To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
47 results

Does Money Explain Asset Returns? Theory and Empirical Analysis

Journal of Finance 1996 51(1), 345
A cash-in-advance model of a monetary economy is used to derive a money-based CAPM (M-CAPM), which allows us to implement tests of asset pricing restrictions without consumption data. A test as in Fama and MacBeth of the model suggests that the money betas have some explanatory power for the cross-sectional variation of expected returns; however, the model is rejected using conditional information. Consistent with our predictions, estimates of the curvature parameter are lower than those of the consumption CAPM (C-CAPM) and pricing errors of the M-CAPM tend to be smaller than those of the C-CAPM.

Macroeconomic Influences and the Variability of the Commodity Futures Basis

Journal of Finance 1993 48(2), 555-573
ABSTRACT We provide evidence that the spread between commodity spot and futures prices (the basis) reflects the macroeconomic risks common to all asset markets. The basis of many commodities is correlated with the stock index dividend yield and corporate bond quality spread. Explanatory power is related to exposure to macroeconomic fluctuations: about 40 percent of the variation in the basis of a portfolio of commodities with high business cycle sensitivity is explained by the stock and bond yields. Further diagnostics indicate that these associations are largely due to the presence of risk premiums, rather than spot price forecasts, in the basis.

Structural and Return Characteristics of Small and Large Firms

Journal of Finance 1991 46(4), 1467-1484
ABSTRACT We examine differences in structural characteristics that lead firms of different sizes to react differently to the same economic news. We find that a small firm portfolio contains a large proportion of marginal firms‐firms with low production efficiency and high financial leverage. We construct two size‐matched return indices designed to mimic the return behavior of marginal firms and find that these return indices are important in explaining the time‐series return difference between small and large firms. Furthermore, risk exposures to these indices are as powerful as log(size) in explaining average returns of size‐ranked portfolios.

An Unconditional Asset‐Pricing Test and the Role of Firm Size as an Instrumental Variable for Risk

Journal of Finance 1988 43(2), 309-325
ABSTRACT In an intertemporal economy where both risk (stock beta) and expected return are time varying, the authors derive a linear relation between the unconditional beta and the unconditional return under certain stationarity assumptions about the stochastic process of size‐portfolio betas. The model suggests the use of long time periods to estimate the unconditional portfolio betas. The authors find that, after controlling for the betas thus estimated, a firm‐size proxy, such as the logarithm of the firm size, does not have explanatory power for the averaged returns across the size‐ranked portfolios.

The Performance of Japanese Mutual Funds

Review of Financial Studies 1997 10(2), 237-274
We analyze the performance of Japanese open-type stock mutual funds for the 1981–1992 period. The results show that, regardless of the performance measures and benchmarks employed, most of the Japanese mutual funds underperform the benchmarks by between 3.6% and 10.8% per annum. These funds tend to invest more in large stocks with low book-to-market ratios. But this feature does not explain the underperformance. A potential explanation is the dilution effect caused by inflows of funds. In Japan, a new investor of an open-type fund only pays in the after-tax value of the net asset value. We conduct a bootstrap experiment to assess the magnitude of this dilution effect.

An Empirical Comparison of Alternative Models of the Short-Term Interest Rate

Journal of Finance 1992 47(3), 1209 open access
We estimate and compare a variety of continuous-time models of the short-term riskless rate using the Generalized Method of Moments. We find that the most successful models in capturing the dynamics of the short-term interest rate are those that allow the volatility of interest rate changes to be highly sensitive to the level of the riskless rate. A number of well-known models perform poorly in the comparisons because of their implicit restrictions on term structure volatility. We show that these results have important implications for the use of different term structure models in valuing interest rate contingent claims and in hedging interest rate risk.

An Empirical Comparison of Alternative Models of the Short‐Term Interest Rate

Journal of Finance 1992 47(3), 1209-1227
ABSTRACT We estimate and compare a variety of continuous‐time models of the short‐term riskless rate using the Generalized Method of Moments. We find that the most successful models in capturing the dynamics of the short‐term interest rate are those that allow the volatility of interest rate changes to be highly sensitive to the level of the riskless rate. A number of well‐known models perform poorly in the comparisons because of their implicit restrictions on term structure volatility. We show that these results have important implications for the use of different term structure models in valuing interest rate contingent claims and in hedging interest rate risk.