1 / 24

The value premium: more evidence on extrapolation

The value premium: more evidence on extrapolation. Anna Beukes February 2011 Northern Alberta Institute of Technology. What is the value premium?. Value stocks refer to those trading at low prices relative to fundamental values such as earnings, book value of assets, and cash flow

shasta
Télécharger la présentation

The value premium: more evidence on extrapolation

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. The value premium: more evidence on extrapolation Anna Beukes February 2011 Northern Alberta Institute of Technology

  2. What is the value premium? • Value stocks refer to those trading at low prices relative to fundamental values such as earnings, book value of assets, and cash flow • Fama & French (1992) showed that stocks of value companies outperformed that of growth companies

  3. International evidence on value premium • Value premium tested extensively and widely in various ways, in Japan (Chan, Hamao and Lakonishok, 1991); France, Germany, Switzerland and the UK (Capaul, Rowley and Sharpe, 1993). • Findings of the value premium existence very consistent, irrespective of method or country

  4. Value Premium in SA • Investigated by various researchers • Most extensive recent test done by Beukes (2010): using 30 years worth of data and more than one method of portfolio formation.

  5. Value Premium in SA: Results • The results are very convincing: • Value portfolios consistently outperformed growth portfolios, regardless of • the length of time the portfolios were carried (one to five years), or • whether returns were recorded annually (year-on-year) or for holding purposes (on a buy-and-hold basis). • Even after size-adjustment, value portfolios still outperformed growth portfolios by an impressive margin.

  6. Empirical Findings 1

  7. Empirical findings (cont.) 2

  8. Current state of theoretical debate • Academic community has generally come to agree that value investment strategies, on average, outperform growth investment strategies (Chan and Lakonishok, 2004:71) • But, still no agreement on how to explain the value premium.

  9. Potential explanations for the value anomaly Risk as (default) explanation • Assuming market efficiency, value premium is a measure of risk – indicating a higher discount rate that compensates investors for carrying higher risk. • What risk? Beta

  10. Risk explanation: Beta • After “uncovering” the value premium, Fama and French (1992) immediately tested beta as explanation and found no evidence that value companies are inherently more risky • Had to admit that: …“our bottom-line results are [that] beta does not seem to help explain the cross-section of average stock returns…” (1992:428).

  11. Risk explanation: Beta in SA • Van Rensburg (2003) found beta does not explain the cross-section of average returns in SA either.

  12. Risk as explanation: Distress factors • Maybe beta “too crude” a risk measure • Heaton and Lucas (1997): value companies vulnerable to recessions, business cycle downturns • Xing and Zhang (2004): fundamentals of value firms more adversely affected by negative business shocks than that of growth firms

  13. Risk as explanation: Distress factors • Liew and Vassalou (1999) tried to link value firm returns to macro-economic events • Jagannathan and Wang (1996) and Reyfman (1997) used labor income as a factor to explain the value premium =>To date no convincing/conclusive evidence that distress factors provide the explanation

  14. Extrapolation as explanation • Lakonishok, Shleifer and Vishny (henceforth LSV, 1994): systematic mispricing of value and growth stocks caused by investors who naively extrapolate the past growth rates of firms • Value stocks - a past history of poor performance (relative to growth stocks) with respect to growth in earnings, cash flow and sales • Investors overestimate sustainability of high returns on growth stocks; project past growth too far into the future.

  15. Extrapolation as explanation • LSV summarized it as follows: “The essence of extrapolation is that investors are excessively optimistic about glamour stocks and excessively pessimistic about value stocks because they tie their expectations of future growth to past growth.” (Lakonishok, Shleifer and Vishny, 1994: 1559)

  16. Analytical method: Testing for extrapolation • Test for extrapolation: look at future growth rates; compare them to past growth rates. • Must be shown that growth companies performed well in the past; that investors expected strong growth to continue in the future. • Similarly, it must be shown that value companies performed badly in past; are expected to continue to perform poorly in the future.

  17. Testing for extrapolation (cont.) • It is possible to test this notion, because past performance and future expectations are two distinct and separate entities which can be evidenced. • Past performance measured by past growth in sales, earnings and cash flow. • Expectations about the future reflected by multiples of stock price to earnings and cash flow.

  18. Testing for extrapolation (cont.) • Book-value-to-market-value (BV/MV) used for portfolio formation • Five years of pre-portfolio formation data necessary to test for extrapolation - portfolio formation started in 1977 • Three portfolios (top 30%, middle 40% and bottom 30%) formed annually - top 30% the value portfolio, bottom 30% the growth portfolio

  19. Testing (cont.) For each of the two extreme portfolios the following variables were tracked: • Past performance (i.e. in the five years before portfolio formation) of growth in sales, earnings and cash flow. • Future performance (i.e. in the five years after portfolio formation) of growth in sales, earnings and cash flow.

  20. Testing (cont.) • Ratios such as E/P (earnings/market value of equity) and C/P (cash flow/market value of equity) at portfolio formation. • These ratios give an indication of investors’ expectations of what will happen in the future.

  21. Findings

  22. Summary: Value premium in SA • Analysis of Johannesburg Stock Exchange data for the existence of a value premium unambiguously confirms that the premium also occurred in South Africa between 1972 and 2001 • The major remaining questions: - what could explain this? - what does the value premium suggest about the tenability of rational finance theory?

  23. Summary: What Explains the Value Premium? • Risk: Are there “distress factors” not captured by beta (systematic risk)? • Fama & French (1993): “Yes” • Lakonishok, Shleifer & Vishny (1994): “No” • Despite substantial research and arguments, debate rages on inconclusively

  24. Summary (cont.) • Extrapolation: Incorporate “less than rational” decision-making into financial markets (DeBondt & Thaler, 1985) – the more likely explanation • “Less than rational” investors extrapolate past results too far into the future - for both value and growth stocks • “Irrational” behaviour will not disappear - rather an enduring characteristic of behaviour in financial markets

More Related