Critical Finance Review > Vol 12 > Issue 1-4

The Cross-Section of Volatility and Expected Returns: Then and Now

Andrew Detzel, Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, USA, andrew_detzel@baylor.edu , Jefferson Duarte, Jones Graduate School of Business, Rice University, USA, jd10@rice.edu , Avraham Kamara, Foster School of Business, University of Washington, USA, kamara@uw.edu , Stephan Siegel, Foster School of Business, University of Washington, USA, ss1110@uw.edu , Celine Sun, Meta Platforms, Inc., USA, sun05@uw.edu
 
Suggested Citation
Andrew Detzel, Jefferson Duarte, Avraham Kamara, Stephan Siegel and Celine Sun (2023), "The Cross-Section of Volatility and Expected Returns: Then and Now", Critical Finance Review: Vol. 12: No. 1-4, pp 9-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/104.00000125

Publication Date: 08 Aug 2023
© 2023 Andrew Detzel, Jefferson Duarte, Avraham Kamara, Stephan Siegel and Celine Sun
 
Subjects
 
Keywords
G11G12G14
Factor modelsTrading costsMispricing
 

Share

Download article
In this article:
1. Data 
2. Aggregate Volatility 
3. Idiosyncratic Volatility 
4. Conclusions 
Appendix: Replication of Additional Ang et al. (2006) Results 
References 

Abstract

We successfully replicate the main results of Ang et al. (2006): Aggregate-volatility risk and idiosyncratic volatility (IV) are each priced in the cross-section of stock returns from 1963 to 2000. We also examine the pricing of volatility outside the original time period and under more recent asset-pricing models. With the exception of NASDAQ stocks, aggregate-volatility risk continues to be priced in the years following the Ang et al. (2006) sample period, and none of the more recent asset-pricing models we consider consistently accounts for the pricing of aggregate-volatility risk. The difference in abnormal returns between stocks with high and low IV decreases but remains significant out of sample. More recent asset-pricing models do not resolve the IV anomaly for the Ang et al. (2006) sample, but the four-factor model of Stambaugh and Yuan (2017) and the six-factor model of Barillas and Shanken (2018) resolve the anomaly out of sample and over the extended period of 1967 to 2016. Finally, both models eliminate the arbitrage asymmetry that Stambaugh et al. (2015) propose as an explanation of the IV anomaly.

DOI:10.1561/104.00000125

Companion

Critical Finance Review, Volume 12, Issue 1-4 Special Issue: Volatility and Higher Moments: Articles Overview
See the other articles that are part of this special issue.