Stock market and investment good prices: implications of macroeconomics
AbstractStock market prices are procyclical, while investment good prices are countercyclical. A real business cycle model calibrated to these observations implies that 75% of the cyclical variation in aggregate output is due to an investment-specific technology shock, while the rest is due to an aggregate productivity shock. To test this conclusion, we investigate the model's implications for asset prices and business cycles. The model does not do significantly worse than existing models on these dimensions, and on two dimensions it does notably better. It is consistent with the facts: (i) employment and investment across different sectors comove over the business cycle: and (ii) high interest rates lead low aggregate output. Fact (ii) is often interpreted as reflecting the business cycle effects of monetary policy shocks. Our result suggest that (ii) may, at least to some extent, also reflect the effects of real shocks.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago in its series Working Paper Series with number WP-98-6.
Date of creation: 1998
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O. Box 834, 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-0834
Web page: http://www.chicagofed.org/
More information through EDIRC
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Jonas Fisher, 2004.
"Technology Shocks Matter,"
Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings
14, Econometric Society.
- Aubhik Khan & Julia K. Thomas, .
"Nonconvex Factor Adjustments in Equilibrium Business Cycle Models: Do Nonlinearities Matter?,"
GSIA Working Papers
2000-E33, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
- Khan, Aubhik & Thomas, Julia K., 2003. "Nonconvex factor adjustments in equilibrium business cycle models: do nonlinearities matter?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 331-360, March.
- Aubhik Khan & Julia Thomas, 2002. "Nonconvex factor adjustments in equilibrium business cycle models: Do nonlinearities matter?," Staff Report 306, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Aubhik Khan & Julia K. Thomas, 2000. "Nonconvex factor adjustments in equilibrium business cycle models: do nonlinearities matter?," Working Papers 00-10, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
- Lawrence J. Christiano & Michele Boldrin & Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2001.
"Habit Persistence, Asset Returns, and the Business Cycle,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 149-166, March.
- Michele Boldrin & Lawrence J. Christiano & Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2000. "Habit persistence, asset returns and the business cycle," Staff Report 280, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Michele Boldrin & Lawrence J. Christiano & Jonas D.M. Fisher, 1999. "Habit persistence, asset returns and the business cycles," Working Paper Series WP-99-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Kevin L. Reffett & Frank Schorfheide, 2000. "Evaluating Asset Pricing Implications of DSGE Models," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1630, Econometric Society.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bernie Flores).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.