A brief overview of really current research on dividends
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 40

A Brief Overview of Really Current Research on Dividends PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 61 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

A Brief Overview of Really Current Research on Dividends. Gretchen A. Fix Department of Statistics Rice University 6 November 2003. Outline. Restatement of problem Fama and French hypothesis Our hypothesis Introduction to survival analysis and tools to be used Kaplan-Meier estimator

Download Presentation

A Brief Overview of Really Current Research on Dividends

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


A brief overview of really current research on dividends

A Brief Overview of Really Current Research on Dividends

Gretchen A. Fix

Department of Statistics

Rice University

6 November 2003


Outline

Outline

  • Restatement of problem

    • Fama and French hypothesis

    • Our hypothesis

  • Introduction to survival analysis and tools to be used

    • Kaplan-Meier estimator

    • Cox regression

  • Preliminary results


Restatement of problem

Restatement of Problem

  • Dividends are important—they are the primary determinant of equity value

  • Papers in the finance literature discuss the changing prevalence of dividends

    • Proportion of dividend paying (industrial) firms has decreased over the past 25 years

    • Real and nominal dividends paid out by industrial firms have increased over this period


Fama and french hypothesis

Fama and French Hypothesis

  • Proportion of public firms paying dividends

    • 66.5 % in 1978

    • 20.8 % in 1998

  • Relevant characteristics of dividend payers

    • Profitability

    • Investment opportunities

    • Size


Fama and french hypothesis1

Fama and French Hypothesis

  • Attribute the decline to

    • Changing characteristics of the population of firms in the market

    • Decreased propensity to pay

  • Make note of the “surge” of new lists that began in 1979

    • Contributed to changing characteristics


Our hypothesis

Our Hypothesis

  • A firm can do two things with its earnings:

    • Pay them out to equity holders

    • Reinvest in positive NPV projects

  • As a firm matures, growth opportunities will become limited and it will run out of projects and resort to dividends


Our hypothesis1

Our Hypothesis

  • This adds another characteristic to Fama and French’s list

    • Profitability

    • Investment opportunities

    • Size

    • Maturity

  • Time origin for maturity INCORPORATION

    • By default, age seems to be measured by listing


Our hypothesis2

Our Hypothesis

  • We compare the dividend initiation behavior of new lists from two time periods

    • Group 1: New lists in 1965-1975

    • Group 2: New lists in 1985-1995

  • We model our lifecycle hypothesis using the Cox regression framework

    • Model the hazard of initiating dividends

    • Find that accounting for age in terms of incorporation has significant effects on the model output


Data structure

Incorporation

Listing

Dividend/

Censoring

Data Structure

  • Three time points of interest: incorporation, listing, dividend/censoring

  • Status of firm is coded as a “1” if endpoint is dividend initiation and “0” if it is a censoring

  • Censorings are the result of losing a firm (due to merger or bankruptcy) or failure to initiate dividends over the life of the study (12/31/2002)


Data structure1

Incorporation

Listing

Dividend/

Censoring

Data Structure

  • From incorporation to listing, the firm is technically not at risk of becoming a dividend payer; we only care about dividends paid after a firm lists

  • This looks like delayed entry into the risk set or left-truncation—but it is not!


Data structure left truncation

Exposure

Recruitment

Death

Data Structure—Left Truncation

  • Left-truncation is a result of study design

  • For example, subjects are exposed to a toxin; at some time after exposure, they are recruited into a study focusing on mortality resulting from toxin exposure; any subject who died from toxin exposure prior to recruitment would not be eligible to participate in the study

  • Subjects are not at risk of an observable death during the interval between exposure and recruitment into the study


Data structure challenges

Data Structure—Challenges

  • We have identified the interval from incorporation to dividend/censoring as the relevant period to study; however

    • Firms are not technically at risk between incorporation and listing

    • It will be difficult to build models using this interval, since there is no comprehensive database for balance sheet information until after firms list


What is survival analysis

What is Survival Analysis?

  • “a collection of statistical procedures for data analysis for which the outcome variable of interest is time until an event occurs”Kleinbaum, p. 4

  • Typical applications

    • Biostatistics—study treatment effects in clinical trials

    • Industrial—study failure behavior of a machine


Typical characteristic of survival analysis data censoring

Typical Characteristic of Survival Analysis Data—Censoring

  • Exact survival time of a subject is unknown

  • Usually occurs at the right side of the follow-up period; but can have left or interval censoring

  • Typical reasons for right censoring:

    • Subject does not experience the event before the study ends

    • Subject is lost to follow up during the study

    • Subject withdraws from the study


Functions of interest in survival analysis

Functions of Interest in Survival Analysis

  • Survival/survivor function, S(t)

    • Gives probability that a subject survives longer than specified time t

    • S(t) = P(T > t) = 1 – P(T  t) = 1 – F(t)

    • Properties

      • Non increasing

      • S(0) = 1; at the start of the study, all observations are alive

      • S() = 0; if the study time were increased without limit, eventually there would be no observations left alive


Functions of interest in survival analysis1

Functions of Interest in Survival Analysis

  • Hazard function, λ(t)

    • λ(t) = limt0 P(t  T < t + t | T  t) / t

    • “Instantaneous potential per unit time for the event to occur, given that the individual has survived up to time t”

    • Conditional failure RATE (probability per unit time)


Kaplan meier estimator

Kaplan-Meier Estimator

  • Method for estimating survival curves; aka The Product Limit Estimator

  • In theory, the survival function is a smooth curve; in practice, it is estimated by a right-continuous step function

  • It can be shown that the K-M estimator is the NPMLE of the survival function when one has censored data


Kaplan meier estimator1

Kaplan-Meier Estimator

  • Let t1, t2, … tn be the ordered failure times of the sample

  • Di = number of subjects who fail at time ti

  • Ni = number of subjects at risk of failure at ti; these are the subjects that are alive and under observation just prior to ti.


Cox ph regression model

Cox PH Regression Model

  • λ(t,X) = λo(t)exp{ß1 X1 + ß2 X2 + . . .+ ßk Xk}

  • Hazard at time t is product of two factors

    • λo(t), the baseline hazard function (does not depend on X)

    • Exponentiated linear sum of the Xi (does not depend on t)


Cox ph regression model1

Cox PH Regression Model

  • Popularity of the model

    • Form of the baseline hazard left unspecified—gives robustness

    • Exponentiation ensures that fitted model will always give non-negative estimates of the hazard

    • Although the form of the baseline hazard unspecified, after model fitting, it can be recovered and corresponding survival curves for individual observations can be estimated


Cox ph regression model2

Cox PH Regression Model

  • The proportional hazards assumption

    • Ratio of the hazards is constant over time


Extended cox regression model

Extended Cox Regression Model

  • Allows time-varying covariates

  • Previously, covariates were not allowed to depend on time (ensured proportionality of hazards)

  • λ(t,X(t)) = λo(t)exp{ß1 X1(t) + …+ ßk Xk (t)}


Preliminary analysis data

Preliminary AnalysisData

  • Dataset consists of approximately 2750 firms that listed in 1965-75 or 1985-95

  • For each firm we have

    • Years of incorporation, listing, dividend/censoring

    • Covariate data (roa, investment, repurchase activity) for each year post listing

    • Dataset was stratified by exchange (NYSE/AMEX or NASDAQ) and market value (above yearly exchange median or below during year of last contact)

  • All analysis presented here was done on the large-NYSE/AMEX stratum


Preliminary analysis data1

65-75 group

Incorporation

Listing

Dividend

85-95 group

Incorporation

Listing

Dividend

Preliminary AnalysisData

  • We think the average observation from each period looks something like this:


Preliminary analysis data2

Preliminary AnalysisData

  • The length of the interval from incorporation to listing was much longer for the early group firm

  • Equivalently, the early group firm had a greater age at list than the late group firm

  • Market conditions of the 80s and 90s allowed firms to go public relatively early in their lifecycles


Preliminary analysis simple statistics

Preliminary AnalysisSimple Statistics

The median age of a firm at dividend initiation (or censoring) is 1 year measured from listing. However, the median age at listing is 22.5 years.

The median age of a firm at dividend initiation (or censoring) is 3.5 years measured from listing. However, the median age at listing is 5 years.


Preliminary analysis simple statistics1

Preliminary AnalysisSimple Statistics

Looking only at the uncensored observations:

The median age of a firm at dividend initiation is 1 year measured from listing and 33 years measured from incorporation.

The median age of a firm at dividend initiation is 1 year measured from listing and 9 years measured from incorporation.


Preliminary analysis kaplan meier estimates

Preliminary AnalysisKaplan-Meier Estimates


Preliminary analysis kaplan meier estimates1

Preliminary AnalysisKaplan-Meier Estimates

  • Curves generated using listing as time origin show lower propensity to pay for 85-95 group

  • Curves generated using incorporation as time origin show higher propensity to pay for 85-95 group


Preliminary analysis kaplan meier estimates2

Preliminary AnalysisKaplan-Meier Estimates

  • Limitation of K-M: non-parametric method; cannot take into account any of the covariates which we think affect dividend initiation

  • Attempt to implement our lifecycle model using the Cox regression framework

    • Model the hazard of initiating dividends


Preliminary analysis cox regression first model try

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression—First Model Try

  • λ(t,X(t)) = λo(t)exp{ßROA XROA(t) + ßINV XINV(t) + [ ßAGE XAGE AT LIST ]+ ßGRP XGRP }

    • XROA(t)(time varying) return on equity value

    • XINV(t)(time varying) investment value

    • XAGE AT LIST age of firm at listing

    • XGRPgroup indicator (0 if in 65-75 group,

      1 if in 85-95 group)


Preliminary analysis cox regression

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression

  • Our hypothesis suggests the following output of the model

    • Positive, significant coefficient for ROA

    • Negative, significant coefficient for INV

    • Negative, significant coefficient for GRPIND when AGEATLIST omitted from model

    • Positive, significant coefficient for AGEATLIST; less negative and/or insignificant coefficient for GRPIND when AGEATLIST included in model


Preliminary analysis cox regression first model try1

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression—First Model Try

  • Model with ROA, INV, GRPIND

  • Model with ROA, INV, GRPIND, AGEATLIST


Preliminary analysis cox regression1

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression

  • Further tweaks to be made

    • DATA: Truncating the data so that we only try to model dividend initiation up to 25 years post incorporation; (accepting that some firms do not conform to our lifecycle hypothesis)

    • MODEL: Consider industry effects (stratify by SIC code)

    • MODEL: Allow the coefficients for ROA and INV to vary for the two time periods

      • Under this model, are we able to pick up the propensity to pay effect?

    • MODEL: Instead of including AGEATLIST , stratify


Preliminary analysis truncated data

Preliminary AnalysisTruncated Data

  • Truncating the data at 25 years will have the effect of eliminating firms that did not list within 25 years of incorporation from the model

    • Group 1 originally 170 firms, now 88 firms

    • Group 2originally 186 firms, now 150 firms


Preliminary analysis simple statistics truncated data

Preliminary AnalysisSimple Statistics—Truncated Data


Preliminary analysis k m estimates truncated data

Preliminary AnalysisK-M Estimates—Truncated Data


Preliminary analysis kaplan meier estimates3

Preliminary AnalysisKaplan-Meier Estimates

  • Curves generated using listing as time origin show lower propensity to pay for 85-95 group;however, this lower propensity is not as strong as before

  • Previous curves showed an increased propensity to pay from incorporation for the 85-95 group,these curves show little difference between the groups


Preliminary analysis cox regression truncated data

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression—Truncated Data

  • Model with ROA, INV, GRPIND

  • Model with ROA, INV, GRPIND, AGEATLIST


Preliminary analysis cox regression interacted model

Preliminary AnalysisCox Regression—Interacted Model

  • Model with ROA1, ROA2, INV1, INV2, GRPIND

  • Model with ROA1 -- GRPIND, AGEATLIST


  • Login