No abstract

Explaining Credit Spread Changes: Some New Evidence from Option-Adjusted Spreads of Bond IndexesWe examine the question of the determinants of corporate bond credit spreads using both weekly and monthly option-adjusted spreads for nine corporate bond indexes from Merrill Lynch from January 1997 to July 2002. We find that the Russell 2000 index historical return volatility and the Conference Board composite leading and coincident economic indicators have significant power in explaining credit spread changes, especially for high yield indexes. Furthermore, these three variables plus the interest rate level, the historical interest rate volatility, the yield curve slope, the Russell 2000 index return, and the Fama-French [1996] high-minus-low factor can explain more than 40% of credit spread changes for five bond indexes. In particular, these eight variables can explain 67.68% and 60.82% of credit spread changes for the B-and the BB-rated indexes, respectively. Our analysis confirms that credit spread changes for high-yield bonds are more closely related to equity market factors and also provides evidence in favor of incorporating macroeconomic factors into credit risk models.

Explaining Credit Spread Changes: Some New Evidence from Option-Adjusted Spreads of Bond IndexesWe examine the question of the determinants of corporate bond credit spreads using both weekly and monthly option-adjusted spreads for nine corporate bond indexes from Merrill Lynch from January 1997 to July 2002. We find that the Russell 2000 index historical return volatility and the Conference Board composite leading and coincident economic indicators have significant power in explaining credit spread changes, especially for high yield indexes. Furthermore, these three variables plus the interest rate level, the historical interest rate volatility, the yield curve slope, the Russell 2000 index return, and the Fama-French [1996] high-minus-low factor can explain more than 40% of credit spread changes for five bond indexes. In particular, these eight variables can explain 67.68% and 60.82% of credit spread changes for the B-and the BB-rated indexes, respectively. Our analysis confirms that credit spread changes for high-yield bonds are more closely related to equity market factors and also provides evidence in favor of incorporating macroeconomic factors into credit risk models.

In this paper we conduct a specification analysis of structural credit risk models, using term structure of credit default swap (CDS) spreads and equity volatility from high-frequency return data. Our study provides consistent econometric estimation of the pricing model parameters and specification tests based on the joint behavior of time-series asset dynamics and cross-sectional pricing errors. Our empirical tests reject strongly the standard Merton (1974) model, the Black and Cox (1976) barrier model, and the Longstaff and Schwartz (1995) model with stochastic interest rates. The double exponential jump-diffusion barrier model (Huang and Huang, 2003) improves significantly over the three models. The best one among the five models considered is the stationary leverage model of Collin-Dufresne and Goldstein (2001), which we cannot reject in more than half of our sample firms. However, our empirical results document the inability of the existing structural models to capture the dynamic behavior of CDS spreads and equity volatility, especially for investment grade names. This points to a potential role of time-varying asset volatility, a feature that is missing in the standard structural models.

In this paper we conduct a specification analysis of structural credit risk models, using term structure of credit default swap (CDS) spreads and equity volatility from high-frequency return data. Our study provides consistent econometric estimation of the pricing model parameters and specification tests based on the joint behavior of time-series asset dynamics and cross-sectional pricing errors. Our empirical tests reject strongly the standard Merton (1974) model, the Black and Cox (1976) barrier model, and the Longstaff and Schwartz (1995) model with stochastic interest rates. The double exponential jump-diffusion barrier model (Huang and Huang, 2003) improves significantly over the three models. The best one among the five models considered is the stationary leverage model of Collin-Dufresne and Goldstein (2001), which we cannot reject in more than half of our sample firms. However, our empirical results document the inability of the existing structural models to capture the dynamic behavior of CDS spreads and equity volatility, especially for investment grade names. This points to a potential role of time-varying asset volatility, a feature that is missing in the standard structural models.