Equity Premium

How has the immediate price impact associated with a stock entering or leaving the S&P 500 evolved? In the March 2024 revision of their paper entitled “The Disappearing Index Effect”, Robin Greenwood and Marco Sammon revisit abnormal returns during the trading day after S&P 500 additions and deletions and investigate four potential drivers of findings. Using announcement dates, implementation dates and daily returns for 732 S&P 500 additions and 726 S&P 500 deletions, and holdings of large U.S. equity funds, during 1980 through 2020, they find that:

Keep Reading

Do stock markets following predictable long boom and bust periods? In the August 2024 draft of their paper entitled “The Anatomy of Lost Stock Market Decades”, Todd Feldman and Brian Yang examine the regularity/frequency of bull periods (strong gains) and lost periods (no gains) of at least 10 years. They also test two metrics to identify when the S&P 500 Index is in a bull or lost period: (1) the ratio of the S&P 500 Index level to a dividend discount model (DDM) valuation of the index; and, (2) an exponential cumulative loss metric calibrated via a 20-year moving average (weighting recent losses more than older losses to sharpen regime shift detection). Using monthly stock market levels from Global Financial Data for the U.S., Canada, Japan, Australia, Germany and France and Robert Schiller’s data for the S&P Composite Index from the 1800s through 2023, they find that:

Keep Reading

How does the performance of the global multi-class market look when evaluated at a monthly frequency? In their August 2024 paper entitled “The Risk and Reward of Investing”, Ronald Doeswijk and Laurens Swinkels assess global investing rewards and risks via an exhaustive $150 trillion portfolio of investable global assets priced at a monthly frequency, enabling greater granularity of risk estimates than does the annual frequency used in prior research. They consider five asset classes: equities, real estate, non-government bonds, government bonds and commodities. For these classes and the multi-class market, they examine stability of Sharpe ratios and severity, frequency and duration of drawdowns. Their default base currency is the U.S. dollar, but they measure effects of choosing one of nine other currencies on global market portfolio performance. They calculate excess investment returns generally relative to government bill yields as a proxy for return on savings. Using monthly returns for all investable global assets with reinvested dividends during 1970 through 2022, they find that:

Keep Reading

“Nixed: The Upside of Getting Dumped”, flagged by a subscriber, finds that “index deletions…could add an abnormal upside to a portfolio when the current growth-dominated bubble starts to deflate.” The authors have quantified findings as the Research Affiliates Deletions Index (NIXT), constructed by:

1. Starting with deletions due to market capitalization changes from the 500 and 1,000 largest U.S. stocks by market capitalization.
2. Removing the bottom 20% of deletions based on firm quality assessments.
3. Holding the equal-weighted remaining deletions up to five years (or until they rejoin a top market capitalization index), rebalancing annually at the end of May.

Do index deletions inherently underperform? To investigate we look at stocks deleted from the S&P 500 Index due to market capitalization changes over the past few years and compare their performances to that of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) since the close on respective deletion dates. Using dividend-adjusted prices for 43 S&P 500 deletions at closes on deletion dates and corresponding dividend-adjusted prices for SPY since during April 2020 through 8/23/24, we find that: Keep Reading

A subscriber requested measurement of a “premium” associated with stocks of innovative technology firms by looking at the difference in returns between the following two exchange-traded funds (ETF):

• Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ), which generally tracks the NASDAQ 100 Index
• SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY)

Using monthly dividend-adjusted closing prices for these ETFs during March 1999 (limited by QQQ) through July 2024, we find that: Keep Reading

Does the combination of an artificial intelligence (AI)-generated financial news sentiment with a complex financial stress metric generate good stock market timing signals? In their April 2024 paper entitled “Mixing Financial Stress with GPT-4 News Sentiment Analysis for Optimal Risk-On/Risk-Off Decisions”, Baptiste Lefort, Eric Benhamou, Jean-Jacques Ohana, David Saltiel, Beatrice Guez and Thomas Jacquot devise and test a risk-on/risk-off strategy for stock market timing. The strategy combines:

• Stress Index (SI): based on VIX, TED spread, Credit Default Swap index and realized volatilities across major equity, bond and commodity markets, all normalized and then aggregated by category. Overall SI is the average of category results, rescaled to fall between 0 and 1.
• News sentiment signal: 10-day moving average of ChatGPT 4 assessments of the sentiment (1 for positive or 0 for negative) in Bloomberg daily market summaries.

They consider six strategies:

1. Benchmark (or Long Only) – buy and hold the index, with constant volatility scaling to match the final (retrospective) volatility of an active strategy.
2. VIX – weight the stock index according to VIX, with times of stress indicated by VIX above its 80th percentile.
3. SI – weight the stock index according to the value of SI as described above.
4. News – weight the stock index according to the ChatGPT 4 news sentiment signal.
5. SI News – weight the stock index according to the product of SI and News.
6. Dynamic SI News – because SI News either significantly outperforms or underperforms SI alone during subperiods, each month weight the stock index according to either SI alone or SI News, whichever has the better Sharpe ratio over the past 250 trading days at the end of the prior month.

They test the strategy on the S&P 500 Index, the NASDAQ 100 Index and an equal-weighted combination of these two indexes plus the Nikkei 225, Euro Stoxx 50 and Emerging Markets indexes. They assume trading frictions of 0.2% of value traded. Using daily values of all specified inputs during January 2005 through December 2023, they find that: Keep Reading

Do analysts systematically ignore the connection between future firm earnings and current economic conditions? In their July 2024 paper entitled “Predicting Analysts’ S&P 500 Earnings Forecast Errors and Stock Market Returns Using Macroeconomic Data and Nowcasts”, Steven Sharpe and Antonio Gil de Rubio Cruz examine the quality of bottom-up forecasts of near-term S&P 500 earnings aggregated from analyst forecasts across individual firms. Specifically, they:

• Model expected aggregate S&P 500 quarterly earnings growth as a function of GDP growth, output and wage inflation and change in dollar exchange rate. They also consider a simplified model based only on real GDP growth and change in the dollar exchange rate.
• Calculate the gap between modeled S&P 500 earnings growth and analyst-forecasted growth.
• Estimate how well this forecast gap predicts analyst forecast errors.
• Test the extent to which the forecast gap predicts S&P 500 Index total returns.

Using quarterly actual and forecasted S&P 500 earnings, S&P 500 Index total return and values for the specified economic variables during 1993 through 2023, they find that: Keep Reading

Has ease of access to, and processing of, firm accounting data suppressed stock anomalies by leveling the information playing field? In their July 2024 paper entitled “The Effect of New Information Technologies on Asset Pricing Anomalies”, David Hirshleifer and Liang Ma test the effects of mandating Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval (EDGAR) during April 1993 to May 1996 and eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) during 2009 to 2011 on well-known stock return anomalies attributed to mispricing. EDGAR makes firm accounting data available electronically, and XBRL reduces the cost of processing such data by making it machine readable. They focus on eight anomalies, five of which rely on accounting data (accruals, net operating assets, investment-to-assets ratio, asset growth and gross profitability) and three of which rely on market data (momentum, net stock issuance and composite equity issuance). They examine effects of EDGAR/XBRL implementations on each anomaly individually, on the five accounting anomalies in aggregate and on the three non-accounting anomalies in aggregate. They carefully consider EDGAR/XBRL implementation dates and fiscal years by firm to compare anomalies for implemented and non-implemented sets of stocks. Using firm characteristics and monthly returns for a broad sample of U.S. common stocks during July 1992 through June 1997 (July 2009 through June 2012) for the EDGAR (XBRL) sample, they find that: Keep Reading

What is the distribution of U.S. common stock outcomes over the past century? In the July 2024 draft of his paper entitled “Which U.S. Stocks Generated the Highest Long-Term Returns?”, Hendrik Bessembinder presents cumulative returns and compound annual growth rates (CAGR) for all 29,078 publicly listed U.S. common stocks in the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP) databases through 2023, from initial appearance in CRSP until delisting or the end of the sample period. He assumes immediate reinvestment of all dividends. Using daily price/dividend data for all U.S. common stocks during December 1925 through December 2023, he finds that:

Keep Reading

“Simple Sector ETF Momentum Strategy” investigates performances of simple momentum trading strategies for the following nine sector exchange-traded funds (ETF) executed with Standard & Poor’s Depository Receipts (SPDR):

Materials Select Sector SPDR (XLB)
Energy Select Sector SPDR (XLE)
Financial Select Sector SPDR (XLF)
Industrial Select Sector SPDR (XLI)
Technology Select Sector SPDR (XLK)
Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR (XLP)
Utilities Select Sector SPDR (XLU)
Health Care Select Sector SPDR (XLV)
Consumer Discretionary Select SPDR (XLY)

Here, we update the principal strategy and extend it by adding equal-weighted combinations of the top two and top three sector ETFs, along with corresponding robustness tests and benchmarks. Using monthly dividend-adjusted closing prices for the sector ETFs and SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY), 3-month U.S. Treasury bill (T-bill) yield and S&P 500 Index level during December 1998 through June 2024, we find that: Keep Reading