IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Does Executive Compensation Reflect Default Risk?

Listed author(s):
  • C, Loran

    ()

    (UiS)

  • Eckbo, Espen

    (Darthmouth College)

  • Lu, Ching-Chih

    (National Chengchi University)

We analyze whether executive compensation reflects firm default risk, measured by distance to default of Merton (1974). Using a large panel of firms, we explore several empirical frameworks. In least squares, fixed effects and quantile regression settings, default risk and volatility possess significant explanatory power for compensation. The signs of the estimated coefficients are consistent with higher compensation for higher risk-bearing--managers of firms with higher default risk are paid more. In the benchmark models, estimates for default risk are quite small, indicating effects on average compensation of around $9,000. The corresponding figure for the upper 5-percentile of CEOs is $50,000. Volatility has much larger average effects, in excess of $25 million, with upper 5-percent effects above $150 million. In a partial identification framework, compensation is systematically associated with default risk. Moving to a higher default risk firm raises compensation by at least $.96%, corresponding to around $70,000 for average CEOs, and above $400,000 for the top 5-percentile. The largest effect applies for moving into the highest default risk firms. For such firms, the treatment effect exceeds $180,000 for average CEOs, and for the top 5-percent, the effect is well above $1 million. Conditional means exhibit monotonicity, suggesting that compensation is amenable to a treatment response approach. Surprisingly, when we utilize an instrumental variables approach, an increase in default risk reduces total compensation. Thus our results uncover a complex but powerful link between firm risk and CEO compensation, which may make it difficult to regulate compensation by means such as `Say-on-Pay'.

If 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.

File URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8078351/uis_wps_econ_fin/uis_wps_2014_11_chollete_eckbo_lu.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Stavanger in its series UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance with number 2014/11.

as
in new window

Length: 48 pages
Date of creation: 11 Sep 2014
Handle: RePEc:hhs:stavef:2014_011
Contact details of provider: Postal:
University of Stavanger, NO-4036 Stavanger, Norway

Web page: http://www.uis.no/research/economics_and_finance

More information through EDIRC

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Manski, Charles F, 1990. "Nonparametric Bounds on Treatment Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 319-323, May.
  2. Carola Frydman & Raven E. Saks, 2010. "Executive Compensation: A New View from a Long-Term Perspective, 1936--2005," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(5), pages 2099-2138.
  3. Xavier Gabaix & Augustin Landier, 2008. "Why has CEO Pay Increased So Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 123(1), pages 49-100.
  4. Charles F. Manski, 1997. "Monotone Treatment Response," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1311-1334, November.
  5. Acharya, Viral V. & Cooley, Thomas & Richardson, Matthew & Walter, Ingo, 2010. "Manufacturing Tail Risk: A Perspective on the Financial Crisis of 2007–2009," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 4(4), pages 247-325, April.
  6. Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1999. "The Other Side of the Trade-off: The Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 65-105, February.
  7. Gian Luca Clementi & Thomas Cooley, 2009. "Executive Compensation: Facts," Working Papers 09-16, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
  8. John Y. Campbell & Jens Hilscher & Jan Szilagyi, 2008. "In Search of Distress Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(6), pages 2899-2939, December.
  9. Sims,Christopher A. (ed.), 1994. "Advances in Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521444606.
  10. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Lasse Heje Pedersen, 2005. "Predatory Trading," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(4), pages 1825-1863, August.
  11. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
  12. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. " On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
  13. Lewellen, Katharina, 2006. "Financing decisions when managers are risk averse," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 551-589, December.
  14. Merton, Robert C, 1974. "On the Pricing of Corporate Debt: The Risk Structure of Interest Rates," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 29(2), pages 449-470, May.
  15. Jonathan B. Berk & Richard Stanton & Josef Zechner, 2010. "Human Capital, Bankruptcy, and Capital Structure," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(3), pages 891-926, June.
  16. Carola Frydman & Dirk Jenter, 2010. "CEO Compensation," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 75-102, December.
  17. Guido Lorenzoni, 2008. "Inefficient Credit Booms," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 809-833.
  18. Charles F. Manski & John V. Pepper, 2000. "Monotone Instrumental Variables, with an Application to the Returns to Schooling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 997-1012, July.
  19. Sims,Christopher A. (ed.), 1994. "Advances in Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521444590.
  20. Florian Heider & Alexander Ljungqvist, 2012. "As Certain as Debt and Taxes: Estimating the Tax Sensitivity of Leverage from Exogenous State Tax Changes," NBER Working Papers 18263, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. Nina Baranchuk & Glenn MacDonald & Jun Yang, 2011. "The Economics of Super Managers," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(10), pages 3321-3368.
  22. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
  23. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
  24. 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.
  25. DeAngelo, Harry & DeAngelo, Linda & Whited, Toni M., 2011. "Capital structure dynamics and transitory debt," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 235-261, February.
  26. Maria Vassalou & Yuhang Xing, 2004. "Default Risk in Equity Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(2), pages 831-868, April.
  27. Alex Edmans & Xavier Gabaix, 2011. "The Effect of Risk on the CEO Market," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(8), pages 2822-2863.
  28. Elie Tamer, 2010. "Partial Identification in Econometrics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 167-195, September.
  29. Paul Brockman & Xiumin Martin & Emre Unlu, 2010. "Executive Compensation and the Maturity Structure of Corporate Debt," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(3), pages 1123-1161, June.
  30. Sreedhar T. Bharath & Tyler Shumway, 2008. "Forecasting Default with the Merton Distance to Default Model," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(3), pages 1339-1369, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:stavef:2014_011. 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: (Bernt Arne Odegaard)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.