IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Comparing Different Explanations of the Volatility Trend

  • Amir Rubin

    (Simon Fraser University and Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzliya)

  • Daniel Smith

    (Simon Fraser University and QUT)

We analyze the puzzling behavior of the volatility of individual stock returns over the past few decades. The literature has provided many different explanations to the trend in volatility and this paper tests the viability of the different explanations. Virtually all current theoretical arguments that are provided for the trend in the average level of volatility over time lend themselves to explanations about the difference in volatility levels between firms in the cross-section. We therefore focus separately on the crosssectional and time-series explanatory power of the different proxies. We fail to find a proxy that is able to explain both dimensions well. In particular, we find that Cao et al. (2008) market-to-book ratio tracks average volatility levels well, but has no crosssectional explanatory power. On the other hand, the low-price proxy suggested by Brandt et al. (2010) has much cross-sectional explanatory power, but has virtually no time-series explanatory power. We also find that the different proxies do not explain the trend in volatility in the period prior to 1995 (R-squared of virtually zero), but explain rather well the trend in volatility at the turn of the Millennium (1995-2005).

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: http://www.ncer.edu.au/papers/documents/WPNo68.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Centre for Econometric Research in its series NCER Working Paper Series with number 68.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 11 Nov 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: forthcoming
Handle: RePEc:qut:auncer:2010_15
Contact details of provider: Phone: 07 3138 5066
Fax: 07 3138 1500
Web page: http://www.ncer.edu.au

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. Graham Elliott & Ulrich K. M�ller, 2006. "Efficient Tests for General Persistent Time Variation in Regression Coefficients -super-1," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(4), pages 907-940.
  2. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-36, May-June.
  3. Lubos PÁstor & Veronesi Pietro, 2003. "Stock Valuation and Learning about Profitability," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 1749-1790, October.
  4. G. William Schwert, 2001. "Stock Volatility in the New Millennium: How Wacky Is Nasdaq?," NBER Working Papers 8436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Jeff Fleming & Chris Kirby & Barbara Ostdiek, 2006. "Stochastic Volatility, Trading Volume, and the Daily Flow of Information," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(3), pages 1551-1590, May.
  6. Chuang, Chia-Chang & Kuan, Chung-Ming & Lin, Hsin-Yi, 2009. "Causality in quantiles and dynamic stock return-volume relations," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1351-1360, July.
  7. Viral V. Acharya & Lasse Heje Pedersen, 2004. "Asset Pricing with Liquidity Risk," NBER Working Papers 10814, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Epps, Thomas W & Epps, Mary Lee, 1976. "The Stochastic Dependence of Security Price Changes and Transaction Volumes: Implications for the Mixture-of-Distributions Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 305-21, March.
  9. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
  10. Michael W. Brandt & Alon Brav & John R. Graham & Alok Kumar, 2010. "The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(2), pages 863-899, February.
  11. Yexiao Xu & Burton G. Malkiel, 2003. "Investigating the Behavior of Idiosyncratic Volatility," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(4), pages 613-644, October.
  12. 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.
  13. Steven X. Wei & Chu Zhang, 2006. "Why Did Individual Stocks Become More Volatile?," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(1), pages 259-292, January.
  14. Hollifield, Burton, 2002. "Comment on: : Stock volatility in the new millennium: how wacky is Nasdaq?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 27-30, January.
  15. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1993. "Differences of Opinion Make a Horse Race," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(3), pages 473-506.
  16. Brown, Gregory & Kapadia, Nishad, 2007. "Firm-specific risk and equity market development," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 358-388, May.
  17. Mitchell A. Petersen, 2005. "Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches," NBER Working Papers 11280, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. 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.
  19. Wang, Zijun, 2010. "Dynamics and causality in industry-specific volatility," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1688-1699, July.
  20. Wayne E. Ferson & Sergei Sarkissian & Timothy T. Simin, 2003. "Spurious Regressions in Financial Economics?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1393-1414, 08.
  21. Amihud, Yakov, 2002. "Illiquidity and stock returns: cross-section and time-series effects," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 31-56, January.
  22. Paul J. Irvine & Jeffrey Pontiff, 2009. "Idiosyncratic Return Volatility, Cash Flows, and Product Market Competition," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 1149-1177, March.
  23. Anat R. Admati, Paul Pfleiderer, 1988. "A Theory of Intraday Patterns: Volume and Price Variability," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 3-40.
  24. Umutlu, Mehmet & Akdeniz, Levent & Altay-Salih, Aslihan, 2010. "The degree of financial liberalization and aggregated stock-return volatility in emerging markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 509-521, March.
  25. Foster, F Douglas & Viswanathan, S, 1990. "A Theory of the Interday Variations in Volume, Variance, and Trading Costs in Securities Markets," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 3(4), pages 593-624.
  26. 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.
  27. Lamoureux, Christopher G & Lastrapes, William D, 1994. "Endogenous Trading Volume and Momentum in Stock-Return Volatility," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(2), pages 253-60, April.
  28. Charles Cao & Timothy Simin & Jing Zhao, 2008. "Can Growth Options Explain the Trend in Idiosyncratic Risk?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(6), pages 2599-2633, November.
  29. Kraus, Alan & Smith, Maxwell, 1996. "Heterogeneous Beliefs and the Effect of Replicatable Options on Asset Prices," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(3), pages 723-56.
  30. Richardson, Matthew & Smith, Tom, 1994. "A Direct Test of the Mixture of Distributions Hypothesis: Measuring the Daily Flow of Information," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(01), pages 101-116, March.
  31. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. " On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
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:qut:auncer:2010_15. 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: (School of Economics and Finance)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask School of Economics and Finance to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.