Analysis of Equity Premium Puzzle and study of Pitfalls in Estimating the Coefficient of Relative Risk Aversion in Tehran Stock Exchange

Document Type : Original Article

Abstract

Standard consumption-based models typically fail in pricing asset returns. In a famous seminal paper, Mehra and Prescott (1985), using a standard consumption model, prove the presence of equity premium puzzle. It has being tried to find an appropriate solution to the well known puzzle in Financial economy literature. In contrast to this literature, which mainly focuses on the United States data, this study is simply intended to examine the existence of the puzzle based on Mehra framework (2003) in Tehran Stock Exchange and the period of 1992-2014. the estimations derived from Model confirm that the puzzle exist and it leads to the new and odd result of relative risk aversion coefficient in Tehran stock market. On the other side, we claim that the key consumption model assumptions, the choice of a proper riskless asset and the lack of data, generate obstacles in finding robustness in the estimations of the CRRA coefficients, in Tehran stock market.

Keywords

References

  1. کشاورز حداد. غ و اصفهانی. م، (1392)، معمای صرف سهام در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران در چارچوب آزمون های تسلط تصادفی، فصلنامه پژوهشهای اقتصادی ایران، سال هجدهم، شماره 56، 40-1.
  2. Arrow, K. J. (1971). Essays in the theory of risk-bearing. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  3. Barro, R. J. and Ursúa, J. F., (2008). Macroeconomic Crises since 1870, NBER Working Papers 13940, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Beach, S. L., (2007), Semivariance in Asset Allocations: Longer Horizons Can Handle Riskier Holdings, Journal of Financial Planning, 20 (1), 60–69.
  5. Campbell, J.Y., and Cochrane J.H., )1999(, By Force of Habit: A Consumption-Based Explanation of Aggregate Stock Market Behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 107(2), 205–251.
  6. Carlstein, E. (1986). The use of subseries methods for estimating the variance of a general statisticfrom a stationary time series. Annals Statistic, 14, 1171–1179.
  7. Constantinides, G.M., J.B. Donaldson, and R. Mehra. (2002), Junior Can’t Borrow: A New Perspective on the Equity Premium Puzzle, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 269–296.
  8. Damodaran, A., (2008), What is the risk-free rate? A search for the basic building block, Unpublished papers, New York University, Stern School of Business.
  9. Donadelli, M and Prosperi, L., (2012), The Equity Premium Puzzle: Pitfalls in Estimating the Coefficient of Relative Risk Aversion, Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, 2(2), 177-213.
  10. Drew, M.E., Mallin, M., Naughton,T and Veeraraghavan, M., (2004), Equity Premium: Does it exist? Evidence from Germany and United Kingdom, School of Economics and Finance Discussion Papers and Working Papers Series from School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology, No 170.
  11. Dzhumashev, R and Madsen, J. B., (2009), The equity premium puzzle and the ex post bias., Applied Financial Economics,19(2), 157-174.
  12. Epstein, L.G., and S.E. Zin., (1991), Substitution, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Consumption and Asset Returns: An Empirical Analysis, Journal of Political Economy,99(2), 263–286.
  13. Guvenen, F. (2009)., A Parsimonious Macroeconomic Model for Asset Pricing. Econometrica, 77, 1711–1750.
  14. Hall, P., (1985), Resampling a coveragepattern. Stochastic Process. Applications. 21,231–246.
  15. Hansson, B. and Persson, M. (2000), Time Diversification and Estimation Risk, Financial Analysts Journal, 56 (5), 55–62.
  16. P.A. Horvath and R.C. Scott., (1980)., On the Direction of Preference for Moments of Higher Order Than the Variance, Journal of Finance, 35(4), 915-919.
  17. Jan, Y.-C. and Wu, Y.-L., (2008)., Revisit the Debate of Time Diversification, Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, 6, 27–33.
  18. Kaszab, L and Marsal, A., (2015), Explaining Bond and Equity Premium Puzzles Jointly in a DSGE Model, MNB Working Papers.
  19. Kunsch, H. R. (1989). Thejackknife and thebootstrapfor general stationary observations. Annals Statistic, 17: 1217–1261.
  20. Lin, M.-C. and Chou, P.-H. (2003). The Pitfall of Using Sharpe Ratio, Finance Letters, 1, 84–89.
  21. Liu, R. Y. and Singh, K, (1992)., Moving blocks jackknife and bootstrap capture weak dependence. In ExploringtheLimits of Bootstrap (R. Lepage and L. Billard, eds.),. John Wiley, New York.
  22. ;225–248.
  23. Mehra, R. (2003). The equity premium: why is it a puzzle? Financial Analysts Journal, 59(1), 54-69.
  24. Mehra, R., and Prescott, E. C. (1985)., The equity premium: a puzzle. Journal of Monetary Economics, 15(2), 145-161.
  25. Mehra, R and Prescott, E.C., (2008), The Equity Premium: ABCs, The Handbook of the Equity Risk Premium, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1-36.
  26. McGrattan, E.R., and Prescott, E.C. (2001)., Taxes, Regulations, and Asset Prices, Working Paper No. 610, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  27. Nuri E, S. Mirakhor, A,. (2010), The Equity Premium Puzzle, Ambiguity Aversion, and Institutional Quality: Implications for Islamic Finance, Journal of Islamic Economics, Banking and 38 Finance, 6(1).
  28. Salomons, R and Grootveld, H., (2003), The Equity Risk Premium: Emerging vs. Developed Markets, Emerging Markets Review, 4(2), 121-144.
  29. Sanfilippo, G. (2003), Stocks, Bonds and the Investment Horizon: A Test of Time Diversification on the French Market”, Quantitative Finance, 3 (4), 345–351.
  30. Weil, P., (1989), The Equity Premium Puzzle and the Risk-Free Rate Puzzle, Journal of Monetary Economics, 24(2), 401-421.
  31. Xie, Y. Athanasios, A and Florackis,C, (2014), Disappointment aversion and the equity premium puzzle: new international evidence, The European Journal of Finance,1-15.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics