Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile?

Journal of Finance - Tập 67 Số 4 - Trang 1329-1370 - 2012
Söhnke M. Bartram, Gregory W. Brown, René M. Stulz1,2,3
1Bartram is with Warwick Business School
2Brown is with the Kenan-Flagler Business School, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
3Stulz is with the Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, NBER, and ECGI. The authors are grateful for comments from Geert Bekaert, Hendrik Bessembinder, Gian Luca Clementi, Nuno Fernandes, Cam Harvey, Patrick Kelly, Christian Lundblad, David MacLean, Richard Roll, Omid Sabbaghi, and Piet Sercu as well as from seminar participants at the American Finance Association Meetings, European Finance Meetings, the 2009 FIRS Conference, HEC-Paris, The University of Calgary, The University of North Carolina, UCLA, and the University of South Florida. Financial support by Inquire United Kingdom is gratefully acknowledged. William Waller provided excellent research assistance.

Tóm tắt

ABSTRACTU.S. stocks are more volatile than stocks of similar foreign firms. A firm's stock return volatility can be higher for reasons that contribute positively (good volatility) or negatively (bad volatility) to shareholder wealth and economic growth. We find that the volatility of U.S. firms is higher mostly because of good volatility. Specifically, stock volatility is higher in the United States because it increases with investor protection, stock market development, new patents, and firm‐level investment in R&D. Each of these factors is related to better growth opportunities for firms and better ability to take advantage of these opportunities.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1016/S0304-3932(02)00208-8

10.1086/262091

10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.04.001

10.1017/S0022109011000275

10.1093/wber/14.3.597

10.1016/S0304-405X(96)00889-6

10.1111/0022-1082.00220

10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.05.007

10.1093/rfs/hhm030

10.1111/j.1540-6261.2007.01231.x

Bekaert Geert Robert J.Hodrick andXiaoyanZhang 2010 Aggregate idiosyncratic volatility Working paper Columbia University.

10.1111/0022-1082.00318

10.1093/rfs/hhl039

Comin Diego andThomasPhilippon 2005 The rise in firm‐level volatility: Causes and consequences NBER Macroeconomic Annual 20 169–228.

10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.03.004

10.1016/j.jfineco.2007.02.007

10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.09.002

10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00816.x

10.1016/S0927-5398(02)00055-5

10.1016/j.jfineco.2007.06.002

10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00152-4

Garmaise Mark J. andJunLiu 2005 Corruption firm governance and the cost of capital Working paper UCLA.

10.1093/rfs/hhq044

10.1093/rfs/hhn043

10.1093/rfs/hhq140

10.1111/j.1475-6803.2006.00189.x

10.1093/rfs/hhn039

10.1080/13876980802231123

10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.11.003

10.1111/j.1540-6261.2008.01372.x

10.1257/000282802762024539

Karolyi Andrew G., 2003, The Handbook of the Economics of Finance

Kaufman Daniel AartKraay andMassimoMastruzzi 2007 Governance matters VI: Governance indicators for 1996–2006 World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4280.

Kelly Patrick 2007 Information efficiency and firm‐specific return variation Working paper University of South Florida.

10.1016/j.jfineco.2003.09.003

10.2307/1911512

10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.01.005

Levine Ross, 1998, Stock markets, banks, and economic growth, American Economic Review, 88, 537

Michelacci Claudio andFabianoSchivardi 2008 Does idiosyncratic business risk matter?Working paper Center for Economic Policy Research.

10.1016/S0304-405X(00)00071-4

10.1016/0304-405X(84)90023-0

10.2307/1913610

Obstfeld Maurice, 1994, Risk‐taking, global diversification, and growth, American Economic Review, 84, 1310

10.1111/1540-6261.00587

10.1257/aer.99.4.1451

10.1093/rfs/hhp067

10.1111/j.1745-6622.1999.tb00027.x

10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00775.x

Teoh Siew Hong Yong (George)Yang andYingleiZhang 2008 R‐square: Noise or firm‐specific information?Working paper University of California Irvine .

Thesmar David andMathiasThoenig 2004 Financial market development and the rise in firm‐level uncertainty CEPR Discussion Paper.