R&D, patents and stock return volatility
Recent finance literature highlights the role of technological change in increasing firm specific (idiosyncratic) and aggregate stock return volatility, yet innovation data is not used in these analyses, leaving the direct relationship between innovation and stock return volatility untested. The paper investigates the relationship between volatility and innovation using firm level patent data. The analysis builds on the empirical work by Mazzucato (Rev Econ Dyn 5:318–345, 2002 ; J Evol Econ 13(5):491–512, 2003 ) where it is found that stock return volatility is highest during periods in the industry life-cycle when innovation is the most ‘radical’. In this paper we ask whether firms which invest more in innovation (more R&D and more patents) and/or which have more important innovations (patents with more citations) experience more volatility in their returns. Given that returns should in theory be higher, on average, for higher risk stocks, we also look at the effect of innovation on the level of returns. To take into account the competition between firms within industries, firm returns and volatility are measured relative to the industry average. We focus the analysis on firms in the pharmaceutical industry between 1974 and 1999. Results suggest that there is a positive and significant relationship between volatility, R&D intensity and the various patent related measures—especially when the innovation measures are filtered to distinguish the very innovative firms from the less innovate ones. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2012
Volume (Year): 22 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00191/index.htm|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Mariana Mazzucato, 2002. "The PC Industry: New Economy or Early Life-Cycle?," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 318-345, April.
- Pástor, Luboš & Veronesi, Pietro, 2004.
"Was There A Nasdaq Bubble in the Late 1990s?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
4485, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Yi Deng, 2005. "The value of knowledge spillovers," Working Paper Series 2005-14, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
- Schwert, G William, 1989.
" Why Does Stock Market Volatility Change over Time?,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 44(5), pages 1115-53, December.
- G. William Schwert, 1990. "Why Does Stock Market Volatility Change Over Time?," NBER Working Papers 2798, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Stephen Hymer & Peter Pashigian, 1962. "Firm Size and Rate of Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 556.
- Timothy F. Bresnahan & Shane Greenstein, 1997.
"Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry,"
97028, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Bresnahan, Timothy F & Greenstein, Shane, 1999. "Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 1-40, March.
- Malkiel, Burton & Campbell, John & Lettau, Martin & Xu, Yexiao, 2001.
"Have Individual Stocks Become More Volatile? An Empirical Exploration of Idiosyncratic Risk,"
3128707, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- John Y. Campbell, 2001. "Have Individual Stocks Become More Volatile? An Empirical Exploration of Idiosyncratic Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(1), pages 1-43, 02.
- John Y. Campbell & Martin Lettau & Burton G. Malkiel & Yexiao Xu, 2000. "Have Individual Stocks Become More Volatile? An Empirical Exploration of Idiosyncratic Risk," NBER Working Papers 7590, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:22:y:2012:i:4:p:811-832. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.