The impact of R&D in firm value across Europe

In this thesis the impact of R&D expenditures on firm market value and stock returns is examined. This is performed in a sample of European listed firms for the period 2000-2009. I apply different linear and GMM econometric estimations for testing the impact of R&D on market prices and construct country portfolios based on firms’ R&D expenditure to market capitalization ratio for studying the effect of R&D on stock returns. The results confirm that more innovative firms have a better market valuation,investors consider R&D as an asset that produces long-term benefits for corporations. The impact of R&D on firm value differs across countries. It is significantly modulated by the financial and legal environment where firms operate. Other firm and industry characteristics seem to play a determinant role when investors value R&D. First, only larger firms with lower financial leverage that operate in highly innovative sectors decide to disclose their R&D investment. Second, the markets assign a premium to small firms, which operate in hi-tech sectors compared to larger enterprises for low-tech industries. On the other hand, I provide empirical evidence indicating that generally highly R&D-intensive firms may enhance mispricing problems related to firm valuation. As R&D contributes to the estimation of future stock returns, portfolios that comprise high R&D-intensive stocks may earn significant excess returns compared to the less innovative after controlling for size and book-to-market risk. Further, the most innovative firms are generally more risky in terms of stock volatility but not systematically more risky than low-tech firms. Firms that operate in Continental Europe suffer more mispricing compared to Anglo-Saxon peers but the former are less volatile, other things being equal. The sectors where firms operate are determinant even for the impact of R&D on stock returns; this effect is much stronger in hi-tech industries.

Essays in Financial Econometrics

The first paper sheds light on the informational content of high frequency data and daily data. I assess the economic value of the two family models comparing their performance in forecasting asset volatility through the Value at Risk metric. In running the comparison this paper introduces two key assumptions: jumps in prices and leverage effect in volatility dynamics. Findings suggest that high frequency data models do not exhibit a superior performance over daily data models. In the second paper, building on Majewski et al. (2015), I propose an affine-discrete time model, labeled VARG-J, which is characterized by a multifactor volatility specification. In the VARG-J model volatility experiences periods of extreme movements through a jump factor modeled as an Autoregressive Gamma Zero process. The estimation under historical measure is done by quasi-maximum likelihood and the Extended Kalman Filter. This strategy allows to filter out both volatility factors introducing a measurement equation that relates the Realized Volatility to latent volatility. The risk premia parameters are calibrated using call options written on S&P500 Index. The results clearly illustrate the important contribution of the jump factor in the pricing performance of options and the economic significance of the volatility jump risk premia. In the third paper, I analyze whether there is empirical evidence of contagion at the bank level, measuring the direction and the size of contagion transmission between European markets. In order to understand and quantify the contagion transmission on banking market, I estimate the econometric model by Aït-Sahalia et al. (2015) in which contagion is defined as the within and between countries transmission of shocks and asset returns are directly modeled as a Hawkes jump diffusion process. The empirical analysis indicates that there is a clear evidence of contagion from Greece to European countries as well as self-contagion in all countries.