Effect of executive compensation on firm performance

The paper finds evidence that the equity-based CEO pay is positively related to firm performance and risk-taking. Both stock price and operating performance as well as firm's riskiness increase in the pay-performance sensitivities (PPS) provided by CEO stock options and stock holdings. PPS can explain stock returns better as an additional factor to the Fama-French 3-factor model. When CEOs are compensated with higher PPS, firms experience higher return on asset (ROA). The higher PPS also leads to the higher risk-taking. While CEO incentive compensation has been perceived mixed on its effectiveness, this study provides support to the equity-based CEO compensation in reducing agency conflicts between CEOs and shareholders.

Are Idiosyncratic Skewness and Idiosyncratic Kurtosis Priced?

This thesis investigates the pricing effects of idiosyncratic moments. We document that idiosyncratic moments, namely idiosyncratic skewness and idiosyncratic kurtosis vary over time. If a factor/characteristic is priced, it must show minimum variation to be correlated with stock returns. Moreover, we can identify two structural breaks in the time series of idiosyncratic kurtosis. Using a sample of US stocks traded on NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ markets from January 1970 to December 2013, we run Fama-MacBeth test at the individual stock level. We document a negative and significant pricing effect of idiosyncratic skewness, consistent with the finding of Boyer et al. (2010). We also report that neither idiosyncratic volatility nor idiosyncratic kurtosis are consistently priced. We run robustness tests using different model specifications and period sub-samples. Our results are robust to the different factors and characteristics usually included in the Fama-MacBeth pricing tests. We also split first our sample using endogenously determined structural breaks. Second, we divide our sample into three equal sub-periods. The results are consistent with our main findings suggesting that expected returns of individual stocks are explained by idiosyncratic skewness. Both idiosyncratic volatility and idiosyncratic kurtosis are irrelevant to asset prices at the individual stock level. As an alternative method, we run Fama-MacBeth tests at the portfolio level. We find that idiosyncratic skewness is not significantly related to returns on idiosyncratic skewness-sorted portfolios. However, it is significant when tested against idiosyncratic kurtosis sorted portfolios.

Are Idiosyncratic Skewness and Idiosyncratic Kurtosis Priced?

This thesis investigates the pricing effects of idiosyncratic moments. We document that idiosyncratic moments, namely idiosyncratic skewness and idiosyncratic kurtosis vary over time. If a factor/characteristic is priced, it must show minimum variation to be correlated with stock returns. Moreover, we can identify two structural breaks in the time series of idiosyncratic kurtosis. Using a sample of US stocks traded on NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ markets from January 1970 to December 2013, we run Fama-MacBeth test at the individual stock level. We document a negative and significant pricing effect of idiosyncratic skewness, consistent with the finding of Boyer et al. (2010). We also report that neither idiosyncratic volatility nor idiosyncratic kurtosis are consistently priced. We run robustness tests using different model specifications and period sub-samples. Our results are robust to the different factors and characteristics usually included in the Fama-MacBeth pricing tests. We also split first our sample using endogenously determined structural breaks. Second, we divide our sample into three equal sub-periods. The results are consistent with our main findings suggesting that expected returns of individual stocks are explained by idiosyncratic skewness. Both idiosyncratic volatility and idiosyncratic kurtosis are irrelevant to asset prices at the individual stock level. As an alternative method, we run Fama-MacBeth tests at the portfolio level. We find that idiosyncratic skewness is not significantly related to returns on idiosyncratic skewness-sorted portfolios. However, it is significant when tested against idiosyncratic kurtosis sorted portfolios.

Stock market reactions to changes in the FTSE SmallCap and S&P/TSX SmallCap indices

Stocks added to (deleted from) the Russell 2000 and the S&P 600 indexes experience positive (negative) abnormal returns following the announcement. However, researchers disagree on whether these abnormal returns are permanent or temporary and offer competing explanations. I address this controversy by examining market reactions for firms that are added to or deleted from the FTSE Small Cap index (the main testing sample) and the S&P/TSX SmallCap index (the comparison sample). For the main testing sample, all stocks except pure additions, experience a permanent price change that is accompanied by a permanent change in liquidity. However, for the comparison sample, abnormal returns over the announcement period fully reverted within 30 days. In further examination of stock liquidity for the main testing sample, sample stocks experience permanent change in liquidity. Taken together, the observed results support the price pressure and liquidity hypotheses.

The Impact of a Corporate Name Change on Stock Price and Trading Volume of Canadian Companies

This thesis examines the impact of a corporate name change on stock price and trading volume of Canadian companies around the announcement date, the approval date, and the adoption date over the time period from 1997 to 2011. Name changes are classified into six categories: major and minor, structural and pure, diversified and focused, accompanied with a change in ticker symbol and without a change in ticker symbol, “Gold” name addition and deletion, and different reasons for name changes (e.g., merger and acquisition, change of structure, change of strategy, and better image). The thesis uses the standard event study methodology to perform abnormal return and trading volume analyses. In addition, regression analysis is employed to examine which type of a name change has the largest impact on cumulative abnormal returns. Sample stocks exhibit a significant positive abnormal return one-day prior to the approval day and one day after the adoption date. Around the approval date we observe significant abnormal returns for stocks with a structural name change. On the day after the adoption date we document abnormal returns for stocks with major, minor, structural, pure, focused, and ticker symbol name changes. If a merger or acquisition is the reason for a name change, companies tend to experience a significant positive abnormal return one-day before the approval date and on the adoption date. If a change of structure is the reason for a name change, companies exhibit a significant positive abnormal return on the approval date and a significant negative abnormal return on the adoption date. In case of a change of strategy as the reason for a name change, companies show a significant negative abnormal return around the approval date and a significant positive abnormal return around the adoption date.