Comonotonicity and low volatility effect
- 44 Downloads
Discussions on low volatility effects often highlight the advantage of low volatility stocks outperforming high volatility stocks. Using comonotonicity tests, our study provides evidence of the downside of this effect: stock returns do not increase monotonically with low volatility, but volatility increases monotonically with specific risks. We find that, counterintuitively, the low volatility effect is mostly driven by high volatility stocks with high specific risks. Our empirical analysis addresses a cross section of stock returns across 23 developed countries and employs comonotonicity tests to show that expected stock returns do not increase monotonically with lower volatility. In addition, by decomposing volatility into its individual risk components, we show that volatility increases monotonically with its specific risk component. Finally, we also confirm that returns obtained from the low volatility effect in stocks are principally driven by the specific risk component rather than the systematic risk component.
KeywordsAsymmetric risk-return Comonotonicity Multi-factor model Low volatility effect Portfolio Risk decomposition
JEL ClassificationsC02 C10 C63
Chen was supported by the research project funded by InfoTech Frankfurt am Main, Germany under USt-IdNr. DE320245686 and DAAD (Grant No. ST34-AP).
- Bali, T. G., Brown, S., Murray, S., & Tang, Y. (2016). A lottery demand-based explanation of the beta anomaly. Working paper (2408146).Google Scholar
- Chen, Y.-T., Sun, E., & Yu, M.-T. (2015). Improving model performance with the integrated wavelet denoising method. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, 19(4), 445–467.Google Scholar
- Cheung, K. (2008). Improved convex upper bound via conditional comonotonicity. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 42, 651–655.Google Scholar
- Cheung, K. (2009). Applications of conditional comonotonicity to some optimization problems. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 45, 89–93.Google Scholar
- Dhaene, J., Denuit, M., Goovaerts, M. J., Kaas, R., & Vyncke, D. (2002a). The concept of comonotonicity in actuarial science and finance: Applications. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 31(2), 133–161.Google Scholar
- Dhaene, J., Denuit, M., Goovaerts, M. J., Kaas, R., & Vyncke, D. (2002b). The concept of comonotonicity in actuarial science and finance: Theory. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 31(1), 3–33.Google Scholar
- Jacod, J., & Shiryaev, A. (2013). Limit theorems for stochastic processes (Vol. 288). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Kaas, R., Dhaene, J., & Goovaerts, M. (2000). Upper and lower bounds for sums of random variables. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 27, 151–168.Google Scholar
- Novy-Marx, R. (2014). Understanding defensive equity. Working paper 20591, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar