MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282041829 · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhac021

High Inflation: Low Default Risk and Low Equity Valuations

2022· article· en· W4282041829 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

VenueReview of Financial Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)EconomicsEquity (law)Monetary economicsInflation (cosmology)DebtCapital asset pricing modelCash flowRisk premiumFinancial economicsProbability of defaultEconometricsCredit riskMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We develop an asset pricing model with endogenous corporate policies that explains how inflation jointly affects real asset prices and corporate default risk. Our model includes two empirically founded nominal rigidities: fixed nominal debt coupons (sticky leverage) and sticky cash flows. These two frictions result in lower real equity prices and credit spreads when expected inflation rises. A decrease in expected inflation has opposite effects, with even larger magnitudes. In the cross-section, the model predicts that the negative impact of higher expected inflation on real equity values is stronger for low leverage firms. We find empirical support for the model’s predictions. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.250 · 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