Average Risk Premium Research Articles

Do macroprudential policies reduce risk spillovers between energy markets?: Evidence from time-frequency domain and mixed-frequency methods

Preventing volatility spillovers between energy markets is essential for maintaining financial stability. Macroprudential policies play an invaluable tool in financial risk monitoring and help to reduce the incidence of systemic risk. However, the effectiveness of macroprudential policies on risk spreads in the energy system is still unclear. This article applies the TVP-VAR (time-varying parameter vector autoregression) spillover methods to capture the risk connectedness between energy markets in the time and frequency domains, and constructs an asymmetric GARCH-MIDAS-MPP model to investigate the influence of macroprudential policies on volatility overflows of the energy system. The results suggest that there are strong risk links between global energy markets and long-term risk resonances play a dominant role. Time-varying risk overflows occur throughout the energy sector, and market turbulence amplifies these risk communications. Whether on a time or frequency horizon, the oil market represents the largest emitter of fluctuation transmissions, while the fuel oil market stands out as the biggest recipient of risk diffusion. We do not observe that macroprudential policies can significantly reduce the average and long-run risk premiums of the energy system. Conversely, our results reveal that macroprudential policies intensify short- and medium-term risk spreads between global energy markets. This paper provides some insight into energy market risk contagion, which is conducive to the improvement of macroprudential policies for energy market risk management.

Demand Volatility and Firm Export Margins: Evidence from Egypt

The study explains the export behavior of Egyptian firms under demand volatility in destination countries using detailed customs data and high-dimensional fixed effects. It finds that demand volatility negatively affects both the intensive and extensive export margins. The effects are particularly evident for large firms which reduce their export sales — especially over time — to more volatile destinations/products, are more likely to exit from exporting more volatile products and are less (more) likely to enter (exit) more volatile destinations. These findings confirm recent literature that emphasizes the greater elasticity of large firms to foreign demand shocks. They are also in line with risk aversion models in which the average risk premium increases with firm size. Given the disproportionate adverse impacts on large exporters, we find that higher demand volatility leads to lower aggregate exports, especially to geographically close and low trade costs countries. Accordingly, uncertainty in demand lessens the positive effect of lower trade barriers on exports.

SECTORAL MARKET RISK PREMIUMS IN TURKEY

Purpose- This empirical study aims to measure the sectoral market risk premiums in the Turkish stock market for the period of 2016 and 2021 and also estimate the sectoral market risk premiums for the years 2022, 2023 and 2024. Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) is the most widely used and popular method in the analysis of investment projects, stock valuation, firm valuation, mergers and acquisitions, initial public offerings, and secondary public offerings. The market risk premium in CAPM is defined as the the difference in between expected market returns and interest rates. The determination of market risk premium is one of the most important inputs in the application of the CAPM. This study intends to calculate the market risk premiums and volatilities for the sectors of Borsa Istanbul for the periods of pre-Covid (2016-2017-2018) and in the Covid-19 era (2019-2020-2021). Methodology- The monthly data from the Reuters Database are collected for the BIST100 and 17 different sectoral indexes and short-term interest rates between the years 2016 and 2021. A total of 1296 observations are obtained. Based upon the historical observations, the market risk premiums are defined as the difference between the market index returns (BIST100 and 17 sectoral indexes) and the average short-term interest rates on monthly basis. Then, using the ARIMA forecasting method, the market risk premiums are estimated for the years 2022, 2023, and 2024. A total of 576 data points are forecasted. Findings- The average risk premium on the BIST100 index is about -2.44% for the pre-Covid era and 14.01% for in-Covid era. The market risk premiums sharply increased from the pre-Covid period to the Covid period. The average volatility on the BIST100 index is about 0.23% for the pre-Covid era while 0.34% in the Covid era. The volatility of the market returns also incresed significantly. Moreover, the Cusum Square Test results point a structural break in the Covid-era. The ARIMA estimates of market risk premiums are 1.87% for 2022, 0.43% for 2023 and 0.42% for 2024. THe ARIMA estimates of volatilities are 0.70% for 2022, 0.72% for 2023 and 0.71% for 2024. Conclusion- The empirical evidence strongly support a structural change in the Covid era with higher market risk premiums and volatilities. The forecasted market risk premiums for the next three years show a diminishing trend while the forecasted volatilities show high and persistent level. Keywords: Market risk premium, BIST100, ARIMA forecasting, sectoral market risk premiums, volatility. JEL Codes: G10, G12, G17

Analysis of sources of assets of the national fund of Kazakhstan and assessment of its efficiency

The article examines the assets of the national fund of Kazakhstan and its dynamics from 2005 to 2020, analyzes the sources of its formation and evaluates the effectiveness of the use of assets. The main sources for the formation of the fund’s assets are direct taxes from organizations in the oil sector and investment income from management. Since 2016, the funds of the national fund in the form of aggregate transfers have already been used and directed to support the country’s economy in the face of an unfavorable price environment for commodities. To assess the performance of the fund and its effectiveness from 2001 to 2020, we calculated such indicators as accumulated profitability, arithmetic and geometric mean returns, portfolio standard deviation, variation coefficient, average risk premium, Sharpe ratio. The key indicators of risk and return of the fund’s foreign exchange portfolio are also compared with the indicators of the Norwegian oil fund. As a result of the comparison, valuable recommendations and conclusions were made on the structure of the fund’s portfolio. The Fund needs to gradually increase the share of investments in risky financial instruments such as shares of foreign companies in order to increase the overall return of the fund. The total transfers of the fund in relation to GDP for the last 10 years have been estimated and the forecast for the size of the fund at the end of 2022 has been made. The size of the fund is still at a sufficient level and is a reliable safety cushion for the economy of Kazakhstan during periods of adverse external factors

Validity of Capital Assets Pricing Model (CAPM) (Empirical Evidences from Amman Stock Exchange)

The purpose of this study is to test the validity of CAPM in Amman Stock Exchange (ASE) during the period (2010 – 2014), which was divided into three sub periods. We used monthly returns of 60 stocks of Jordanian companies listed in ASE. Black, Jensen and Scholes (1972) and Fama and MacBeth (1973) methods were used to test the CAPM in different study sub-periods. The analysis results showed that higher risk (beta) is not associated with higher levels of return, which violated the CAPM assumption. Results of the study leads to contradict the theory’s assumption that beta coefficient is a good toll to predict the relationship between risk and return; hence the beta coefficient of some portfolios in the three sub periods was not significant. In addition, the results of testing SML violated the CAPM assumption in the three sub periods that, the slope should be equal to the average risk premium. Finally, tests of nonlinearity of the relationship between return and betas validated the CAPM hypothesis, that the expected return-beta relationship is linear. Depending on the above results, we couldn’t find conclusive evidence in support of CAPM in ASE.

Monetary Policy and Stock Market Valuation

This paper estimates the effect of monetary policy on the term structure of stock market risk premia. Stock market risk premia are solved using analysts’ dividend forecasts and dividend future prices. Although risk-free rates have decreased after the global financial crisis, the results indicate that the expected long-term average stock market return has remained quite stable at around 9 percent. This implies that the average stock market risk premium has increased since the financial crisis. The prices of dividend futures suggest that the rise is related to changes in the term structure of risk premia. The effect of monetary policy on risk premia is analysed using VAR models and local projection methods. According to the results, monetary policy easing raises the average risk premium. The effect is driven by a rise in long-horizon risk premia.

Expected prices, futures prices and time-varying risk premiums: The case of copper

A three-factor no-arbitrage stochastic commodity pricing model is calibrated to copper using analysts' predictions provided by Bloomberg's Commodity Price Forecast and futures prices from the COMEX and LME metals exchanges. The model generates futures prices, expected spot prices and time-varying risk premiums for different maturities. Results show that between October 2010 and June 2018 both exchanges exhibit a positive average risk premium for each maturity. The risk premiums for both exchanges are also shown to be stochastic, with short maturities having higher average values and greater volatility. In addition, the futures prices of COMEX values were greater than those LME with a mean difference of 0.477% and the LME exhibits higher averages values than COMEX for expected spot prices and risk premiums, with differences of 0.438% and 0.354%, respectively. As for risk premium volatility, the estimate for COMEX is 0.993% greater than that for LME. Statistically significant evidence is also given for the cointegration of the two markets. An empirical analysis shows that the main determinants of the variation in copper risk premiums are variations in COMEX inventories, hedging pressure, the default premium, the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index and the return on the NASDAQ Emerging Market Index. Finally, the approach is used for estimating expected copper spot prices, thus making it a useful tool for practitioners and policy makers who use expected copper prices as the basis for their investment and risk-management decisions.

Monetary Policy and Stock Market Valuation

This paper estimates the effect of monetary policy on the term structure of stock market risk premia. Stock market risk premia are solved using analysts’ dividend forecasts and dividend future prices. Although risk-free rates have decreased after the global financial crisis, the results indicate that the expected long-term average stock market return has remained quite stable at around 9 percent. This implies that the average stock market risk premium has increased since the financial crisis. The prices of dividend futures suggest that the rise is related to changes in the term structure of risk premia. The effect of monetary policy on risk premia is analysed using VAR models and local projection methods. According to the results, monetary policy easing raises the average risk premium. The effect is driven by a rise in long-horizon risk premia.

Cost of Floating Exchange Rates: Should We Fear to Float?

This paper explores the impact of switching exchange rate regimes from fixed to floating on the sovereign credit risk. We perform synthetic control estimation analysis, which compares monthly observations of Emerging Market Bond Index Global (EMBIG) trajectory of treated countries, which switched their exchange rate regimes to floating, with the trajectory of their counterfactuals constructed from a combination of similar but untreated countries, which kept their exchange rates managed. The results provide evidence that breaking the exchange rate pegs incurs a statistically significant increase in the average risk premium by 0.21 - 0.35 standard deviations for three to seven months; however, extended analyses through event study framework also hints that a floating regime may help to stabilize the economy in the longer run.

Estimating the Equity Risk Premium Using Implied Cost of Capital

Research on the implied cost of capital (ICC) has found that the equity risk premium is approximately 3%, on average, much lower than estimates based on the mean of historical stock market returns. The validity of such ICC estimates, however, faces both theoretical and empirical challenges. The theoretical equivalence between ICC and expected return requires the stringent condition that the latter is a constant, which is inconsistent with theory and empirical evidence. The empirical estimation of ICC depends on short-run and long-run earnings forecasts, whose biases can severely limit the validity of the estimates. By employing a forecasting procedure that induces little bias in both short-run and long-run forecasts and taking into account the stochastic nature of expected returns, we show that the average market risk premium ranges between 3% and 6%. We also demonstrate that the results of prior research are affected by input errors that are partially self-canceling.

The Equity Risk Premium in 2018

We analyze the history of the equity risk premium from surveys of U.S. Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) conducted every quarter from June 2000 to December 2017. The risk premium is the expected 10-year S&P 500 return relative to a 10-year U.S. Treasury bond yield. The average risk premium is 4.42% and is somewhat higher than the average observed over the past 18 years. We also provide results on the risk premium disagreement among respondents as well as asymmetry or skewness of risk premium estimates. We also link our risk premium results to survey-based measures of the weighted average cost of capital and investment hurdle rates. The hurdle rates are significantly higher than the cost of capital implied by the market risk premium estimates.

A conditional regime switching CAPM

The standard Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) is simple, intuitive, and grounded in sound economic theory. Yet, almost half a century's worth of empirical testing has so far failed to demonstrate its relevance. One major reason given for the CAPM's empirical failure is that beta is not the sole measure of systematic risk. In other words, the standard CAPM does not hold. Another important explanation is that the CAPM may hold conditionally rather than unconditionally. The standard CAPM fails to explain the cross-section of returns because it ignores the fact that both the risk and the price of risk are time-varying. The search for conditional models has led researchers to either disregard the theory behind the CAPM or to use statistical procedures that are too complex to be replicated by other researchers and practitioners. In this paper we propose a conditional model that is compatible with the standard CAPM while remaining simple and accessible to both researchers and practitioners. Beta and the risk premium are assumed to be time-varying, with the latter being associated with bull and bear states. We find strong support for the conditional CAPM with beta explaining both bull and bear markets. While the bear market ex-post risk premium is negative, the weighted average risk premium is positive and highly significant.

Discount Rate (Risk-Free Rate and Market Risk Premium) Used for 41 Countries in 2017: A Survey

This paper contains the statistics of a survey about the Risk-Free Rate (RF) and the Market Risk Premium (MRP) used in 2017 for 41 countries. We got answers for 68 countries, but we only report the results for 41 countries with more than 25 answers. The average (RF) used in 2017 was smaller than the one used in 2015 in 12 countries (in 5 of them the difference was more than 1%). In 10 countries the average (RF) used in 2017 was more than a 1% higher than the one used in 2015 (see table 6). The change between 2015 and 2017 of the average Market risk premium used was higher than 1% for 11 countries (see table 6). Most of the respondents use for Europe and UK a Risk-Free Rate (RF) higher than the yield of the 10-year Government bonds. Due to Quantitative Easing, the Risk-Free Rate (RF) and the Market Risk Premium (MRP) reported for Euro countries are negatively correlated (Spain -51%; Germany -28%; France -47%; Italy -30%)

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Traditional beta, average drawdown beta and market risk premium

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Traditional beta, average drawdown beta and market risk premium

The Equity Risk Premium in 2016

We analyze the history of the equity risk premium from surveys of U.S. Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) conducted every quarter from June 2000 to June 2016. The risk premium is the expected 10-year S&P 500 return relative to a 10-year U.S. Treasury bond yield. The average risk premium in 2016, 4.02%, is slightly higher than the average observed over the past 16 years. We also provide results on the risk premium disagreement among respondents as well as asymmetry or skewness of risk premium estimates. We also link our risk premium results to survey-based measures of the weighted average cost of capital and investment hurdle rates. The hurdle rates are significantly higher than the cost of capital implied by the market risk premium estimates.

Retraction Note to: Traditional beta, average drawdown beta and market risk premium

Retraction Note to: Traditional beta, average drawdown beta and market risk premium

The relationship between risk-neutral and actual default probabilities: the credit risk premium

ABSTRACTThe study investigates empirically the relationship between the risk-neutral measure Q and the real-world measure P. We study the ratio between the risk-neutral and actual default intensities, which we call the coverage ratio or the relative credit risk premium. Actual default intensities are derived from rating agencies annual transition matrices, while risk-neutral default intensities are bootstrapped from CDS quotes of European corporates. We quantify the average risk premium and its changes over time. Compared to related literature, special attention is given to the effects of the recent financial and European sovereign crises. We find that average credit risk premia rose substantially and that post-crisis levels are still higher than those observed before the financial crisis. This observation is especially true for high-quality debt and if it persists, it will have an impact on corporates funding costs. The quantification and revision of risk premia contributes to the discussion of the credit spread puzzle and could give extra insights in valuation models that start from real-world estimates. Our work is furthermore important in the context of state aid assessment. The real economic value (REV) methodology, applied by the European Commission to evaluate impaired portfolios, is based on a long-term average risk premium.

Solving OLG Models with Many Cohorts, Asset Choice and Large Shocks

The paper presents a computationally efficient method to solve overlapping generations models with asset choice. The method is used to study an OLG economy with many cohorts, up to 3 different assets, stochastic volatility, short-sale constraints, and subject to rather large technology shocks. On the methodological side, the main findings are that global projection methods with polynomial approximations of degree 3 are sufficient to provide a very precise solution, even in the case of large shocks. Globally linear approximations, in contrast to local linear approximations, are sufficient to capture the most important financial statistics, including not only the average risk premium, but also the variation of the risk premium over the cycle. However, global linear approximations are not sufficient to reliably pin down asset choices. With a risk aversion parameter of only 4, the model generates a price of risk, measured as the Sharpe ratio, that is almost half of what it is for US stocks. However, the asset price fluctuations and the equity premium are much smaller than in US data.

The cross-sectional variation of volatility risk premia

This paper analyzes the determinants of the cross-sectional variation of the average volatility risk premia for a representative set of portfolios sorted by volatility risk premium beta. The market volatility risk premium and, especially, the default premium are shown to be key risk factors in the cross-sectional variation of average volatility risk premium payoffs. The cross-sectional variation of risk premia seems to reflect a very different behavior of the underlying components of our sample portfolios with respect to credit or financial stress that generates a significant dispersion of the volatility swap pricing of these securities.

Facts and Fantasies About Commodity Futures Ten Years Later

Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006) examined commodity futures returns over the period July 1959 to December 2004 based on an equally-weighted index. They found that fully collateralized commodity futures had historically offered the same return and Sharpe ratio as U.S. equities, but were negatively correlated with the return on stocks and bonds. Reviewing these results ten years later, we find that our conclusions largely hold up out-of-sample. The in- and out-of-sample average commodity risk premiums are not significantly different, nor is the cross-sectional relationship between average returns and the basis. Correlations among commodities and commodity correlations with other assets experienced a temporary increase during the financial crisis which is in line with historical experience of variation of these correlations over the business cycle.