Return Predictability and Stock Market Crashes in a Simple Rational Expectations Model



the variance of asset returns over finite periods. Hence, declining aggregate
RRA explains the well documented excess volatility.

Proposition 2 (Excess Volatility) Suppose that at each date aggregate
RRA is declining in the dividend and that the dividend is governed by a geo-
metric Brownian motion with constant instantaneous volatility and constant
instantaneous drift. Then the conditional
(τ>t= θ) and the unconditional
(τ>t>θ) variance of the total return index exceed the dividend variance,
i.e.

Var(lnVτ - ln Vt | Dθ) >Var(lnDτ - ln Dt | Dθ) .           (6)

Proposition 2 is proved in the appendix.9 The conditional variance Var(ln Vτ |Dt)
exceeds the dividend variance
Var(ln DτDt) because of overreaction. The
same is true of the unconditional variance. Therefore excess volatility is
obtained.

We have seen that asset returns under declining aggregate RRA overreact
compared to constant aggregate RRA. Does the overreaction render asset
returns predictable? First, notice that the instantaneous drift of the total
return index
μv(St) equals the instantaneous drift of stock returns plus the
dividend yield. Hence the instantaneous Sharpe ratio

μv (St) - rf _ μs (St) + D - rf _ φ ,d

Σ V ( St )   = Σ S ( St )      = ηt   '

depends negatively on Dt for declining aggregate RRA, ηtΦ,D. Therefore the
Sharpe ratio can easily be predicted knowing the current dividend. The pre-
dictability of the Sharpe ratio would directly translate into predictability of
excess returns if the instantaneous return volatility Σ
V (St) was non-random.
But changes in volatility might disturb this relationship, the exception being
that the volatility does not increase with the dividend.

Instead of using the fundamental variable, in our model the dividend, for
forecasting excess returns, many forecasts are based on past excess re-
turns. This is successful if excess returns are either positively or nega-
tively autocorrelated. To analyze the serial return dependence, we con-
sider the covariance between the excess return over the time span [
t, τ], i.e.
CERt,τ fT dVs JT rf ds, and the instantaneous expected excess return
at time
τ, i.e. μv (τ) — rf .10

9Proposition 2 assumes declining aggregate RRA. It does not hold in an analogous
manner for increasing aggregate RRA.

10For a similar analysis see Johnson (2002).



More intriguing information

1. Activation of s28-dependent transcription in Escherichia coli by the cyclic AMP receptor protein requires an unusual promoter organization
2. The name is absent
3. Dual Track Reforms: With and Without Losers
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
7. The name is absent
8. Short- and long-term experience in pulmonary vein segmental ostial ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation*
9. Om Økonomi, matematik og videnskabelighed - et bud på provokation
10. Comparative study of hatching rates of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus Burchell 1822) eggs on different substrates
11. Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 11
12. The name is absent
13. LIMITS OF PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION
14. The name is absent
15. Research Design, as Independent of Methods
16. The name is absent
17. Behavior-Based Early Language Development on a Humanoid Robot
18. The name is absent
19. The name is absent
20. How Low Business Tax Rates Attract Multinational Headquarters: Municipality-Level Evidence from Germany