IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/3086.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Cost of Constraints: Risk Management, Agency Theory and Asset Prices

Author

Listed:
  • Alankar, Ashwin

    (Alliance Bernstein)

  • Blaustein, Peter

    (Oak Hill Advisors)

  • Scholes, Myron S.

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

Traditional academic literature has relied on so-called "limits to arbitrage" theories to explain why investment managers are unable to eliminate the effects of investor "irrational" preferences (either the asset-pricing anomalies or the behavioral finance literature) on asset pricing. We demonstrate, however, that investment managers may not eliminate the observed asset-pricing anomalies because they may contribute to their existence. We show that if managers face constraints such as a "tracking-error constraint," coupled with the need to hold liquidity to meet redemptions or to actively-manage investments, they optimally hold higher-volatility securities in their portfolios. Investment constraints, such as tracking-error constraints, however, reduce the principal-agent problems inherent in delegated asset management and serve as effective risk-control tools. Liquidity reserves allow managers to meet redemptions or redeploy risks efficiently. We prove that investment managers will combine a portfolio of active risks (a so-called "alpha portfolio") for a given level of liquidity with a hedging portfolio designed to control tracking error. As the demand for either liquidity or active management increases presumably because of confidence in alpha, the cost of maintaining the tracking-error constraint increases in that the investment managers must finance these demands by selling more lower-volatility securities and holding more higher volatility securities. With more demand for the "alpha" portfolio, managers are forced to buy more of the tracking-error control portfolio. Investment managers and their investors are willing to hold inefficient portfolios and to give up returns, if necessary, to control the tracking-error of their portfolios. Given the liquidity and tracking-error constraints, investment managers concentrate more of their holdings in higher volatility (higher beta) securities. And, we show that it is optimal for investors to limit their manager's use of leverage, which implies that leverage has a different cost other than the cost of borrowing exceeding the return from lending. Empirically, we show that active investment managers, such as mutual funds, hold portfolios that concentrate in higher volatility securities. Moreover, when they change their holdings of their "alpha" portfolios (reduce or increase their tracking error by choice), the relative prices of higher volatility stocks change according to the predictions of the model. That is, if investment managers move closer to a market portfolio, the prices of lower-volatility stocks rise more than the prices of higher-volatility stocks given changes in the prices of other market factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Alankar, Ashwin & Blaustein, Peter & Scholes, Myron S., 2014. "The Cost of Constraints: Risk Management, Agency Theory and Asset Prices," Research Papers 3086, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:3086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/cost-constraints-risk-management-agency-theory-asset-prices
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. "The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    2. Richard A. Easterlin, 1992. "Analysis," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 51-53, July.
    3. Barberis, Nicholas & Thaler, Richard, 2003. "A survey of behavioral finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 1053-1128, Elsevier.
    4. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    5. Malcolm Baker & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2007. "Investor Sentiment in the Stock Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 129-152, Spring.
    6. Karceski, Jason, 2002. "Returns-Chasing Behavior, Mutual Funds, and Beta's Death," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 559-594, December.
    7. Pastor, Lubos & Stambaugh, Robert F., 2003. "Liquidity Risk and Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(3), pages 642-685, June.
    8. Xuemin (Sterling) Yan, 2006. "The Determinants and Implications of Mutual Fund Cash Holdings: Theory and Evidence," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 35(2), pages 67-91, June.
    9. Haugen, Robert A. & Heins, A. James, 1975. "Risk and the Rate of Return on Financial Assets: Some Old Wine in New Bottles," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(5), pages 775-784, December.
    10. Lakonishok, Josef & Shapiro, Alan C., 1986. "Systematic risk, total risk and size as determinants of stock market returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 115-132, March.
    11. Shleifer, Andrei, 2000. "Inefficient Markets: An Introduction to Behavioral Finance," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292272, Decembrie.
    12. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Lo, Andrew W & Wang, Jiang, 2000. "Trading Volume: Definitions, Data Analysis, and Implications of Portfolio Theory," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(2), pages 257-300.
    14. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1995. "Size and Book-to-Market Factors in Earnings and Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(1), pages 131-155, March.
    15. Jose A. Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2003. "Overconfidence and Speculative Bubbles," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(6), pages 1183-1219, December.
    16. Owen A. Lamont & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Anomalies: The Law of One Price in Financial Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 191-202, Fall.
    17. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Andrew Ang & Robert J. Hodrick & Yuhang Xing & Xiaoyan Zhang, 2006. "The Cross‐Section of Volatility and Expected Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(1), pages 259-299, February.
    19. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    20. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    21. Ferreira, Miguel A. & Matos, Pedro, 2008. "The colors of investors' money: The role of institutional investors around the world," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 499-533, June.
    22. Eli Ofek & Matthew Richardson, 2003. "DotCom Mania: The Rise and Fall of Internet Stock Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(3), pages 1113-1137, June.
    23. John H. Cochrane, 2002. "Stocks as Money: Convenience Yield and the Tech-Stock Bubble," NBER Working Papers 8987, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Alok Kumar, 2009. "Who Gambles in the Stock Market?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1889-1933, August.
    25. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    26. Stulz, Rene M & Wasserfallen, Walter, 1995. "Foreign Equity Investment Restrictions, Capital Flight, and Shareholder Wealth Maximization: Theory and Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 8(4), pages 1019-1057.
    27. Narasimhan Jegadeesh & Sheridan Titman, 2001. "Profitability of Momentum Strategies: An Evaluation of Alternative Explanations," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(2), pages 699-720, April.
    28. Sensoy, Berk A., 2009. "Performance evaluation and self-designated benchmark indexes in the mutual fund industry," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 25-39, April.
    29. Eli Ofek & Matthew Richardson, 2003. "DotCom Mania: The Rise and Fall of Internet Stock Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(3), pages 1113-1138, June.
    30. Black, Fischer, 1972. "Capital Market Equilibrium with Restricted Borrowing," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(3), pages 444-455, July.
    31. Blitz, D.C. & van Vliet, P., 2007. "The Volatility Effect: Lower Risk without Lower Return," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-044-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Boguth, Oliver & Simutin, Mikhail, 2018. "Leverage constraints and asset prices: Insights from mutual fund risk taking," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(2), pages 325-341.

    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. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2013. "Understanding Asset Prices," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2013-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    2. Montone, Maurizio, 2023. "Beta, value, and growth: Do dichotomous risk-preferences explain stock returns?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    3. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, November.
    4. Rocciolo, Francesco & Gheno, Andrea & Brooks, Chris, 2022. "Explaining abnormal returns in stock markets: An alpha-neutral version of the CAPM," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Joshua Traut, 2023. "What we know about the low-risk anomaly: a literature review," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 37(3), pages 297-324, September.
    6. Seiichiro Iwasawa & Tomonori Uchiyama, 2013. "A Behavioral Economics Exploration into the "Volatility Anomaly" ``," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 9(3), pages 457-490, September.
    7. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning analysis of stock market anomalies under prospect stochastic dominance," Working Papers unige:134101, University of Geneva, Geneva School of Economics and Management.
    8. Malcolm Baker & Mathias F. Hoeyer & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2016. "The Risk Anomaly Tradeoff of Leverage," NBER Working Papers 22116, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Atilgan, Yigit & Bali, Turan G. & Demirtas, K. Ozgur & Gunaydin, A. Doruk, 2020. "Left-tail momentum: Underreaction to bad news, costly arbitrage and equity returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(3), pages 725-753.
    10. Stephen A. Gorman & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2021. "The ABC’s of the alternative risk premium: academic roots," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(6), pages 405-436, October.
    11. David Blitz, 2014. "Agency†Based Asset Pricing and the Beta Anomaly," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(4), pages 770-801, September.
    12. Andreas Oehler & Julian Schneider, 2022. "Gambling with lottery stocks?," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(6), pages 477-503, October.
    13. Constantinos Antoniou & John A. Doukas & Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 2016. "Investor Sentiment, Beta, and the Cost of Equity Capital," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 347-367, February.
    14. Lin, Chaonan & Chen, Hong-Yi & Ko, Kuan-Cheng & Yang, Nien-Tzu, 2021. "Time-dependent lottery preference and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 272-294.
    15. Jianping Mei & Jose A. Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2009. "Speculative Trading and Stock Prices: Evidence from Chinese A-B Share Premia," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 10(2), pages 225-255, November.
    16. Polk, Christopher & Lou, Dong & Huang, Shiyang, 2016. "The Booms and Busts of Beta Arbitrage," CEPR Discussion Papers 11531, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Andrew Ang & Assaf A. Shtauber & Paul C. Tetlock, 2013. "Asset Pricing in the Dark: The Cross-Section of OTC Stocks," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(12), pages 2985-3028.
    18. Chabi-Yo, Fousseni & Ruenzi, Stefan & Weigert, Florian, 2018. "Crash Sensitivity and the Cross Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 1059-1100, June.
    19. Lou, Dong & Polk, Christopher & Huang, Shiyang, 2014. "The booms and busts of beta arbitrage," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119019, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Paul Schneider & Christian Wagner & Josef Zechner, 2020. "Low‐Risk Anomalies?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(5), pages 2673-2718, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ecl:stabus:3086. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.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.