Results 1  10
of
222
Illiquidity and Stock Returns: Crosssection and Timeseries Effects
 Journal of Financial Markets
, 2002
"... This paper shows that over time, expected market illiquidity positively affects ex ante stock excess return, suggesting that expected stock excess return partly represents an illiquidity premium. This complements the crosssectional positive return–illiquidity relationship. Also, stock returns are n ..."
Abstract

Cited by 305 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper shows that over time, expected market illiquidity positively affects ex ante stock excess return, suggesting that expected stock excess return partly represents an illiquidity premium. This complements the crosssectional positive return–illiquidity relationship. Also, stock returns are negatively related over time to contemporaneous unexpected illiquidity. The illiquidity measure here is the average across stocks of the daily ratio of absolute stock return to dollar volume, which is easily obtained from daily stock data for long time series in most stock markets. Illiquidity affects more strongly small firm stocks, thus explaining time series variations in their premiums over
Investing for the long run when returns are predictable
 Journal of Finance
, 2000
"... We examine how the evidence of predictability in asset returns affects optimal portfolio choice for investors with long horizons. Particular attention is paid to estimation risk, or uncertainty about the true values of model parameters. We find that even after incorporating parameter uncertainty, th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 278 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We examine how the evidence of predictability in asset returns affects optimal portfolio choice for investors with long horizons. Particular attention is paid to estimation risk, or uncertainty about the true values of model parameters. We find that even after incorporating parameter uncertainty, there is enough predictability in returns to make investors allocate substantially more to stocks, the longer their horizon. Moreover, the weak statistical significance of the evidence for predictability makes it important to take estimation risk into account; a longhorizon investor who ignores it may overallocate to stocks by a sizeable amount. ONE OF THE MORE STRIKING EMPIRICAL FINDINGS in recent financial research is the evidence of predictability in asset returns. 1 In this paper we examine the implications of this predictability for an investor seeking to make sensible portfolio allocation decisions. We approach this question from the perspective of horizon effects: Given the evidence of predictability in returns, should a longhorizon investor allocate his wealth differently from a shorthorizon investor? The motivation for thinking about the problem in these terms is the classic work of Samuelson ~1969! and Merton ~1969!. They show that if asset returns are i.i.d., an investor with power utility who rebalances his portfolio optimally should choose the same asset allocation, regardless of investment horizon. In light of the growing body of evidence that returns are predictable, the investor’s horizon may no longer be irrelevant. The extent to which the horizon does play a role serves as an interesting and convenient way of thinking about how predictability affects portfolio choice. Moreover, the results may shed light on the common but controversial advice that investors with long horizons should allocate more heavily to stocks. 2
Consumption, Aggregate Wealth, and Expected Stock Returns
 THE JOURNAL OF FINANCE • VOL. LVI, NO. 3 • JUNE 2001
, 2001
"... This paper studies the role of fluctuations in the aggregate consumption–wealth ratio for predicting stock returns. Using U.S. quarterly stock market data, we find that these fluctuations in the consumption–wealth ratio are strong predictors of both real stock returns and excess returns over a Treas ..."
Abstract

Cited by 151 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper studies the role of fluctuations in the aggregate consumption–wealth ratio for predicting stock returns. Using U.S. quarterly stock market data, we find that these fluctuations in the consumption–wealth ratio are strong predictors of both real stock returns and excess returns over a Treasury bill rate. We also find that this variable is a better forecaster of future returns at short and intermediate horizons than is the dividend yield, the dividend payout ratio, and several other popular forecasting variables. Why should the consumption–wealth ratio forecast asset returns? We show that a wide class of optimal models of consumer behavior imply that the log consumption–aggregate wealth ~human capital plus asset holdings! ratio summarizes expected returns on aggregate wealth, or the market portfolio. Although this ratio is not observable, we provide assumptions under which its important predictive components for future asset returns may be expressed in terms of observable variables, namely in terms of consumption, asset holdings and labor income. The framework implies that these variables are cointegrated, and
The equity share in new issues and aggregate stock returns
 JOURNAL OF FINANCE
, 2000
"... The share of equity issues in total new equity and debt issues is a strong predictor of U.S. stock market returns between 1928 and 1997. In particular, firms issue relatively more equity than debt just before periods of low market returns. The equity share in new issues has stable predictive power i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 150 (24 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The share of equity issues in total new equity and debt issues is a strong predictor of U.S. stock market returns between 1928 and 1997. In particular, firms issue relatively more equity than debt just before periods of low market returns. The equity share in new issues has stable predictive power in both halves of the sample period and after controlling for other known predictors. We do not find support for efficient market explanations of the results. Instead, the fact that the equity share sometimes predicts significantly negative market returns suggests inefficiency and that firms time the market component of their returns when issuing securities.
A Comprehensive Look at the Empirical Performance of Equity Premium Prediction,” working paper
, 2004
"... Given the historically high equity premium, is it now a good time to invest in the stock market? Economists have suggested a whole range of variables that investors could or should use to predict: dividend price ratios, dividend yields, earningsprice ratios, dividend payout ratios, net issuing rati ..."
Abstract

Cited by 121 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Given the historically high equity premium, is it now a good time to invest in the stock market? Economists have suggested a whole range of variables that investors could or should use to predict: dividend price ratios, dividend yields, earningsprice ratios, dividend payout ratios, net issuing ratios, bookmarket ratios, interest rates (in various guises), and consumptionbased macroeconomic ratios (cay). The typical paper reports that the variable predicted well in an insample regression, implying forecasting ability. Our paper explores the outofsample performance of these variables, and finds that not a single one would have helped a realworld investor outpredicting the thenprevailing historical equity premium mean. Most would have outright hurt. Therefore, we find that, for all practical purposes, the equity premium has not been predictable, and any belief about whether the stock market is now too high or too low has to be based on theoretical prior, not on the empirically variables we have explored.
What does the Yield Curve Tell us about GDP Growth?
, 2003
"... A lot, including a few things you may not expect. Previous studies find that the term spread forecasts GDP but these regressions are unconstrained and do not model regressor endogeneity. We build a dynamic model for GDP growth and yields that completely characterizes expectations of GDP. The model d ..."
Abstract

Cited by 103 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A lot, including a few things you may not expect. Previous studies find that the term spread forecasts GDP but these regressions are unconstrained and do not model regressor endogeneity. We build a dynamic model for GDP growth and yields that completely characterizes expectations of GDP. The model does not permit arbitrage. Contrary to previous findings, we predict that the short rate has more predictive power than any term spread. We confirm this finding by forecasting GDP outofsample. The model also recommends the use of lagged GDP and the longest maturity yield to measure slope. Greater efficiency enables the yieldcurve model to produce superior outofsample GDP forecasts than unconstrained OLS at all horizons.
Investor Sentiment and the CrossSection of Stock Returns
, 2003
"... We examine how investor sentiment affects the crosssection of stock returns. Theory predicts that a broad wave of sentiment will disproportionately affect stocks whose valuations are highly subjective and are difficult to arbitrage. We test this prediction by studying how the crosssection of subse ..."
Abstract

Cited by 101 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We examine how investor sentiment affects the crosssection of stock returns. Theory predicts that a broad wave of sentiment will disproportionately affect stocks whose valuations are highly subjective and are difficult to arbitrage. We test this prediction by studying how the crosssection of subsequent stock returns varies with proxies for beginningofperiod investor sentiment. When sentiment is low, subsequent returns are relatively high on smaller stocks, high volatility stocks, unprofitable stocks, nondividendpaying stocks, extremegrowth stocks, and distressed stocks, consistent with an initial underpricing of these stocks. When sentiment is high, on the other hand, these patterns attenuate or fully reverse. The results are consistent with predictions and appear unlikely to reflect an alternative explanation based on compensation for systematic risk.
Stock Return Predictability and Model Uncertainty
, 2002
"... We use Bayesian model averaging to analyze the sample evidence on return predictability in the presence of model uncertainty. The analysis reveals insample and outofsample predictability, and shows that the outofsample performance of the Bayesian approach is superior to that of model selecti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 97 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We use Bayesian model averaging to analyze the sample evidence on return predictability in the presence of model uncertainty. The analysis reveals insample and outofsample predictability, and shows that the outofsample performance of the Bayesian approach is superior to that of model selection criteria. We find that term and market premia are robust predictors. Moreover, smallcap value stocks appear more predictable than largecap growth stocks. We also investigate the implications of model uncertainty from investment management perspectives. We show that model uncertainty is more important than estimation risk, and investors who discard model uncertainty face large utility losses.
2006) Approximately normal tests for equal predictive accuracy in nested models. Journal of Econometrics forthcoming
"... Forecast evaluation often compares a parsimonious null model to a larger model that nests the null model. Under the null that the parsimonious model generates the data, the larger model introduces noise into its forecasts by estimating parameters whose population values are zero. We observe that the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 87 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Forecast evaluation often compares a parsimonious null model to a larger model that nests the null model. Under the null that the parsimonious model generates the data, the larger model introduces noise into its forecasts by estimating parameters whose population values are zero. We observe that the mean squared prediction error (MSPE) from the parsimonious model is therefore expected to be smaller than that of the larger model. We describe how to adjust MSPEs to account for this noise. We propose applying standard methods (West (1996)) to test whether the adjusted mean squared error difference is zero. We refer to nonstandard limiting distributions derived in Clark and McCracken (2001, 2005a) to argue that use of standard normal critical values will yield actual sizes close to, but a little less than, nominal size. Simulation evidence supports our recommended procedure. West thanks the National Science Foundation for financial support. We thank Pablo M. PincheiraBrown and Taisuke Nakata for helpful comments. The views expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City or the Federal Reserve System.
Understanding Predictability
 JOURNAL OF POITICAL ECONOMY
, 2004
"... We propose a general equilibrium model with multiple securities in which investors’ risk preferences and expectations of dividend growth are time varying. While time varying risk preferences induce the standard positive relation between the dividend yield and expected returns, time varying expected ..."
Abstract

Cited by 86 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose a general equilibrium model with multiple securities in which investors’ risk preferences and expectations of dividend growth are time varying. While time varying risk preferences induce the standard positive relation between the dividend yield and expected returns, time varying expected dividend growth induces a negative relation between them. These offsetting effects reduce the ability of the dividend yield to forecast returns and eliminate its ability to forecast dividend growth, as observed in the data. The model links the predictability of returns to that of dividend growth, suggesting specific changes to standard linear predictive regressions for both. The model’s predictions are con…rmed empirically.