MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600709751 · doi:10.1093/jjfinec/nbx009

Forecasting Stock Returns Using Option-Implied State Prices*

2017· article· en· W2600709751 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 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsEconometricsQuantileSkewnessCapital asset pricing modelVolatility (finance)Equity premium puzzleEquity (law)Stock (firearms)Risk aversion (psychology)Financial economicsValuation of optionsExpected utility hypothesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Options prices embed the risk preferences that determine expected returns in asset pricing models. Therefore, functions of options prices should predict returns. In this paper, we show that the State Prices of Conditional Quantiles (SPOCQ)—functions of options prices introduced in Metaxoglou and Smith (2016)—exhibit strong predictive ability for the U.S. equity premium. These SPOCQ series provide estimates of the market’s willingness to pay for insurance against outcomes in various quantiles of the return distribution. They also relate to expected returns in prominent asset pricing models. Our SPOCQ series that captures relative risk aversion exhibits strong predictive ability for S&P 500 returns at horizons between 6 and 18 months, both in the full sample, 1990–2012, and out of sample. Our SPOCQ series that captures volatility aversion, however, exhibits no predictive ability due to the lack of skewness in the return distribution for the horizons considered.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.118 · 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