Three essays on asset pricing

In this dissertation, I investigate three related topics on asset pricing: the consumption-based asset pricing under long-run risks and fat tails, the pricing of VIX (CBOE Volatility Index) options and the market price of risk embedded in stock returns and stock options. These three topics are fully explored in Chapter II through IV. Chapter V summarizes the main conclusions. In Chapter II, I explore the effects of fat tails on the equilibrium implications of the long run risks model of asset pricing by introducing innovations with dampened power law to consumption and dividends growth processes. I estimate the structural parameters of the proposed model by maximum likelihood. I find that the stochastic volatility model with fat tails can, without resorting to high risk aversion, generate implied risk premium, expected risk free rate and their volatilities comparable to the magnitudes observed in data. In Chapter III, I examine the pricing performance of VIX option models. The contention that simpler-is-better is supported by the empirical evidence using actual VIX option market data. I find that no model has small pricing errors over the entire range of strike prices and times to expiration. In general, Whaley’s Black-like option model produces the best overall results, supporting the simpler-is-better contention. However, the Whaley model does under/overprice out-of-the-money call/put VIX options, which is contrary to the behavior of stock index option pricing models. In Chapter IV, I explore risk pricing through a model of time-changed Lvy processes based on the joint evidence from individual stock options and underlying stocks. I specify a pricing kernel that prices idiosyncratic and systematic risks. This approach to examining risk premia on stocks deviates from existing studies. The empirical results show that the market pays positive premia for idiosyncratic and market jump-diffusion risk, and idiosyncratic volatility risk. However, there is no consensus on the premium for market volatility risk. It can be positive or negative. The positive premium on idiosyncratic risk runs contrary to the implications of traditional capital asset pricing theory.

Protecting Your Assets: A Well-Defined Credit Policy Is The Key

In - Protecting Your Assets: A Well-Defined Credit Policy Is The Key – an essay by Steven V. Moll, Associate Professor, The School of Hospitality Management at Florida International University, Professor Moll observes at the outset: “Bad debts as a percentage of credit sales have climbed to record levels in the industry. The author offers suggestions on protecting assets and working with the law to better manage the business.” “Because of the nature of the hospitality industry and its traditional liberal credit policies, especially in hotels, bad debts as a percentage of credit sales have climbed to record levels,” our author says. “In 1977, hotels showing a net income maintained an average accounts receivable ratio to total sales of 3.4 percent. In 1983, the accounts receivable ratio to total sales increased to 4.1 percent in hotels showing a net income and 4.4 percent in hotels showing a net loss,” he further cites. As the professor implies, there are ways to mitigate the losses from bad credit or difficult to collect credit sales. In this article Professor Moll offers suggestions on how to do that. Moll would suggest that hotels and food & beverage operations initially tighten their credit extension policies, and on the following side, be more aggressive in their collection-of-debt pursuits. There is balance to consider here and bad credit in and of itself as a negative element is not the only reflection the profit/loss mirror would offer. “Credit managers must know what terms to offer in order to compete and afford the highest profit margin allowable,” Moll says. “They must know the risk involved with each guest account and be extremely alert to the rights and wrongs of good credit management,” he advocates. A sound profit policy can be the result of some marginal and additional credit risk on the part of the operation manager. “Reality has shown that high profits, not small credit losses, are the real indicator of good credit management,” the author reveals. “A low bad debt history may indicate that an establishment has an overly conservative credit management policy and is sacrificing potential sales and profits by turning away marginal accounts,” Moll would have you believe, and the science suggests there is no reason not to. Professor Moll does provide a fairly comprehensive list to illustrate when a manager would want to adopt a conservative credit policy. In the final analysis the design is to implement a policy which weighs an acceptable amount of credit risk against a potential profit ratio. In closing, Professor Moll does offer some collection strategies for loose credit accounts, with reference to computer and attorney participation, and brings cash and cash discounts into the discussion as well. Additionally, there is some very useful information about what debt collectors – can’t – do!

Three Essays on Asset Pricing

In this dissertation, I investigate three related topics on asset pricing: the consumption-based asset pricing under long-run risks and fat tails, the pricing of VIX (CBOE Volatility Index) options and the market price of risk embedded in stock returns and stock options. These three topics are fully explored in Chapter II through IV. Chapter V summarizes the main conclusions. In Chapter II, I explore the effects of fat tails on the equilibrium implications of the long run risks model of asset pricing by introducing innovations with dampened power law to consumption and dividends growth processes. I estimate the structural parameters of the proposed model by maximum likelihood. I find that the stochastic volatility model with fat tails can, without resorting to high risk aversion, generate implied risk premium, expected risk free rate and their volatilities comparable to the magnitudes observed in data. In Chapter III, I examine the pricing performance of VIX option models. The contention that simpler-is-better is supported by the empirical evidence using actual VIX option market data. I find that no model has small pricing errors over the entire range of strike prices and times to expiration. In general, Whaley’s Black-like option model produces the best overall results, supporting the simpler-is-better contention. However, the Whaley model does under/overprice out-of-the-money call/put VIX options, which is contrary to the behavior of stock index option pricing models. In Chapter IV, I explore risk pricing through a model of time-changed Lévy processes based on the joint evidence from individual stock options and underlying stocks. I specify a pricing kernel that prices idiosyncratic and systematic risks. This approach to examining risk premia on stocks deviates from existing studies. The empirical results show that the market pays positive premia for idiosyncratic and market jump-diffusion risk, and idiosyncratic volatility risk. However, there is no consensus on the premium for market volatility risk. It can be positive or negative. The positive premium on idiosyncratic risk runs contrary to the implications of traditional capital asset pricing theory.

Liquidity and asset pricing: A comparison between three-factor and three-moment capital asset pricing models

Liquidity is an important attribute of an asset that investors would like to take into consideration when making investment decisions. However, the previous empirical evidence whether liquidity is a determinant of stock return is not unanimous. This dissertation provides a very comprehensive study about the role of liquidity in asset pricing using the Fama-French (1993) three-factor and Kraus and Litzenberger (1976) three-moment CAPM as models for risk adjustment. The relationship between liquidity and well-known determinants of stock returns such as size and book-to-market are also investigated. This study examines the liquidity and asset pricing issues for both intertemporal as well as cross-sectional data. ^ The results indicate an existence of a liquidity premium, i.e., less liquid stocks would demand higher rate of return than more liquid stocks. More specifically, a drop of 1 percent in liquidity is associated with a higher rate of return of about 2 to 3 basis points per month. Further investigation reveals that neither the Fama-French three-factor model nor the three-moment CAPM captures the liquidity premium. Finally, the results show that well-known determinants of stock return such as size and book-to-market do not serve as proxy for liquidity. ^ Overall, this dissertation shows that a liquidity premium exists in the stock market and that liquidity is a distinct effect, and is not influenced by the presence of non-market factors, market factors and other stock characteristics.^

Estimation of global beta and tests of capital asset pricing models

With the rapid globalization and integration of world capital markets, more and more stocks are listed in multiple markets. With multi-listed stocks, the traditional measurement of systematic risk, the domestic beta, is not appropriate since it only contain information from one market. ^ Prakash et al. (1993) developed a technique, the global beta, to capture information from multiple markets wherein the stocks are listed. In this study, the global betas are obtained as well as domestic betas for 704 multi-listed stocks from 59 world equity markets. Welch tests show that domestic betas are not equal across markets, therefore, global beta is more appropriate in a global investment setting. ^ The traditional Capital Asset Pricing Models (CAPM) is also tested with regards to both domestic beta and global beta. The results generally support the positive relationship between stocks returns and global beta while tend to reject this relationship between stocks returns and domestic beta. Further tests of International CAPM with domestic beta and global beta strengthen the conclusion.^

Liquidity, governance and adverse selection in asset pricing

A plethora of recent literature on asset pricing provides plenty of empirical evidence on the importance of liquidity, governance and adverse selection of equity on pricing of assets together with more traditional factors such as market beta and the Fama-French factors. However, literature has usually stressed that these factors are priced individually. In this dissertation we argue that these factors may be related to each other, hence not only individual but also joint tests of their significance is called for. ^ In the three related essays, we examine the liquidity premium in the context of the finer three-digit SIC industry classification, joint importance of liquidity and governance factors as well as governance and adverse selection. Recent studies by Core, Guay and Rusticus (2006) and Ben-Rephael, Kadan and Wohl (2010) find that governance and liquidity premiums are dwindling in the last few years. One reason could be that liquidity is very unevenly distributed across industries. This could affect the interpretation of prior liquidity studies. Thus, in the first chapter we analyze the relation of industry clustering and liquidity risk following a finer industry classification suggested by Johnson, Moorman and Sorescu (2009). In the second chapter, we examine the dwindling influence of the governance factor if taken simultaneously with liquidity. We argue that this happens since governance characteristics are potentially a proxy for information asymmetry that may be better captured by market liquidity of a company's shares. Hence, we jointly examine both the factors, namely, governance and liquidity - in a series of standard asset pricing tests. Our results reconfirm the importance of governance and liquidity in explaining stock returns thus independently corroborating the findings of Amihud (2002) and Gompers, Ishii and Metrick (2003). Moreover, governance is not subsumed by liquidity. Lastly, we analyze the relation of governance and adverse selection, and again corroborate previous findings of a priced governance factor. Furthermore, we ascertain the importance of microstructure measures in asset pricing by employing Huang and Stoll's (1997) method to extract an adverse selection variable and finding evidence for its explanatory power in four-factor regressions.^

Household Preferences for Financing Hurricane Risk Mitigation: A Survey Based Empirical Analysis

After a series of major storms over the last 20 years, the state of financing for U.S. natural disaster insurance has undergone substantial disruptions causing many federal and state backed programs against residential property damage to become severally underfunded. In order to regain actuarial soundness, policy makers have proposed a shift to a system that reflects risk-based pricing for property insurance. We examine survey responses from 1394 single-family homeowners in the state of Florida for support of several natural disaster mitigation policy reforms. Utilizing a partial proportional odds model we test for effects of location, risk perception, socio-economic and housing characteristics on support for policy reforms. Our findings suggest residents across the state, not just risk-prone homeowners, support the current subsidized model. We also examine several other policy questions from the survey to verify our initial results. Finally, the implications of our findings are discussed to provide inputs to policymakers.

Liquidity, Governance and Adverse Selection in Asset Pricing

A plethora of recent literature on asset pricing provides plenty of empirical evidence on the importance of liquidity, governance and adverse selection of equity on pricing of assets together with more traditional factors such as market beta and the Fama-French factors. However, literature has usually stressed that these factors are priced individually. In this dissertation we argue that these factors may be related to each other, hence not only individual but also joint tests of their significance is called for. In the three related essays, we examine the liquidity premium in the context of the finer three-digit SIC industry classification, joint importance of liquidity and governance factors as well as governance and adverse selection. Recent studies by Core, Guay and Rusticus (2006) and Ben-Rephael, Kadan and Wohl (2010) find that governance and liquidity premiums are dwindling in the last few years. One reason could be that liquidity is very unevenly distributed across industries. This could affect the interpretation of prior liquidity studies. Thus, in the first chapter we analyze the relation of industry clustering and liquidity risk following a finer industry classification suggested by Johnson, Moorman and Sorescu (2009). In the second chapter, we examine the dwindling influence of the governance factor if taken simultaneously with liquidity. We argue that this happens since governance characteristics are potentially a proxy for information asymmetry that may be better captured by market liquidity of a company’s shares. Hence, we jointly examine both the factors, namely, governance and liquidity – in a series of standard asset pricing tests. Our results reconfirm the importance of governance and liquidity in explaining stock returns thus independently corroborating the findings of Amihud (2002) and Gompers, Ishii and Metrick (2003). Moreover, governance is not subsumed by liquidity. Lastly, we analyze the relation of governance and adverse selection, and again corroborate previous findings of a priced governance factor. Furthermore, we ascertain the importance of microstructure measures in asset pricing by employing Huang and Stoll’s (1997) method to extract an adverse selection variable and finding evidence for its explanatory power in four-factor regressions.