[Evidence of stock-return predictability by financial ratios is still controversial, as documented by inconsistent results for in-sample and out-of-sample regressions and by substantial parameter instability. This article shows that these seemingly incompatible results can be reconciled if the assumption of a fixed steady state mean of the economy is relaxed. We find strong empirical evidence in support of shifts in the steady state and propose simple methods to adjust financial ratios for such shifts. The in-sample forecasting relationship of adjusted price ratios and future returns is statistically significant and stable over time. In real time, however, changes in the steady state make the in-sample return forecastability hard to exploit out-of-sample. The uncertainty of estimating the size of steady-state shifts rather than the estimation of their dates is responsible for the difficulty of forecasting stock returns in real time. Our conclusions hold for a variety of financial ratios and are robust to changes in the econometric technique used to estimate shifts in the steady state.]

[Aggregate stock prices, relative to virtually any indicator of fundamental value, soared to unprecedented levels in the 1990s. Even today, after the market declines since 2000, they remain well above historical norms. Why? We consider one particular explanation: A fall in macroeconomic risk, or the volatility of the aggregate economy. Empirically, we find a strong correlation between low-frequency movements in macroeconomic volatility and low-frequency movements in the stock market. To model this phenomenon, we estimate a two-state regime switching model for the volatility and mean of consumption growth, and find evidence of a shift to substantially lower consumption volatility at the beginning of the 1990s. We then use these estimates from postwar data to calibrate a rational asset pricing model with regime switches in both the mean and standard deviation of consumption growth. Plausible parameterizations of the model are found to account for a significant portion of the run-up in asset valuation ratios observed in the late 1990s.]

Evidence of stock-return predictability by financial ratios is still controversial, as documented by inconsistent results for in-sample and out-of-sample regressions and by substantial parameter instability. This article shows that these seemingly incompatible results can be reconciled if the assumption of a fixed steady state mean of the economy is relaxed. We find strong empirical evidence in support of shifts in the steady state and propose simple methods to adjust financial ratios for such shifts. The in-sample forecasting relationship of adjusted price ratios and future returns is statistically significant and stable over time. In real time, however, changes in the steady state make the in-sample return forecastability hard to exploit out-of-sample. The uncertainty of estimating the size of steady-state shifts rather than the estimation of their dates is responsible for the difficulty of forecasting stock returns in real time. Our conclusions hold for a variety of financial ratios and are robust to changes in the econometric technique used to estimate shifts in the steady state.

Aggregate stock prices, relative to virtually any indicator of fundamental value, soared to unprecedented levels in the 1990s. Even today, after the market declines since 2000, they remain well above historical norms. Why? We consider one particular explanation: a fall in macroeconomicrisk, or the volatility of the aggregate economy. Empirically, we find a strong correlation between low-frequency movements in macroeconomic volatility and low-frequency movements in the stock market. To model this phenomenon, we estimate a two-state regime switching model for the volatility and mean of consumption growth, and find evidence of a shift to substantially lower consumption volatility at the beginning of the 1990s. We then use these estimates from postwar data to calibrate a rational asset pricing model with regime switches in both the mean and standard deviation of consumption growth. Plausible parameterizations of the model are found to account for a significant portion of the run-up in asset valuation ratios observed in the late 1990s.