Journal of Asset Management

, Volume 20, Issue 7, pp 552–567 | Cite as

Non-stationary dividend-price ratios

  • Vassilis PolimenisEmail author
  • Ioannis Neokosmidis
Original Article


Dividend yields have been widely used in previous research to relate stock market valuations to cash flow fundamentals. However, this approach relies on the assumption that dividend yields are stationary. Due to the failure to reject the hypothesis of a unit root in the classical dividend-price ratio for the US stock market, Polimenis and Neokosmidis (Int Rev Financ Anal 45:31–38, 2016) proposed the use of a modified dividend-price ratio (mdp) as the deviation between d and p from their long run equilibrium and showed that mdp provides substantially improved forecasting results over the classical dp ratio. Here, we extend that paper by performing multivariate regressions based on the Campbell–Shiller approximation, by utilizing a dynamic econometric procedure to estimate the modified dp, and by testing the modified ratios against reinvested dividend yields. By comparing the performance of mdp and dp in the period after 1965, we are not only able to enhance the robustness of the findings, but also able to show that the enhanced performance of the modified ratio in predicting future returns does not come from a capacity to predict the risk-free return component. Depending on whether one uses the recursive or population methodology to measure the performance of mdp, the out-of-sample performance gain is between 30 and 50%.


Dividend-price ratio Non-stationary ratios Cointegrated dividend-prices Modified dividend-price ratio 



  1. Blough, S.R. 1992. The relationship between power and level for generic unit root tests in finite samples. Journal of Applied Econometrics 7: 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boswijk, H. P. 2001. Testing for a unit root with near-integrated volatility (No. 01-077/4). Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
  3. Brav, A., J.R. Graham, C.R. Harvey, and R. Michaely. 2005. Payout policy in the 21st century. Journal of Financial Economics 77(3): 483–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell, J., and R. Shiller. 1988. The dividend-price ratio and expectations of future dividends and discount factors. Review of Financial Studies 1: 195–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, J.Y., and S.B. Thompson. 2008. Predicting excess stock returns out of sample: Can anything beat the historical average? Review of Financial Studies 21: 1509–1531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, L. 2009. On the reversal of return and dividend growth predictability: A tale of two periods. Journal of Financial Economics 92(1): 128–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cochrane, J.H. 2008. The dog that did not bark: A defense of return predictability. Review of Financial Studies 21(4): 1533–1575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cochrane, J.H. 2011. Presidential address: Discount rates. The Journal of Finance 66: 1047–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeAngelo, Harry, Linda DeAngelo, and Douglas J. Skinner. 2009. Corporate PAYOUT POLICY. Foundations and Trends in Finance 3(2–3): 95–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dickey, D.A., and W.A. Fuller. 1979. Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74: 427–431.Google Scholar
  11. Engle, and Granger. 1987. Cointegration and error correction: Representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica 55: 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Engsted, T., and T.Q. Pedersen. 2010. The dividend-price ratio does predict dividend growth: International evidence. Journal of Empirical Finance 17(4): 585–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Engsted, T., T.Q. Pedersen, and C. Tanggaard. 2012. The log-linear return approximation, bubbles, and predictability. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 47(03): 643–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ericsson, N.R., and J.G. MacKinnon. 2002. Distributions of error correction tests for cointegration. The Econometrics Journal 5: 285–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fama, E.F., and K.R. French. 1988. Dividend yields and expected stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics 22: 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fama, E.F., and K.R. French. 2002. The equity premium. The Journal of Finance 57: 637–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goyal, A., and I. Welch. 2003. Predicting the equity premium with dividend ratios. Management Science: Journal of the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences 49: 639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamilton, J.D. 1994. Time series analysis, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Harris, R., and R. Sollis. 2003. Applied time series modelling and forecasting. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Johansen, S. 1991. Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegration vectors in Gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica 59: 1551–1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johansen, S. 1995. Likelihood-based inference in cointegrated vector autoregressive models. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim, K., and P. Schmidt. 1993. Unit root tests with conditional heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 59(3): 287–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lettau, M., and S. Ludvigson. 2001. Consumption, aggregate wealth, and expected stock returns. The Journal of Finance 56: 815–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lettau, M., and S.C. Ludvigson. 2005. Expected returns and expected dividend growth. Journal of Financial Economics 76: 583–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lettau, M., and S. Van Nieuwerburgh. 2008. Reconciling the return predictability evidence. Review of Financial Studies 21: 1607–1652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Perron, P. 1989. The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 57: 1361–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Polimenis, V., and I. Neokosmidis. 2016. The modified dividend-price ratio. International Review of Financial Analysis 45: 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rahbek, A., E. Hansen, and J. G. Dennis. 2002. ARCH innovations and their impact on cointegration rank testing. Centre for Analytical Finance working paper, 22, 15.Google Scholar
  29. Rapach, D.E., J.K. Strauss, and G. Zhou. 2010. Out-of-sample equity premium prediction: Combination forecasts and links to the real economy. Review of Financial Studies 23: 821–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Seo, B. 1999. Distribution theory for unit root tests with conditional heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 91(1): 113–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stock, J.H. 1987. Asymptotic properties of least squares estimators of cointegrating vectors. Econometrica 55: 1035–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Toda, H.Y., and T. Yamamoto. 1995. Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics 66(1): 225–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Welch, I., and A. Goyal. 2008. A comprehensive look at the empirical performance of equity premium prediction. Review of Financial Studies 21: 1455–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations