![]() |
|||
|
WORKING PAPER ABSTRACTS - 2011Listed below are the abstracts for all of the working papers for this year. To see a list of paper titles (with links to available PDF files) click here.
According to conventional wisdom, annualized volatility of stock returns is lower when
computed over long horizons than over short horizons, due to mean reversion induced by return
predictability. In contrast, we find that stocks are substantiallymore volatile over long horizons
from an investor’s perspective. This perspective recognizes that parameters are uncertain, even
with two centuries of data, and that observable predictors imperfectly deliver the conditional
expected return. Mean reversion contributes strongly to reducing long-horizon variance, but it
is more than offset by various uncertainties faced by the investor, especially uncertainty about
the expected return. The same uncertainties also make target-date funds undesirable to a class
of investors who would otherwise find them appealing.
We argue that the popularity of active management is not puzzling despite the industry’s
poor track record. Our model features decreasing returns to scale: as the industry’s size increases,
every manager’s ability to outperform passive benchmarks declines. We find that
the active management industry can remain large even after significantly negative underperformance.
Given the observed performance of active mutual funds, investors’ proportional
allocation to active management should have shrunk only modestly since 1962. We also find
investors face endogeneity that limits their learning about returns to scale and allows prolonged
departures of the industry’s size from its optimal level.
This study explores the role of investor sentiment in a broad set of anomalies in
cross-sectional stock returns. We consider a setting where the presence of market-
wide sentiment is combined with the argument that overpricing should be more preva
lent than underpricing, due to short-sale impediments. Long-short strategies that
exploit the anomalies exhibit profits consistent with this setting. First, each anomaly
is stronger—its long-short strategy is more profitable—following high levels of sentiment. Second, the short leg of each strategy is more profitable following high sentiment.
Finally, sentiment exhibits no relation to returns on the long legs of the strategies.
We study a model where a capital provider learns from the price of a firm’s security in deciding how much capital to provide for new investment. This feedback effect from the financial market to the investment decision gives rise to trading frenzies, where speculators all wish to trade like others, generating large pressure on prices. Coordination among speculators is sometimes desirable for price nformativeness and investment efficiency, but speculators’ incentives push in the opposite direction, so that they coordinate exactly when it is undesirable. We analyze the effect of various market parameters on the likelihood of trading frenzies to arise
Market prices are thought to contain a lot of useful information. Hence, regulators (and
other agents) are often urged to use market prices to guide decisions. An important issue
to consider is the endogeneity of market prices and how they are affected by the prospect
of government intervention. We show that if the government learns from the price when
This paper develops a model of a self-fulfilling credit market freeze and uses it to
study alternative governmental responses to such a crisis. We study an economy in
which operating firms are interdependent, with their success depending on the ability of
other operating firms to obtain financing. In such an economy, an inefficient credit
market freeze may arise in which banks abstain from lending to operating firms with
The bankruptcy process around the world can involve long delays that
Our paper sheds new light on the theoretically ambiguous effect of stock options on
managerial incentives for risk-taking by analyzing how equity-based incentives affect
firms’ responses to an unanticipated and exogenous increase in risk. The particular risk
we study is an increase in liability and regulatory risk arising from workers’ exposure to
newly identified carcinogens. We find that compensation contracts with high sensitivity
to stock prices, low sensitivity to volatility, and options that are deep in-the-money
reduce managers’ risk-taking incentives after risk increases. While options increase
compensation’s sensitivity to both stock prices and volatility, on net, they encourage risk
taking in our setting. We find that variation in managerial stock and option holdings
causes meaningful differences in corporate decisions. Our findings underline the
Why is the equity premium so high, and why are stocks so volatile? Why are stock
returns in excess of government bill rates predictable? This paper proposes an answer
to these questions based on a time-varying probability of a consumption disaster. In
the model, aggregate consumption follows a normal distribution with low volatility
most of the time, but with some probability of a consumption realization far out in
We propose a career choice model in which agents with heterogenous ability levels choose to work as bankers or as nancial regulators. When workers extract intrinsic benets from working in regulation (such as public-sector motivation or human capital improvement), our model jointly predicts that bankers will be, on average, more skilled than regulators and their compensation will be more sensitive to performance. During nancial booms, banks draw the best workers away from the regulatory sector and misbehavior increases. In a dynamic extension of our model, young regulators accumulate human capital and the best ones switch to banking in mid-career.
This paper identifes a limit to arbitrage that arises from the fact that a firrms fundamental value is endogenous to the act of exploiting the arbitrage opportunity. Trading on
private information reveals this information to managers and helps them improve their
real decisions, in turn enhancing fundamental value. While this increases the profittability
This paper studies optimal contracting under synergies: effort by one agent reduces a colleague's marginal cost of effort. Our framework allows for agents'
contributions to synergies to be asymmetric { an agent's effect on his colleague's
cost differs from his colleague's effect on him { and workers to vary in the number of synergistic relationships they enjoy. In a two-agent model, effort levels are
always equal even if contributions to synergies are asymmetric. An increase in
synergy raises total effort and total pay, consistent with strong equity incentives
in small firms, including among low-level employees. Individual pay, however,
is asymmetric, with the more influential agent receiving a greater share, even
though both agents exert the same effort and have the same direct effect on out-
put. With three agents, effort levels differ and are higher for more synergistic
This paper studies the implications of directorss expertise for optimal board structure.
The expertise of directors is particularly important when the companys management does
not cooperate with the board, and directors must rely on their own judgment when making
decisions. The results of this paper demonstrate that even when the board acts in its
We address the connection between market stress and asset pricing by
| ||
Copyright ©1998 The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. All rights reserved. Site designed by Singularity Design. |
|||