Risk premia on credit and equity markets [Elektronische Ressource] / Tobias Berg

Sujets

• Management

Informations

• Publié par: technische_universitat_munchen
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2009
• Nombre de lectures: 19
• Langue: English

Extrait

Technische Universitat Munchen
Lehrstuhl fur Finanzmanagement und Kapitalmarkte
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christoph Kaserer
Risk Premia on
Credit and Equity Markets
Tobias Berg
Vollstandiger Abdruck der von der Fakultat fur Wirtschaftswissenschaften der
Technischen Universitat Munchen zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades
eines Doktors der Wirtschaftswissenschaften (Dr. rer. pol.) genehmigten
Dissertation.
Vorsitzende: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Isabell Welpe
Prufer der Dissertation:
1. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christoph Kaserer
2. Dr. Joachim Henkel
Die Dissertation wurde am 04.05.2009
bei der Technischen Universitat Munchen eingereicht und durch
die Fakultat fur Wirtschaftswissenschaften am 21.10.2009
angenommen.Abstract
Risk premia in uence asset prices on both equity and credit markets. Most
research on risk premia has so far looked at either equity or credit markets
separately. However, these two markets are not separated: Both markets of-
fer claims on the same underlying (i.e. companies’ assets) and most investors
have access to both markets. Therefore, risk premia on equity markets can
be compared to risk premia on debt markets and vice versa. We use this
comparability idea to address certain questions concerning risk premia on
both equity and credit markets.
We start by analyzing credit spreads on credit markets. Practitioners fre-
quently price credit instruments using real-world quantities (PD, EL) and
adding a (credit) risk premium. We analyze these credit risk premia within
structural models of default based on calibrations from historical equity risk
premia. We rst analyze a Merton framework and nd that i) credit risk
premia constitute a signi cant part of model-implied spreads and ii) this
part increases with increasing credit quality. In addition, credit risk premia
are hardly a ected by moving to more advanced structural models of de-
fault.
We use these observations to propose a new approach for estimating the eq-
uity premium using CDS spreads and structural models of default. Although
the equity premium is { both from a conceptual and empirical perspective
{ a widely researched topic in nance, there is still no consensus in the
academic literature on its magnitude. Based on a Merton model, a simple
estimator for the market Sharpe ratio and the equity premium can be de-
rived. This estimator has several advantages: First, it o ers a new line of
thought for estimating the equity premium which is not directly linked to
current methods. Second, it is only based on observable parameters. We
neither have to calibrate dividend or earnings growth, which is usually nec-
essary in dividend/earnings discount models, nor do we have to calibrate
asset values or default barriers, which is usually necessary in traditional ap-
plications of structural models. Third, our estimator is robust with respect
to model changes.
iiWe apply our estimator to more than 150,000 CDS spreads from the U.S.,
Europe, and Asia from 2003-2007. Our estimates yield equity premia of
6.50% for the U.S., 5.44% for Europe, and 6.21% for Asia based on 5-year
CDS spreads. Due to some conservative assumptions these estimates are
upper limits for the equity premium. Using 3-, 7-, and 10-year CDS spreads
yields similar results and o ers an opportunity to estimate the term struc-
ture of risk premia.
Besides the magnitude of the equity premium, the time series behavior of
risk premia is another important issue in nance. We use the estimator
described above to calibrate the term structure of risk premia before and
during the 2007/2008 nancial crisis. We nd that the risk premium term
structure was at before the crisis and downward sloping during the crisis.
The instantaneous risk premium increased signi cantly during the crisis,
whereas the long-run mean of the risk premium process was of the same
magnitude before and during the crisis.
These results convey the idea that (marginal) investors have become more
risk averse during the crisis. Investors were, however, well aware that risk
premia will revert to normal levels again. As a result, short-term risk premia
increased more than long-term risk premia. The slope of the risk premium
term structure (measured as 10-year Sharpe ratio minus 3-year Sharpe ra-
tio) was approximately zero before the 2007/2008 nancial crisis and be-
came negative during the 2007/2008 nancial crisis. Based on theoretical
arguments one would also expect this slope to be a factor in asset pricing,
although our short sample period does not allow for a direct validation.
Both applications { estimating equity premia and calibrating the risk pre-
mium term structure { bene t from the same underlying reason: Risk premia
can be more easily measured on credit than on equity markets. It is easier to
estimate the necessary input factors on credit markets than to estimate the
necessary input factors on equity markets. In addition, distinct maturities
are available. Therefore, we think that our approach is not limited to the
applications developed in this thesis but also o ers a basis for analyzing
further research questions conerning risk premia on nancial markets.
iiiContents
Abstract ii
List of Figures viii
List of Tables ix
List of Abbreviations xi
List of Symbols xiii
1. Introduction 1
1.1. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2. An introductory example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3. Research questions and contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.4. Structure of analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2. Existing literature and review of standard models 16
2.1. General asset pricing theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2. Equity valuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.2.1. Valuation models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.1.1. Dividend discount model . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.1.2. Residual income model . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.2.1.3. Earnings discount model . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2.2. Estimation of cash ows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.2.3. Risk premia on equity markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.2.3.1. Magnitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.2.3.2. Time series behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
iv2.2.3.3. Synopsis: Risk premia on equity markets . . 39
2.3. Credit pricing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.3.1. Pricing models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.3.1.1. Yield-based pricing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.3.1.2. Reduced-form credit pricing . . . . . . . . . 43
2.3.1.3. Structural models of default . . . . . . . . . 45
2.3.2. Estimation of expected loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.3.2.1. Probability of default . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.3.2.2. Recovery rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.3.3. Risk premia on credit markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.3.3.1. Bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.3.3.2. Credit default swaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.3.3.3. Synopsis: Risk premia on credit markets . . 58
2.4. The link between equity and credit risk premia . . . . . . . . 60
3. From actual to risk-neutral default probabilities 64
3.1. Motivation and intuition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.2. De nition of absolute and relative credit risk premia . . . . . 68
3.3. Merton framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.3.1. Model setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.3.2. Credit risk premia in the Merton framework . . . . . 69
3.3.3. Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.3.3.1. The relative importance of risk premia . . . 70
3.3.3.2. Functional form of credit risk premia . . . . 74
3.4. Other structural models of default . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.4.1. Model setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.4.2. Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.4.3. Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3.4.3.1. Illustrative example . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3.4.3.2. The default timing e ect . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3.4.3.3. The asset value uncertainty e ect . . . . . . 84
3.4.3.4. Extended results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
v4. Estimating equity premia from CDS spreads 89
4.1. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4.2. Model setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.2.1. Estimating equity premia in the Merton framework . 90
4.2.2. equity premia in other frameworks . . . . 93
4.3. Data and implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
4.4. Results for 5-year CDS in the U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
4.5. for further maturities and from other markets . . . . 101
4.6. Robustness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
4.6.1. Sensitivity with respect to noise in input parameters 104
4.6.2. Robustness: CDS spread . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.6.3. Recovery rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
4.6.4. Robustness: Actual default probabilities . . . . . . . 109
4.6.5. Asset correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
5. The term structure of risk premia 114
5.1. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
5.2. Model setup . . . . . . . . . .