Upload
chenoa
View
47
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Value versus Growth: Stochastic Dominance Criteria. Abhay Abhyankar University of Edinburgh Keng-Yu Ho National Central University Huainan Zhao City University, London NTU International Conference on Finance Taipei, Taiwan December 13-14, 2006. Introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Value versus Growth:Stochastic Dominance Criteria
Abhay AbhyankarUniversity of Edinburgh
Keng-Yu HoNational Central University
Huainan ZhaoCity University, London
NTU International Conference on Finance Taipei, Taiwan
December 13-14, 2006
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
2
Introduction• Evidence of value-based investment
strategy.– Even back from the 1930s. (Graham and
Dodd, 1934)• Why value stocks earn higher returns
than growth stocks?– Risk-based explanation.– Behavioral explnantion.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
3
Previous Research• Numerous empirical studies find that
value stocks outperform growth stocks worldwide.– Risk-return tradeoff.
• Fama and French (1992, 1993).• Petkova and Zhang (2005).
– Investor sentiment.• Debondt and Thaler (1985).• Lakonishok, Shleifer, and Vishny (1994).
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
4
Motivation• Apply a new approach in testing the
value premium.• Advantages of stochastic dominance
tests:– Compare the entire return distributions
of two portfolios.– No need to specify asset pricing model
to estimate expected returns and adjust for risk.
– Allow for minimal assumptions about investor’s utility function.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
5
Stochastic Dominance Tests• First-order stochastic dominance-
Non-satiation.
• Second-order stochastic dominance- Risk-aversion.
);();( 11 FzGz
);();( 22 FzGz
)();(1 zFFz
zz
dtFtdttFFz0 102 );()();(
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
6
Stochastic Dominance Tests• Third-order stochastic dominance-
Positive skewness preference.
• Kolmogorov-Smirnov type tests at all observation points in the sample.
);();( 33 FzGz
dtFtdsdtsFFzzz t
0 20 03 );()();(
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
7
Stochastic Dominance Tests• Hypothesis
H0:
H1:– The null hypothesis is that the CDF G
stochastically dominates CDF F for the jth order (including the case where the two CDFs are equal), while the alternative is that stochastic dominance fails at some points.
zFzGz jj somefor );();(
zFzGz jj allfor );();(
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
8
Stochastic Dominance Tests• Barrett and Donald (2003) tests:
– P-values for FOSD have closed-form distribution: .
– P-values beyond FOSD (e.g. SOSD and TOSD) do not have closed-form distribution.• Two simulation methods.• Three bootstrap methods
))ˆ;()ˆ;((supˆNjMj
zj FzGz
MNMNS
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
9
Stochastic Dominance Tests• Two-step test for the first and second order stochastic dominance.
– First Step: Test whether the CDF of the value portfolio return stochastically dominates the CDF of growth portfolio return.
– Second Step:Test whether the CDF of the growth portfolio return stochastically dominates the CDF of the value portfolio return.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
10
Stochastic Dominance Tests• If we fail to reject the first step
(second step) but can reject the second step (first step), we conclude that the value (growth) portfolio stochastically dominates the growth (value) portfolio.
• If we reject or fail to reject both steps of the test, we conclude that there is no stochastic dominance relation between the two portfolio returns.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
11
Data• Monthly returns on the U.S. value
and growth portfolios from 1951-2003.– Book-to-market ratio.– Earnings-to-price ratio.– Cash flow-to-price ratio.
• In general, value stocks have larger mean but lower standard deviation than growth stock.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
12
Descriptive Statistics
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
13
Empirical Results• For first-, second-, and third-order stochastic dominance tests, we find that value stocks are preferred to growth stocks.• The results are found for both full sample period (1951-2003) and LSV sample period (1963-1990).• The results based on stochastic dominance tests cast doubt on the risk-based argument that value premium may due to omitted risk factors in existing asset pricing models.
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
14
Empirical Results: 1951-2003
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
15
Empirical Results: 1963-1990
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
16
Empirical Results• Results during economic booms.
– For first-, second-, and third-order stochastic dominance tests, we find that value stocks are preferred to growth stocks.
– The results are found for both full sample period (1951-2003) and LSV sample period (1963-1990).
• Results during economic booms.– For first-, second-, and third-order stochastic
dominance tests, we find no stochastic dominance relation between value and growth stocks.
– The results are found for both full sample period (1951-2003) and LSV sample period (1963-1990).
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
17
Empirical Results: Boom, 1951-2003
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
18
Empirical Results: Boom, 1963-1990
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
19
Empirical Results: Recession, 1951-2003
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
20
Empirical Results: Recession, 1963-1990
2006/12/13-14 NTU International Conference on Finance
21
Conclusion• Re-examine the value premium using stochastic dominance test. • In general, the value premium exists for non-satiation, risk-averse and positive skewness preference investors.• However, value premium cannot be simple explained by misspecified models.• Behavioral explanation seems to be preferred to risk-based explanation.