1 / 23

Stochastic discount factors

Stochastic discount factors. HKUST FINA790C Spring 2006. Objectives of asset pricing theories. Explain differences in returns across different assets at point in time (cross-sectional explanation) Explain differences in an asset’s return over time (time-series)

heller
Télécharger la présentation

Stochastic discount factors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Stochastic discount factors HKUST FINA790C Spring 2006

  2. Objectives of asset pricing theories • Explain differences in returns across different assets at point in time (cross-sectional explanation) • Explain differences in an asset’s return over time (time-series) • In either case we can provide explanations based on absolute pricing (prices are related to fundamentals, economy-wide variables) OR relative pricing (prices are related to benchmark price)

  3. Most general asset pricing theory All the models we will talk about can be written as Pit = Et[ mt+1 Xit+1] where Pit = price of asset i at time t Et = expectation conditional on investors’ time t information Xit+1 = asset i’s payoff at t+1 mt+1 = stochastic discount factor

  4. The stochastic discount factor • mt+1 (stochastic discount factor; pricing kernel) is the same across all assets at time t+1 • It values future payoffs by “discounting” them back to the present, with adjustment for risk: pit = Et[ mt+1Xit+1 ] = Et[mt+1]Et[Xit+1] + covt(mt+1,Xit+1) • Repeated substitution gives pit = Et[ S mt,t+j Xit+j ] (if no bubbles)

  5. Stochastic discount factor & prices • If a riskless asset exists which costs $1 at t and pays Rf = 1+rf at t+1 1 = Et[ mt+1Rf ] or Rf = 1/Et[mt+1] • So our risk-adjusted discounting formula is pit = Et[Xit+1]/Rf + covt(Xit+1,mt+1)

  6. What can we say about sdf? • Law of One Price: if two assets have same payoffs in all states of nature then they must have the same price  m : pit = Et[ mt+1 Xit+1 ] iff law holds • Absence of arbitrage: there are no arbitrage opportunities iff  m > 0 : pit = Et[mt+1Xit+1]

  7. Stochastic discount factors • For stocks, Xit+1 = pit+1 + dit+1 (price + dividend) • For riskless asset if it exists Xit+1 = 1 + rf = Rf • Since pt is in investors’ information set at time t, 1 = Et[ mt+1( Xit+1/pit ) ] = Et[mt+1Rit+1] • This holds for conditional as well as for unconditional expectations

  8. Stochastic discount factor & returns • If a riskless asset exists 1 = Et[mt+1Rf] or Rf = 1/Et[mt+1] • Et[Rit+1] = ( 1 – covt(mt+1,Rit+1 )/Et[mt+1] Et[Rit+1] – Et[Rzt+1] = -covt(mt+1,Rit+1)Et[Rzt+1] asset’s expected excess return is higher the lower its covariance with m

  9. Paths to take from here • (1) We can build a specific model for m and see what it says about prices/returns • E.g., mt+1 = b∂U/∂Ct+1/Et∂U/∂Ct from first-order condition of investor’s utility maximization problem • E.g., mt+1 = a + bft+1 linear factor model • (2) We can view m as a random variable and see what we can say about it generally • Does there always exist a sdf? • What market structures support such a sdf? • It is easier to narrow down what m is like, compared to narrowing down what all assets’ payoffs are like

  10. Thinking about the stochastic discount factor • Suppose there are S states of nature • Investors can trade contingent claims that pay $1 in state s and today costs c(s) • Suppose market is complete – any contingent claim can be traded • Bottom line: if a complete set of contingent claims exists, then a discount factor exists and it is equal to the contingent claim prices divided by state probabilities

  11. Thinking about the stochastic discount factor • Let x(s) denote Payoff ⇒ p(x) =Σ c(s)x(s) • p(x) = (s) { c(s)/(s) } x(s) , where(s) is probability of state s • Let m(s) = { c(s)/(s) } • Then p = Σ (s)m(s)x(s) = E m(s)x(s) So in a complete market the stochastic discount factor m exists with p = E mx

  12. Thinking about the stochastic discount factor • The stochastic discount factor is the state price c(s) scaled by the probability of the state, therefore a “state price density” • Define *(s) = Rfm(s)(s) = Rfc(s) = c(s)/Et(m) Then pt = E*t(x)/Rf ( pricing using risk-neutral probabilities *(s) )

  13. A simple example • S=2, π(1)= ½ • 3 securities with x1= (1,0), x2=(0,1), x3= (1,1) • Let m=(½,1) • Therefore, p1=¼, p2= 1/2 , p3= ¾ • R1= (4,0), R2=(0,2), R3=(4/3,4/3) • E[R1]=2, E[R2]=1, E[R3]=4/3

  14. Simple example (contd.) • Where did m come from? • “representative agent” economy with –endowment: 1 in date 0, (2,1) in date 1 –utility EU(c0, c11, c12) = Σπs(lnc0+ lnc1s) –i.e. u(c0, c1s) = lnc0+ lnc1s (additive) time separable utility function • m= ∂u1/E∂u0=(c0/c11, c0/c12)=(1/2, 1/1) • m=(½,1) since endowment=consumption • Low consumption states are “high m” states

  15. What can we say about m? • The unconditional representation for returns in excess of the riskfree rate is E[mt+1(Rit+1 – Rf) ] =0 • So E[Rit+1-Rf] = -cov(mt+1,Rit+1)/E[mt+1] E[Rit+1-Rf] = -(mt+1,Rit+1)(mt+1)(Rit+1)/E[mt+1] • Rewritten in terms of the Sharpe ratio E[Rit+1-Rf]/(Rit+1) = -(mt+1,Rit+1)(mt+1)/E[mt+1]

  16. Hansen-Jagannathan bound • Since -1 ≤  ≤ 1, we get (mt+1)/E[mt+1] ≥ supi | E[Rit+1-Rf]/(Rit+1) | • This is known as the Hansen-Jagannathan Bound: The ratio of the standard deviation of a stochastic discount factor to its mean exceeds the Sharpe Ratio attained by any asset

  17. Computing HJ bounds • For specified E(m) (and implied Rf) we calculate E(m)S*(Rf); trace out the feasible region for the stochastic discount factor (above the minimum standard deviation bound) • The bound is tighter when S*(Rf) is high for different E(m): i.e. portfolios that have similar  but different E(R) can be justified by very volatile m

  18. Computing HJ bounds • We don’t observe m directly so we have to infer its behavior from what we do observe (i.e.returns) • Consider the regression of m onto vector of returns R on assets observed by the econometrician m = a + R’b + e where a is constant term, b is a vector of slope coefficients and e is the regression error b = { cov(R,R) }-1 cov(R,m) a = E(m) – E(R)’b

  19. Computing HJ bounds • Without data on m we can’t directly estimate these. But we do have some theoretical restrictions on m: 1 = E(mR) or cov(R,m) = 1 – E(m)E(R) • Substitute back: b = { cov(R,R) }-1[ 1 – E(m)E(R) ] • Since var(m) = var(R’b) + var(e) (m) ≥ (R’b) = {(1-E(m)E(R))’cov(R,R)-1(1-E(m)E(R))}½

  20. Using HJ bounds • We can use the bound to check whether the sdf implied by a given model is legitimate • A candidate m† = a + R’b must satisfy E( a + R’b ) = E(m†) E ( (a+R’b)R ) = 1 Let X = [ 1 R’ ], ’ = ( a b’ ), y’ = ( E(m†) 1’ ) E{ X’ X  - y } = 0 • Premultiply both sides by ’ E[ (a+R’b)2 ] =[ E(m†) 1’ ]

  21. Using HJ bounds • The composite set of moment restrictions is E{ X’ X  - y } = 0 E{ y’ - m†2 } ≤ 0 See, e.g. Burnside (RFS 1994), Cecchetti, Lam & Mark (JF 1994), Hansen, Heaton & Luttmer (RFS, 1995)

  22. HJ bounds • These are the weakest bounds on the sdf (additional restrictions delivered by the specific theory generating m) • Tighter bound: require m>0

More Related