IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/actuec/v80y2004i1p137-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Révision à la baisse de la prime sur les actions au Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Rochon, Mathieu

    (Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec)

  • Desrosiers, Stéphanie

    (Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec)

  • L’Her, Jean-François

    (Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec)

Abstract

The average historical excess return of market index over government bonds has been 4.5 % in Canada during the 20th century. Contrarily to the majority of the developed markets, it has remained almost the same during the two halves of the century. However, years 2001 and 2002 have driven the average excess return downwards so that the average excess return is now more in line with risk premium estimated via prospective approaches. The first prospective approach which is the most used in the financial literature is based on the return decomposition. The risk premium is equal to the difference between the sum of the expected dividend and capital gain returns on market indices, and the expected return on bonds. As the dividend yield is currently at a low level, the estimated risk premium is low, about 1.5 %. If share repurchases are considered, the risk premium should probably be augmented by 0.5 %. The second prospective approach, less used in the literature, is based on the implicit risk premium inferred from the equality between the observed value and the intrinsic value of the market index estimated from a model based on abnormal earnings (Edwards, Bell et Ohlson). The estimated risk premium is then 3.5 %, which can be considered an upper limit given the documented over-optimism bias of financial analysts forecasts. Once we adjust for this upward bias, the implicit risk premium should be revised downwards by 1 %. Depending on the approach, the prospective risk premium for Canada ranges between 2 % and 2.5 %. Le rendement historique excédentaire moyen des marchés boursiers par rapport aux obligations gouvernementales a été de 4,5 % au Canada durant le xxe siècle. Contrairement à la plupart des marchés développés, il est resté sensiblement le même durant les deux moitiés du siècle. Toutefois, la prise en compte des années 2001 et 2002 conduit à un rendement excédentaire moyen beaucoup plus faible et davantage en ligne avec les primes de risque estimées via des approches prospectives. La première approche prospective, la plus utilisée dans la littérature financière, s’appuie sur la décomposition des rendements. La prime de risque est alors égale à la différence entre la somme des rendements attendus sur les indices boursiers sous forme de dividendes et de gain en capital, et le rendement anticipé sur les obligations. Étant donné que le rendement en dividende est à un niveau très bas aujourd’hui, la prime de risque anticipée est faible, de l’ordre de 1,5 %. Toutefois, elle doit vraisemblablement être majorée de 0,5 % du fait de l’importance des rachats d’actions. La seconde approche prospective, moins utilisée, se base sur la prime de risque implicite inférée de l’égalité entre la valeur de l’indice boursier et la valeur intrinsèque du même indice estimée à partir du modèle d’actualisation des bénéfices anormaux (Edwards, Bell et Ohlson). Elle conduit à une prime de risque de 3,5 %, soit sans doute une borne supérieure étant donné le biais positif des prévisions d’analystes financiers documenté dans la littérature. Après ajustement pour ce biais, la prime de risque implicite doit être minorée de 1 %. La prime de risque prospective au Canada est donc actuellement de l’ordre de 2 % à 2,5 % selon les approches retenues.

Suggested Citation

  • Rochon, Mathieu & Desrosiers, Stéphanie & L’Her, Jean-François, 2004. "Révision à la baisse de la prime sur les actions au Canada," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 80(1), pages 137-170, Mars.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:80:y:2004:i:1:p:137-170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/010757ar
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Nellie Liang & Steven A. Sharpe, 1999. "Share repurchases and employee stock options and their implications for S&P 500 share retirements and expected returns," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 1999-59, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    2. Eugene F. Fama & Kenneth R. French, 2001. "Disappearing Dividends: Changing Firm Characteristics Or Lower Propensity To Pay?," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 14(1), pages 67-79, March.
    3. Goetzmann, William N. & Jorion, Philippe, 1999. "Re-Emerging Markets," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-32, March.
    4. P Best & A Byrne, 2001. "Measuring the equity risk premium," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(3), pages 245-256, January.
    5. Elfakhani, Said & Lockwood, Larry J & Zaher, Tarek S, 1998. "Small Firm and Value Effects in the Canadian Stock Market," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 21(3), pages 277-291, Fall.
    6. John Capstaff & Krishna Paudyal & William Rees, 2001. "A Comparative Analysis of Earnings Forecasts in Europe," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5‐6), pages 531-562, June.
    7. James Claus & Jacob Thomas, 2001. "Equity Premia as Low as Three Percent? Evidence from Analysts' Earnings Forecasts for Domestic and International Stock Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(5), pages 1629-1666, October.
    8. Roger G. Ibbotson & Peng Chen, 2003. "Long-Run Stock Returns: Participating in the Real Economy," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm354, Yale School of Management.
    9. Ivo Welch, 2001. "The Equity Premium Consensus Forecast Revisited," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1325, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    11. Frankel, Richard & Lee, Charles M. C., 1998. "Accounting valuation, market expectation, and cross-sectional stock returns," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 283-319, June.
    12. Olivier J. Blanchard, 1993. "Movements in the Equity Premium," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(2), pages 75-138.
    13. James A. Ohlson, 1991. "The theory of value and earnings, and an introduction to the Ball†Brown analysis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, September.
    14. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    15. Rajnish Mehra, 2003. "The Equity Premium: Why is it a Puzzle?," NBER Working Papers 9512, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R., 2001. "The theory and practice of corporate finance: evidence from the field," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2-3), pages 187-243, May.
    17. Merton H. Miller & Franco Modigliani, 1961. "Dividend Policy, Growth, and the Valuation of Shares," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34, pages 411-411.
    18. Said Elfakhani & Larry J. Lockwood & Tarek S. Zaher, 1998. "Small Firm And Value Effects In The Canadian Stock Market," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 21(3), pages 277-291, September.
    19. Terence Lim, 2001. "Rationality and Analysts' Forecast Bias," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(1), pages 369-385, February.
    20. James A. Ohlson, 1990. "A Synthesis of security valuation theory and the role of dividends, cash flows, and earnings," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 648-676, March.
    21. Jay R. Ritter, 2002. "The Biggest Mistakes We Teach," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 159-168, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kothari, S. P., 2001. "Capital markets research in accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 105-231, September.
    2. Roelof Salomons, 2008. "A Theoretical And Practical Perspective On The Equity Risk Premium," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 299-329, April.
    3. Christian Bach & Peter O. Christensen, 2016. "Consumption-based equity valuation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1149-1202, December.
    4. Christian Bach, 2011. "Conservatism in Corporate Valuation," CREATES Research Papers 2011-32, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    5. van Ewijk, Casper & de Groot, Henri L.F. & Santing, A.J. (Coos), 2012. "A meta-analysis of the equity premium," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 819-830.
    6. Fernandez, Pablo & Aguirreamalloa, Javier & Liechtenstein, Heinrich, 2009. "The equity premium puzzle: High required equity premium, undervaluation and self fulfilling prophecy," IESE Research Papers D/821, IESE Business School.
    7. Jiang, Xiaoquan & Lee, Bong-Soo, 2007. "Stock returns, dividend yield, and book-to-market ratio," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 455-475, February.
    8. Longstaff, Francis A. & Piazzesi, Monika, 2004. "Corporate earnings and the equity premium," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 401-421, December.
    9. Christophe Faugere & Julian Van Erlach, 2003. "The Equity Premium: Explained by GDP Growth and Consistent with Portfolio Insurance," Finance 0311004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Longstaff, Francis & Piazzesi, Monika, 2002. "Corporate Earnings and the Equity Premium," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt3qn115m4, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    11. Salomons, Roelof, 2004. "Expert something sensible: putting US returns in an international perspective," Research Report 04E02, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    12. Eugene F. Fama & Kenneth R. French, 2002. "The Equity Premium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(2), pages 637-659, April.
    13. Ma, Qingzhong & Whidbee, David A. & Zhang, Athena Wei, 2011. "Value, valuation, and the long-run performance of merged firms," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, February.
    14. repec:dgr:rugsom:04e02 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Bonaimé, Alice Adams & Öztekin, Özde & Warr, Richard S., 2014. "Capital structure, equity mispricing, and stock repurchases," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 182-200.
    16. Khimich, Natalya, 2017. "A comparison of alternative cash flow and discount rate news proxies," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 31-52.
    17. Ding, Xiaoya (Sara) & Ni, Yang & Rahman, Abdul & Saadi, Samir, 2015. "Housing price growth and the cost of equity capital," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 283-300.
    18. Christophe Faugere & Julian Van Erlach, 2003. "A General Theory of Stock Market Valuation and Return," Finance 0311005, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 May 2004.
    19. Christophe, Faugere, 2003. "A Required Yield Theory of Stock Market Valuation and Treasury Yield Determination," MPRA Paper 15579, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Jun 2009.
    20. Avdis, Efstathios & Wachter, Jessica A., 2017. "Maximum likelihood estimation of the equity premium," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 589-609.
    21. Hendriock, Mario, 2020. "Implied cost of capital and mutual fund performance," CFR Working Papers 20-11, University of Cologne, Centre for Financial Research (CFR).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:80:y:2004:i:1:p:137-170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Benoit Dostie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/scseeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.