The Dog that Did Not Bark: A Defense of Return Predictability
39 Pages Posted: 14 Jul 2006 Last revised: 12 Nov 2022
There are 3 versions of this paper
The Dog that Did Not Bark: A Defense of Return Predictability
The Dog that Did Not Bark: A Defense of Return Predictability
The Dog that Did Not Bark: A Defense of Return Predictability
Date Written: February 2006
Abstract
To question the statistical significance of return predictability, we cannot specify a null that simply turns off that predictability, leaving dividend growth predictability at its essentially zero sample value. If neither returns nor dividend growth are predictable, then the dividend-price ratio is a constant. If the null turns off return predictability, it must turn on the predictability of dividend growth, and then confront the evidence against such predictability in the data. I find that the absence of dividend growth predictability gives much stronger statistical evidence against the null, with roughly 1-2% probability values, than does the presence of return predictability, which only gives about 20% probability values. I argue that tests based on long-run return and dividend growth regressions provide the cleanest and most interpretable evidence on return predictability, again delivering about 1-2% probability values against the hypothesis that returns are unpredictable. I show that Goyal and Welch's (2005) finding of poor out-of-sample R2 does not reject return forecastability. Out-of-sample R2 is poor even if all dividend yield variation comes from time-varying expected returns.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Consumption, Aggregate Wealth and Expected Stock Returns
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Risks for the Long Run: A Potential Resolution of Asset Pricing Puzzles
By Ravi Bansal and Amir Yaron
-
Dividend Yields and Expected Stock Returns: Alternative Procedures for Interference and Measurement
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia are Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia Wre Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson