The market value implications of pension asset allocation

Pension funds have been part of the private sector since the 1850's. Defined Benefit pension plans [DB], where a company promises to make regular contributions to investment accounts held for participating employees in order to pay a promised lifelong annuity, are significant capital markets participants, amounting to 2.3 trillion dollars in 2010 (Federal Reserve Board, 2013). In 2006, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.158 (SFAS 158), Employers' Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postemployment Plans, shifted information concerning funding status and pension asset/liability composition from disclosure in the footnotes to recognition in the financial statements. I add to the literature by being the first to examine the effect of recent pension reform during the financial crisis of 2008-09. This dissertation is comprised of three related essays. In my first essay, I investigate whether investors assign different pricing multiples to the various classes of pension assets when valuing firms. The pricing multiples on all classes of assets are significantly different from each other, but only investments in bonds and equities were value-relevant during the recent financial crisis. Consistent with investors viewing pension liabilities as liabilities of the firm, the pricing multiples on pension liabilities are significantly larger than those on non-pension liabilities. The only pension costs significantly associated with firm value are actual rate of return and interest expense. In my second essay, I investigate the role of accruals in predicting future cash flows, extending the Barth et al. (2001a) model of the accrual process. Using market value of equity as a proxy for cash flows, the results of this study suggest that aggregate accounting amounts mask how the components of earnings affect investors' ability to predict future cash flows. Disaggregating pension earnings components and accruals results in an increase in predictive power. During the 2008-2009 financial crisis, however, investors placed a greater (and negative) weight on the incremental information contained in the individual components of accruals. The inferences are robust to alternative specifications of accruals. Finally, in my third essay I investigate how investors view under-funded plans. On average, investors: view deficits arising from under-funded plans as belonging to the firm; reward firms with fully or over-funded pension plans; and encourage those funds with unfunded pension plans to become funded. Investors also encourage conservative pension asset allocations to mitigate firm risk, and smaller firms are perceived as being better able to handle the risk associated with underfunded plans. During the financial crisis of 2008-2009 underfunded status had a lower negative association with market value. In all three models, there are significant differences in pre- and post- SFAS 158 periods. These results are robust to various scenarios of the timing of the financial crisis and an alternative measure of funding.

Three essays on the microstructure of exchange traded funds

Exchange traded funds (ETFs) have increased significantly in popularity since they were first introduced in 1993. However, there is still much that is unknown about ETFs in the extant literature. This dissertation attempts to fill gaps in the ETF literature by using three related essays. In these three essays, we compare ETFs to closed ended mutual funds (CEFs) by decomposing the bid-ask spread into its three components; we look at the intraday shape of ETFs and compare it to the intraday shape of equities as well as examine the co-integration factor between ETFs on the London Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange; we also examine the differences between leveraged ETFs and unleveraged ETFs by analyzing the impact of liquidity and volatility. These three essays are presented in Chapters 1, 2, and 3, respectively. ^ Chapter one uses the Huang and Stoll (1997) model to decompose the bid-ask spread in CEFs and ETFs for two distinct periods—a normal and a volatile period. We show a higher adverse selection component for CEFs than for ETFs without regard to volatility. However, both ETFs and CEFs increased in magnitude of the adverse selection component in the period of high volatility. Chapter two uses a mix of the Werner and Kleidon (1993) and the Hupperets and Menkveld (2002) methods to get the intraday shape of ETFs and analyze co-integration between London and New York trading. We find two different shapes for New York and London ETFs. There also appears to be evidence of co-integration in the overlapping two-hour trading period but not over the entire trading day for the two locations. The third chapter discusses the new class of ETFs called leveraged ETFs. We examine the liquidity and depth differences between unleveraged and leveraged ETFs at the aggregate level and when the leveraged ETFs are classified by the leveraged multiples of -3, -2, -1, 2, and 3, both for a normal and a volatile period. We find distinct differences between leveraged and unleveraged ETFs at the aggregate level, with leveraged ETFs having larger spreads than unleveraged ETFs. Furthermore, while both leveraged and unleveraged ETFs have larger spreads in high volatility, for the leveraged ETFs the change in magnitude is significantly larger than for the unleveraged ETFs. Among the multiples, the -2 leveraged ETF is the most pronounced in its liquidity characteristics, more so in volatile times. ^