The Journal of Finance

How Are Derivatives Used? Evidence from the Mutual Fund Industry

Published: 12/17/2002   |   DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00126

Jennifer Lynch Koski, Jeffrey Pontiff

We investigate investment managers' use of derivatives by comparing return distributions for equity mutual funds that use and do not use derivatives. In contrast to public perception, derivative users have risk exposure and return performance that are similar to nonusers. We also analyze changes in fund risk in response to prior fund performance. Changes in risk are substantially less severe for funds using derivatives, consistent with the explanation that managers use derivatives to reduce the impact of performance on risk. We provide new evidence regarding the implications of cash flows and managerial gaming for the relation between performance and risk.

Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability?

Published: 10/13/2015   |   DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12365

R. DAVID MCLEAN, JEFFREY PONTIFF

We study the out‐of‐sample and post‐publication return predictability of 97 variables shown to predict cross‐sectional stock returns. Portfolio returns are 26% lower out‐of‐sample and 58% lower post‐publication. The out‐of‐sample decline is an upper bound estimate of data mining effects. We estimate a 32% (58%–26%) lower return from publication‐informed trading. Post‐publication declines are greater for predictors with higher in‐sample returns, and returns are higher for portfolios concentrated in stocks with high idiosyncratic risk and low liquidity. Predictor portfolios exhibit post‐publication increases in correlations with other published‐predictor portfolios. Our findings suggest that investors learn about mispricing from academic publications.

Share Issuance and Cross‐sectional Returns

Published: 04/01/2008   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2008.01335.x

JEFFREY PONTIFF, ARTEMIZA WOODGATE

Post‐1970, share issuance exhibits a strong cross‐sectional ability to predict stock returns. This predictive ability is more statistically significant than the individual predictive ability of size, book‐to‐market, or momentum. Our finding is related to research that finds that long‐run returns are associated with share repurchase announcements, seasoned equity offerings, and stock mergers, although our results remain strong even after exclusion of the data used in these studies. We estimate the issuance relation pre‐1970 and find no statistically significant predictive ability for most holding periods.

Market Valuation of Tax‐Timing Options: Evidence from Capital Gains Distributions

Published: 03/09/2006   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00856.x

J. B. CHAY, DOSOUNG CHOI, JEFFREY PONTIFF

We examine a distribution that is taxed as a capital gain rather than as a dividend. Since the distribution induces a realized capital gain while the price change is an unrealized gain, ex‐day return behavior provides evidence of the value of tax‐timing capital gains. We show that investors are compensated 7¢ in unrealized gains for each dollar of realized capital gains, that is, $1 of realized capital gains is equivalent to 93¢ of unrealized gains. An investor with a tax rate on realized gains of 15% has an effective tax rate on unrealized capital gains of 8.6%.

Anomalies and News

Published: 08/09/2018   |   DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12718

JOSEPH ENGELBERG, R. DAVID MCLEAN, JEFFREY PONTIFF

Using a sample of 97 stock return anomalies, we find that anomaly returns are 50% higher on corporate news days and six times higher on earnings announcement days. These results could be explained by dynamic risk, mispricing due to biased expectations, or data mining. We develop and conduct several unique tests to differentiate between these three explanations. Our results are most consistent with the idea that anomaly returns are driven by biased expectations, which are at least partly corrected upon news arrival.