Volume 29, Issue 1 (Spring 2024)
JPBUD 2024, 29(1): 51-78 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Feghhi Kashani M, ziyaee Z. (2024). Supply Side Implications of Ambiguity Aversion for Risk Premium and Risk-Free Rate Puzzles. JPBUD. 29(1), 51-78. doi:10.61186/jpbud.29.1.51
URL: http://jpbud.ir/article-1-2286-en.html
URL: http://jpbud.ir/article-1-2286-en.html
1- Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics, University of Allamah Tabataba’i, Tehran, Iran.
2- Corresponding Author, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Economics, University of Allamah Tabataba’i, Tehran, Iran. ,zahra_ziyaee@yahoo.com
2- Corresponding Author, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Economics, University of Allamah Tabataba’i, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract: (657 Views)
Since the 1990s, many economists have taken different approaches towards resolving the risk premium and risk free rate puzzles. Identifying causes of these two puzzles can help investors, regulators and policy makers in finding out determinants of the asset prices in financial markets and thereby shaping the real sector trends in the economy so that to improve their allocations efficiency. Meanwhile, the periodic incidence and prevalance of ambiguity environment in many economies, especially economies with more fragile institutional and economic structures, such as many developing economies, including the Iranian economy, have turned attentions towards highlighting the consequences of ambiguity for investors’ decision-making and policy design by policy makers.Within a parsimonious continuous-time stochastic general equilibrium model including heterogeneous agents with ambiguity aversion, this study shows how by a utility function with constant relative risk aversion coefficient augmented with variable investment opportunities and financial friction, one can still make a more justifiable account for the above dual puzzles. Model calibration indicates that the model fits better with the stylized facts detected for different time periods.
Keywords: Ambiguity, Variable Investment Opportunities, Continuous-time General Equilibrium Model, Heterogeneous Agents, Equity Premium Puzzle, Risk Free Rate Puzzle.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
financial economics
Received: May 27 2024 | Accepted: Jul 02 2024 | ePublished: Sep 09 2024
Received: May 27 2024 | Accepted: Jul 02 2024 | ePublished: Sep 09 2024
References
1. Abel, A. B. (1999). Risk Premia and Term Premia in General Equilibrium. Journal of Monetary Economics, 43(1), 3-33. [DOI:10.1016/S0304-3932(98)00039-7]
2. Alizadeh, M., Jalali-Naini, S. A., & Einian, M. (2023). Estimating Real Money Balance Effect on Private Consumption and Aggregate Demand. Planning and Budgeting, 27(4), 23-60. [DOI:10.52547/jpbud.27.4.23]
3. Anderson, E., Hansen, L. P., & Sargent, T. (2000). Robustness, Detection and the Price of Risk. Manuscript, Stanford, 19.
4. Bansal, R., & Yaron, A. (2004). Risks for the Long Run: A Potential Resolution of Asset Pricing Puzzles. The Journal of Finance, 59(4), 1481-1509. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00670.x]
5. Barro, R. J. (2009). Rare Disasters, Asset Prices, and Welfare Costs. American Economic Review, 99(1), 243-264. [DOI:10.1257/aer.99.1.243]
6. Basak, S., & Cuoco, D. (1998). An Equilibrium Model with Restricted Stock Market Participation. The Review of Financial Studies, 11(2), 309-341. [DOI:10.1093/rfs/11.2.309]
7. Breeden, D. T., Gibbons, M. R., & Litzenberger, R. H. (1989). Empirical Tests of the Consumption‐Oriented CAPM. The Journal of Finance, 44(2), 231-262. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1989.tb05056.x]
8. Brunnermeier, M. K., & Sannikov, Y. (2014). A Macroeconomic Model with a Financial Sector. American Economic Review, 104(2), 379-421. [DOI:10.1257/aer.104.2.379]
9. Campbell, J. Y. (1986). Bond and Stock Returns in a Simple Exchange Model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(4), 785-803. [DOI:10.2307/1884178]
10. Campbell, J. Y. (2003). Consumption-Based Asset Pricing. Handbook of the Economics of Finance, 1(Part B), 803-887. [DOI:10.1016/S1574-0102(03)01022-7]
11. Campbell, J. Y. (2017). Financial Decisions and Markets: A Course in Asset Pricing. Princeton University Press.
12. Chetty, R. (2006). A New Method of Estimating Risk Aversion. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1821-1834. [DOI:10.1257/aer.96.5.1821]
13. Constantinides, G. M., & Duffie, D. (1996). Asset Pricing with Heterogeneous Consumers. Journal of Political Economy, 104(2), 219-240. [DOI:10.1086/262023]
14. Daniel, K., & Marshall, D. (1997). Equity-Premium and Risk-Free-Rate Puzzles at Long Horizons. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 1(2), 452-484. [DOI:10.1017/S1365100597003076]
15. Dunn, K. B., & Singleton, K. J. (1986). Modeling the Term Structure of Interest Rates under Non-Separable Utility and Durability of Goods. Journal of Financial Economics, 17(1), 27-55. [DOI:10.1016/0304-405X(86)90005-X]
16. Eichenbaum, M., & Hansen, L. P. (1990). Estimating Models with Intertemporal Substitution Using Aggregate Time Series Data. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 8(1), 53-69. [DOI:10.1080/07350015.1990.10509777]
17. Epstein, L. G., & Zin, S. E. (1989), Substitution, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Consumption and Asset Returns: A Theoretical Framework, Econometrica, 57(1), 937-969. [DOI:10.2307/1913778]
18. Epstein, L. G., & Zin, S. E. (1991). Substitution, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Consumption and Asset Returns: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 99(2), 263-286. [DOI:10.1086/261750]
19. Erbas, S. N., & Sayers, C. L. (2006). Institutional Quality, Knightian Uncertainty, and Insurability: A Cross-Country Analysis. IMF Working Paper, WP/06/179. [DOI:10.5089/9781451864397.001]
20. Feghhi Kashani, M., Mohammadi, T., & Pirdaye, H. (2023). Investigating the Soft and Hard Information Voluntary Disclosure Strategies as to Good and Bad News: A Case Study of Digital Corporates in Tehran Stock Exchange Market. Iranian Journal of Economic Research. [DOI:10.22054/ijer.2023.73276.1180]
21. Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin Expected Utility with Non-Unique Prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18(2), 141-153. [DOI:10.1016/0304-4068(89)90018-9]
22. Keshavarz Haddad, G., & Esfahani, M. (2013). Equity Premium Puzzle in Tehran Stock Exchange: Stochastic Dominance Approach. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 18(56), 1-40. [In Farsi]
23. Kiyotaki, N., & Moore, J. (1997). Credit Cycles. Journal of Political Economy, 105(2), 211-248. [DOI:10.1086/262072]
24. Kroencke, T. A. (2017). Asset Pricing without Garbage. The Journal of Finance, 72(1), 47-98. [DOI:10.1111/jofi.12438]
25. Maenhout, P. J. (2004). Robust Portfolio Rules and Asset Pricing. Review of Financial Studies, 17(4), 951-983. [DOI:10.1093/rfs/hhh003]
26. McGrattan, E. R., & Prescott, E. C. (2003). Average Debt and Equity Returns: Puzzling? American Economic Review, 93(2), 392-397. [DOI:10.1257/000282803321947407]
27. McGrattan, E. R., & Prescott, E. C. (2005). Taxes, Regulations, and the Value of US and UK Corporations. The Review of Economic Studies, 72(3), 767-796. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00351.x]
28. Mehra, R., & Prescott, E. C. (1985). The Equity Premium: A Puzzle. Journal of Monetary Economics, 15(2), 145-161. [DOI:10.1016/0304-3932(85)90061-3]
29. Parker, J. A., & Julliard, C. (2005). Consumption Risk and the Cross Section of Expected Returns. Journal of Political Economy, 113(1), 185-222. [DOI:10.1086/426042]
30. Pindyck, R. S., & Wang, N. (2013). The Economic and Policy Consequences of Catastrophes. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(4), 306-339. [DOI:10.1257/pol.5.4.306]
31. Riddick, L. A., & Whited, T. M. (2009). The Corporate Propensity to Save. The Journal of Finance, 64(4), 1729-1766. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01478.x]
32. Rietz, T. A. (1988). The Equity Risk Premium a Solution. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 117-131. [DOI:10.1016/0304-3932(88)90172-9]
33. Ruan, X., & Zhang, J. E. (2021). Ambiguity on Uncertainty and the Equity Premium. Finance Research Letters, 38(1), 101429. [DOI:10.1016/j.frl.2020.101429]
34. Savov, A. (2011). Asset Pricing with Garbage. The Journal of Finance, 66(1), 177-201. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01629.x]
35. Soltani, A., Ehteshamrasi, R., & abedi, S. (2023). Multi-Objective Modeling of Financial Provision and Expenses in Sustainable Supply Chains and the Study Effects of Financial Ratios. Planning and Budgeting, 27(4), 61-90. [DOI:10.52547/jpbud.27.4.61]
36. Wachter, J. A. (2013). Can Time‐Varying Risk of Rare Disasters Explain Aggregate Stock Market Volatility? The Journal of Finance, 68(3), 987-1035. [DOI:10.1111/jofi.12018]
37. Wang, Y., & Mu, C. (2019). Can Ambiguity about Rare Disasters Explain Equity Premium Puzzle? Economics Letters, 183(1), 108555. [DOI:10.1016/j.econlet.2019.108555]
38. Weil, P. (1989). The Equity Premium Puzzle and the Risk-Free Rate Puzzle. Journal of Monetary Economics, 24(3), 401-421. [DOI:10.1016/0304-3932(89)90028-7]
39. Weitzman, M. L. (2007). Subjective Expectations and Asset-Return Puzzles. American Economic Review, 97(4), 1102-1130. [DOI:10.1257/aer.97.4.1102]
40. Welch, I. (2000). Views of Financial Economists on the Equity Premium and on Professional Controversies. The Journal of Business, 73(4), 501-537. [DOI:10.1086/209653]
41. Yogo, M. (2006). A Consumption‐Based Explanation of Expected Stock Returns. The Journal of Finance, 61(2), 539-580. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00848.x]
42. Zhang, X. (2022). Belief-Driven Growth Slowdowns and Zero-Bounded Risk-Free Rate. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 59(1), 101600. [DOI:10.1016/j.najef.2021.101600]
| Rights and permissions | |
.jpg) |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
