Bond risk premia

Union Jack
Dannebrog

Bond risk premia

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Tolleshaug, Harald
dc.date.accessioned 2009-11-05
dc.date.accessioned 2009-11-19T10:06:14Z
dc.date.available 2009-11-19T10:06:14Z
dc.date.issued 2009-11-19T10:06:14Z
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10417/748
dc.description.abstract Forecasting the expected returns on bonds with increasing certainty is wanted from all rational investors in the fixed income markets. The potential for higher returns increase with the ability to forecast expected returns, through better trading payoffs and improved hedging and risk management. The expectations hypothesis was long prevailing in the academical litterature. It stated that the rational investor was expected to require zero or at least a constant excess return on bonds with long maturity over short maturity. This is equal to no time varying risk premiums. It is however reasonable for the rational investor to have time varying risk preferences based on the economic situation and outlook for the future, as described by Cochrane (1999). Thus, bonds with different maturity may be priced with different risk in an efficient market, and accordingly have time varying risk premiums. The expectations hypothesis has thus been rejected. This has been manifested through the classical studies of Fama and Bliss (1987) as well as Campbell and Shiller (1991). These studies modelled predictions of bond returns on specific maturities, with a R2 up to 18%. In a new and original approach, Cochrane and Piazzesi (2005) models a single-factor that predicts bond returns of any maturity, with a R2 up to 44%, more than doubled from the studies mentioned above. This is done on the same dataset as Fama and Bliss (1987) used and would be a big discovery within the field, if the model can be accepted across time and datasets. I test the model of Cochrane and Piazzesi (2005) based on the framework that these used originally, as well as new tests they have provided as response to critique of the model. So far, no other paper has rejected this model on all these dimensions. I use very well accepted data, and reject the model in every dimension tested. This paper is thus the rejection of the Cochrane and Piazzesi (2005) single-factor bond forecasting model. en_US
dc.format.extent 109 s. en_US
dc.language eng en_US
dc.subject.other Kandidatafhandlinger en_US
dc.title Bond risk premia en_US
dc.type mop en_US
dc.accessionstatus modt09nov05 jobrmo en_US
dc.contributor.corporation Copenhagen Business School. CBS en_US
dc.contributor.corporationshort Department of Finance. FI en_US
dc.contributor.corporationshort Institut for Finansiering. FI en_US
dc.contributor.department MSc in Economics & Business Administration en_US
dc.contributor.departmentshort 22 en_US
dc.description.notes Cand.merc.aef. Applied Economics and Finance en_US
dc.idnumber x656603908 en_US
dc.publisher.year 2009 en_US
dc.publisher.city Frederiksberg en_US
dc.title.subtitle Rejecting Cochrane and Piazzesi’s Single-Factor Model en_US

Files Size Format View
harald_tolleshaug.pdf 9.957Mb PDF View/Open

The following license files are associated with this item:

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record