MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142367888 · doi:10.1093/jjfinec/nbm012

Components of Market Risk and Return

2007· article· en· W2142367888 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Financial Econometrics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsVolatility (finance)UnivariateEconomicsVariance risk premiumEquity premium puzzleEquity (law)Bivariate analysisRealized varianceRisk premiumFinancial economicsVolatility risk premiumVariance (accounting)Conditional varianceStochastic volatilityAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityMultivariate statisticsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a flexible but parsimonious specification of the joint dynamics of market risk and return to produce forecasts of a time-varying market equity premium. Our parsimonious volatility model allows components to decay at different rates, generates mean-reverting forecasts, and allows variance targeting. These features contribute to realistic equity premium forecasts for the U.S. market over the 1840–2006 period. For example, the premium forecast was low in the mid-1990s but has recently increased. Although the market's total conditional variance has a positive effect on returns, the smooth long-run component of volatility is more important for capturing the dynamics of the premium. This result is robust to univariate specifications that condition on either levels or logs of past realized volatility (RV), as well as to a new bivariate model of returns and RV.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it