Finance Flashcards
Explain the distribution of US equity returns
1) Leptokurtic (fat tails). Compared to normal distribution, likelihood of very good and very bad returns much higher. Gives rise to “black swan” events
2) Negatively skewed. Negative returns more likely.
Show asset price formula. What is mt+1
The price of an asset is the future payoff discounted by SDF.
mt+1 is the stochastic discount factor.
It can also be written as mt= 1/ 1 + rf
How can the asset price formula be expanded? What happens if the covariance term is positive/negative?
If cov>0, asset pays off when MU is high. This makes it a good hedge, and helps to smooth consumption. Everyone likes this, so price goes up.
If cov<0, asset pays well when MU is low. This destabilises consumption profile, demand is low, so price will fall.
Show the CCAPM equation and outline what it is
CCAPM is a single factor system. The only risk factor is consumption growth. Only non-diversifable risk is priced.
Using the standard asset pricing formula, p=E(mx), determine the price of a zero-coupon risk-free bond paying off 1 next period. What is the gross return on the bond?
Would a risk-averse investor like leptokurtosis? Explain
A leptokurtic distribution is when there is a greater chance of getting a very bad and a very good outcome. If you are risk-averse, the pain of the bad outweighs the gain of the good.
They dislike letpokurtosis.
Give the formula for expected excess returns
What is the equity premium puzzle? How can you provide a solution to understanding it?
CCAPM can only explain about 1/10 of the historic premium. Consumption is stable, so there is small covariance between returns and consumption growth
Solutions:
- If perceived consumption volatility was higher, this could mitigate. People might fear rare disasters
- Habit persistence implies people become “addicted” to current consumption level
- Heterogenous agents: consumption of rich comoves with equity returns
- Incomplete markets: if people cannot insure themselves v idiosyncratic risk, they may be reluctant to take on additional risk
How does CCAPM explain time-series variation in returns?
We look at conditional mean. Test random walk (see model) b should be zero.
Give the CCAPM in beta representation
Beta is the coefficient of gc. It is the consumption beta, the “quantity of risk”.
You can also write theta var(gc) as lambda. Lambda is independent of the asset: the “price” of risk. It is the risk premium for bearing consumption risk
Can write this as ri-rf = alpha + beta(lambda) + error
Explain the Fama-French model
Organises by size (smallest), then by value (book-to-market ratio)
What is shorting?
Bet against a stock. Gain if it falls in value
Outline a zero-cost portfolio simple example
There are 2 stocks, A and B. You only own A. Think A will go down, B will go up. Short A, borrow, commit to repaying at the end of the month. Sell it for 1 immediately, and purchase B. Buy A at the new low value and return, hopefully B has gone up as well.
SMB and HML are of this kind.
Explain how zero-cost portfolios eliminate global risk
It uses differences in idiosyncratic risk
Explain the stochastic discount factor (m). How would you measure it?
Must affect the average person. High m implies bad times.
Any asset pricing model is a model of m:
1) CAPM: m = a - bRm
2) CCAPM: m = a - bgc
3) Fama-French Three-Factor model (see model)
- VALUE: when HML low, value stocks are doing badly, usually in a recession. This is due to greater adjustment costs, human capital risk
- SIZE: when SMB low, small stocks doing relatively badly. This is when liquidity is low. People want to hold liquid assets, so the demand for small illiquid stocks is low.
One explanation for the equity premium puzzle is the possibility of rare disasters. Would hyperinflation constitute a rare disaster?
For it to explain the equity premium, rare disasters would need to impact equities more than bonds. But hyperinflayion affects bonds more since they pay a fixed amount of return.
True or false:
According to Fama-French, small stocks are underpriced as they are overlooked, so they pay higher returns.
False. Small stocks pay higher as they comove with SMB risk factor. Small stocks are susceptible to all risk in SMB
True or false:
According to Fama-French, if you break up a larger firm into smaller ones, investing in them will lead to higher returns
False. Nothing will change about its fundamental performance. The beta on SMB should not change. You could say they they become more illiquid when split up though.
True or false:
Value stocks tend to move together
True. They do move together, this is the risk. By arbitrage, we cannot have a situation where the value portfolio pays a high premium and variability across value firms “cancel out”
Explain the factors in the Fama-French model
HML factor: average excess returns of value stocks over growth stocks. Long value stocks and short growth stocks. This is a risk premium
SMB factor: average excess returns of small firms over large firms. Long small stocks and short large stocks.
Betas indicate how stock comoves with the respective risk factor. This is different for each asset. The risk premia, SMB and HML are constant.
Explain the WML risk premium. Explain the behavioural explanations for this
Momentum. Short the losers and long the winners. This counters efficient markets. It does not have a natural risk-based story. The biggest risk is crash risk.
Behavioural explanations:
- Overreaction
- Herding
- Underreaction. Does not really work with greater technology. This is caused by the disposition effect.