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

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

When It Cannot Get Better or Worse: The Asymmetric Impact of Good and Bad News on Bond Returns in Expansions and Recessions

Review of Finance 2010 14(1), 119-155 open access
Abstract We examine empirically the response of bond returns and their volatility to good and bad macroeconomic news during expansions and recessions. We find that macroeconomic announcements are most important when they contain bad news for bond returns in expansions and, to a lesser extent, good news in contractions. In expansions, the bond market responds most strongly to bad news in non-farm payrolls, while in recessions good news about inflation is relatively more important. We also document that macroeconomic news impacts the volatility of bond returns at all maturities by increasing jump intensities and altering the jump size distribution.

The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes?

Review of Financial Studies 2010 23(2), 863-899
[Campbell, Lettau, Malkiel, and Xu (2001) document a positive trend in idiosyncratic volatility during the 1962-1997 period. We show that by 2003 volatility falls back to pre-1990s levels. Furthermore, we show that the increase and subsequent reversal is concentrated among firms with low stock prices and high retail ownership. This evidence suggests that the increase in idiosyncratic volatility through the 1990s was not a time trend but, rather, an episodic phenomenon, at least partially associated with retail investors. Results from cross-sectional regressions, conditional trend estimation, stock-split events, and "attentiongrabbing" events are consistent with a retail trading effect.]

The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes?

Review of Financial Studies 2010 23(2), 863-899
Campbell, Lettau, Malkiel, and Xu (2001) document a positive trend in idiosyncratic volatility during the 1962–1997 period. We show that by 2003 volatility falls back to pre-1990s levels. Furthermore, we show that the increase and subsequent reversal is concentrated among firms with low stock prices and high retail ownership. This evidence suggests that the increase in idiosyncratic volatility through the 1990s was not a time trend but, rather, an episodic phenomenon, at least partially associated with retail investors. Results from cross-sectional regressions, conditional trend estimation, stock-split events, and “attention-grabbing” events are consistent with a retail trading effect.