The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Does Idiosyncratic Volatility Proxy for Risk Exposure?
Open accessAbstract
We decompose aggregate market variance into an average correlation component and an average variance component. First, we show that the average variance component commands a negative price of risk in the cross-section of portfolios sorted by idiosyncratic volatility. The average correlation component is not significantly priced. Second, we show that portfolios with high idiosyncratic volatility relative to the Fama-French model have positive exposures to innovations in average stock variance and therefore lower expected returns. On the other hand, portfolios with low idiosyncratic volatility relative to the Fama-French model have negative exposures to innovations in average stock variance and therefore higher expected returns. This difference in the variance loadings between high and low idiosyncratic risk stocks, combined with the negative premium for average stock variance, completely explains the idiosyncratic volatility puzzle of Ang, et al. (2006, 2009). Idiosyncratic risk appears to be related to expected returns because it is a proxy for exposure to average stock variance. We explore a growth options explanation behind our results. Stocks with high idiosyncratic volatility have higher research and development expenditures than stocks with low idiosyncratic volatility, and therefore are likely to have more growth options. This explains the positive relation between high idiosyncratic volatility portfolios and aggregate market variance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Conditioning variables and the cross-section of stock returns
Ferson, W. E., & Harvey, C. R. (1999) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00148 · Cited by 839
Cited by
… and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns
Harvey, C. R., Liu, Y., & Zhu, H. (2016) · Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhv059 · Cited by 2,119
Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle
STAMBAUGH, R. F., YU, J., & YUAN, Y. (2015) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/jofi.12286 · Cited by 940
The common factor in idiosyncratic volatility: Quantitative asset pricing implications
Herskovic, B., Kelly, B., Lustig, H., & Van Nieuwerburgh, S. (2016) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2015.09.010 · Cited by 398
A tug of war: Overnight versus intraday expected returns
Lou, D., Polk, C., & Skouras, S. (2019) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2019.03.011 · Cited by 320
Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle
Stambaugh, R. F., Yu, J., & Yuan, Y. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2155491 · Cited by 286
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Z., & Petkova, R.
- Venue
- Review of Financial Studies
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-07-31
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2745-2787
- ISSN
- 0893-9454 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-7368
- OpenAlex
- W2148124701
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 25.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Does Idiosyncratic Volatility Proxy for Risk Exposure? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/rfs/hhs084
- The paper
- Chen, Z., & Petkova, R. (2012). Does Idiosyncratic Volatility Proxy for Risk Exposure? Review of Financial Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhs084
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.