suggest that the QTSMs outperform the ATSMs in explaining historical bond price behavior in the United States.

ABSTRACT We show that aggregate consumption risks embodied in cash flows can account for the puzzling differences in risk premia across book‐to‐market, momentum, and size‐sorted portfolios. The dynamics of aggregate consumption and cash flow growth rates, modeled as a vector autoregression, are used to measure the consumption beta of discounted cash flows. Differences in these cash flow betas account for more than 60% of the cross‐sectional variation in risk premia. The market price for risk in cash flows is highly significant. We argue that cash flow risk is important for interpreting differences in risk compensation across assets.