Using the parametric Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) methodology of Hansen (1982 Hansen, LP. 1982. Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50: 1029–54. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and the nonparametric approach of Hansen and Jagannathan (1991 Hansen, LP and Jagannathan, R. 1991. Implications of security market data for models of dynamic economies. Journal of Political Economy, 99: 225–62. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), this note investigates the ability of Consumption-based Asset Pricing Models (CCAPMs) to explain the cross-section of investment funds returns in the German market. The parametric analysis shows that both the classic power utility model of Hansen and Singleton (1982 Hansen, LP and Singleton, KJ. 1982. Generalized instrumental variables estimation of nonlinear rational expectations models. Econometrica, 50: 1269–86. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and the habit formation extension of Campbell and Cochrane (1999 Campbell, JY and Cochrane, JH. 1999. By force of habit: a consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 107: 205–51. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) are not rejected, but require high risk-aversion to be consistent with the data. Furthermore, only the power utility model suffers from a risk-free rate puzzle. The nonparametric results are not accompanied by a risk-free rate puzzle for both models but the models still show high risk aversion. So using adequate test assets and evaluation methods, this note fully supports Cochrane (2006 Cochrane, JH. 2006. “Financial markets and the real economy”. In Financial Markets and the Real Economy, Edited by: Cochrane, JH. XI–LXIX. London: Edward Elgar. [Google Scholar]) saying that work explaining asset returns with consumption-based models should be dying out since there are preferences that can coherently describe the data with high risk-aversion.
Read full abstract