Why is the Market Skewness-Return Relationship Negative?

Scientific Conference (2020, January 23)

The observed negative relationship between market skewness and excess return or the negative price of market skewness risk in the cross-section of stock returns is somewhat counterintuitive when we ... [more ▼]

The observed negative relationship between market skewness and excess return or the negative price of market skewness risk in the cross-section of stock returns is somewhat counterintuitive when we consider the usual interpretation of e.g. option-implied skewness as an indicator of jump risk or downside risk. One possible explanation for this inconsistency is that there are factors affecting option-implied market skewness other than jump risk in the stock market. In this paper, I find that price pressure associated with “crowded trades” of mutual funds is an important endogenous factor. Given that retail investors are prone to herding, the directional trading of mutual funds is correlated, and their collective actions can generate short-term price pressure on aggregate stock prices. Short sellers systematically exploit these patterns not only in the equity lending market, but also in the options market. In line with this economic channel, I find that firstly, the significant negative relationship between market skewness and returns becomes insignificant, once I control for price pressure. Secondly, the negative relationship is only present for the “bad” downside component of risk-neutral skewness, associated with out-of-the-money put options. For the “good” upside component of risk-neutral skewness, associated with out-of-the-money call options, the relationship is always positive. Thirdly, price pressure affects the skewness-return relationship, which can be clearly distinguished from the impact of flows on the volatility-return relationship in terms of the leverage effect. [less ▲]

Model Uncertainty and Pricing Performance in Option Valuation

in The Journal of Derivatives (2020), 27(3), 31-49

The objective of this paper is to evaluate option pricing model performance at the cross sectional level. For this purpose, we propose a statistical framework, in which we in particular account for the ... [more ▼]

The objective of this paper is to evaluate option pricing model performance at the cross sectional level. For this purpose, we propose a statistical framework, in which we in particular account for the uncertainty associated with the reported pricing performance. Instead of a single figure, we determine an entire probability distribution function for the loss function that is used to measure option pricing model performance. This methodology enables us to visualize the effect of parameter uncertainty on the reported pricing performance. Using a data driven approach, we confirm previous evidence that standard volatility models with clustering and leverage effects are sufficient for the option pricing purpose. In addition, we demonstrate that there is short-term persistence but long-term heterogeneity in cross-sectional option pricing information. This finding has two important implications. First, it justifies the practitioner’s routine to refrain from time series approaches, and instead estimate option pricing models on a cross-section by cross-section basis. Second, the long term heterogeneity in option prices pinpoints the importance of measuring, comparing and testing option pricing model for each cross-section separately. To our knowledge no statistical testing framework has been applied to a single cross-section of option prices before. We propose a methodology that addresses this need. The proposed framework can be applied to a broad set of models and data. In the empirical part of the paper, we show by means of example, an application that uses a discrete time volatility model on S&P 500 index options. [less ▲]

THE MARKET SKEWNESS-RETURN RELATIONSHIP

Presentation (2019, October 29)

The observed negative relationship between market skewness and excess return or the negative price of market skewness risk in the cross-section of stock returns is somewhat counterintuitive when we ... [more ▼]

The observed negative relationship between market skewness and excess return or the negative price of market skewness risk in the cross-section of stock returns is somewhat counterintuitive when we consider the usual interpretation of e.g. option-implied skewness as an indicator of jump risk or downside risk. One possible explanation for this inconsistency is that there are factors affecting option-implied market skewness other than jump risk in the stock market. In this paper, I find that price pressure associated with “crowded trades” of mutual funds is an important endogenous factor. Given that retail investors are prone to herding, the directional trading of mutual funds is correlated, and their collective actions can generate short-term price pressure on aggregate stock prices. Short sellers systematically exploit these patterns not only in the equity lending market, but also in the options market. In line with this economic channel, I find that firstly, the significant negative relationship between market skewness and returns becomes insignificant, once I control for price pressure. Secondly, the negative relationship is only present for the “bad” downside component of risk-neutral skewness, associated with out-of-the-money put options. For the “good” upside component of risk-neutral skewness, associated with out-of-the-money call options, the relationship is always positive. Thirdly, price pressure affects the skewness-return relationship, which can be clearly distinguished from the impact of flows on the volatility-return relationship in terms of the leverage effect. [less ▲]

Fear and Euphoria

Scientific Conference (2019, August 28)

WHY IS THE MARKET SKEWNESS-RETURN RELATIONSHIP NEGATIVE?

E-print/Working paper (2019)

WHY IS THE MARKET SKEWNESS-RETURN RELATIONSHIP NEGATIVE?

Scientific Conference (2019, May 30)

Energy Systemic Risk

Scientific Conference (2019, April 06)

Big Moves of Mutual Funds

in Eurasian Economic Review (2019), 9(1), 1-27

Corporate Governance and Skewness in Stock Returns

E-print/Working paper (2019)

This paper analyzes the relationship between corporate governance and idiosyncratic skewness of stock returns. We test this hypothesis by analyzing the impact of external as well as internal governance ... [more ▼]

This paper analyzes the relationship between corporate governance and idiosyncratic skewness of stock returns. We test this hypothesis by analyzing the impact of external as well as internal governance provisions, and are thus able to provide an overall understanding of the relationship between governance and firm-specific return asymmetries. Our results show that better governance leads to a reduction in idiosyncratic skewness in relatively non-competitive industries. In relatively competitive industries, governance has less to no impact on firm-specific return skewness. Furthermore, an overall increase in transparency, quality and disclosure of information, proxied through the Sarbanes Oxley Act, reduces relative idiosyncratic skewness. Our findings can be regarded as detrimental for shareholders, who have a preference for positive idiosyncratic skewness. The evidence contributes to a debate, which suggests that – at the end of the day – an act like Sarbanes-Oxley, which was intended to protect shareholders from accounting errors and frauds and to improve the accuracy of corporate disclosures, comes at the expenses of shareholders. The reduction of idiosyncratic skewness through better governance collides with shareholder’s preference for idiosyncratic and positively skewed stock returns, which present a lottery like upside option of monetary gains and value creation through the right tail. This side effect of governance is also in line with the literature that highlights potential costs of corporate governance. [less ▲]

The Impact of Feedback Trading on Option Prices

Scientific Conference (2018, September 20)