We study the link between corporate bond risk premia and equity returns in a large panel of corporate bond transaction data. In contrast to previous work, we find that a significant part of the time variation in bond risk premia can be explained by equity implied bond risk premium estimates. We also document a large time variation in the expected loss component of bond spreads. This component is related to total asset volatility, whereas the risk premium is related to systematic volatility. In addition, we show by means of linear regressions that augmenting the set of variables predicted by typical structural models with equity-implied bond default risk premia significantly increases explanatory power.

This paper explores the role of liquidity risk in the pricing of corporate bonds. We show that corporate bond returns have signifcant exposures to fluctuations in treasury bond liquidity and equity market liquidity. Further, this liquidity risk is a priced factor for the expected returns on corporate bonds, and the associated liquidity risk premia help to explain the credit spread puzzle. In terms of expected returns, the total estimated liquidity risk premium is around 0.6% per annum for US long-maturity investment grade bonds. For speculative grade bonds, which have higher exposures to the liquidity factors, the liquidity risk premium is around 1.5% per annum. We find very similar evidence for the liquidity risk exposure of corporate bonds for a sample of European corporate bond prices.

Financial Markets and the Real Economy reviews the current academic literature on the macroeconomics of finance.

This paper investigates the holding period risk premia of U.S. corporate and Treasury bonds. Using excess return regressions, two priced risk factors are derived from yield and macroeconomic data: a priced term risk factor and a priced credit risk factor explain half of the variation in one-year corporate and Treasury excess returns. The information of the term risk factor is not represented by major yield characteristics but is a hidden risk factor whereas the credit risk factor is not hidden. The term risk premium is earned primarily for exposure to inflation and the yield level and the credit risk premium is earned for an exposure to real growth and the credit spread level. The regression results are usefull for the specification of the market prices of risk in affine credit term structure models: The two-factor representation of the risk premium suggests a rank restriction on the market prices of risk and an additional pricing factor to capture the hidden property of term risk.

Academic finance has had a remarkable impact on many financial services. Yet long-term investors have received curiously little guidance from academic financial economists. Mean-variance analysis, developed almost fifty years ago, has provided a basic paradigm for portfolio choice. This approach usefully emphasizes the ability of diversification to reduce risk, but it ignores several critically important factors. Most notably, the analysis is static; it assumes that investors care only about risks to wealth one period ahead. However, many investors—-both individuals and institutions such as charitable foundations or universities—-seek to finance a stream of consumption over a long lifetime. In addition, mean-variance analysis treats financial wealth in isolation from income. Long-term investors typically receive a stream of income and use it, along with financial wealth, to support their consumption. At the theoretical level, it is well understood that the solution to a long-term portfolio choice problem can be very different from the solution to a short-term problem. Long-term investors care about intertemporal shocks to investment opportunities and labor income as well as shocks to wealth itself, and they may use financial assets to hedge their intertemporal risks. This should be important in practice because there is a great deal of empirical evidence that investment opportunities—-both interest rates and risk premia on bonds and stocks—-vary through time. Yet this insight has had little influence on investment practice because it is hard to solve for optimal portfolios in intertemporal models. This book seeks to develop the intertemporal approach into an empirical paradigm that can compete with the standard mean-variance analysis. The book shows that long-term inflation-indexed bonds are the riskless asset for long-term investors, it explains the conditions under which stocks are safer assets for long-term than for short-term investors, and it shows how labor income influences portfolio choice. These results shed new light on the rules of thumb used by financial planners. The book explains recent advances in both analytical and numerical methods, and shows how they can be used to understand the portfolio choice problems of long-term investors.