The trading of security options is one of the fastest growing and most dynamic areas of investment concern. When the Chicago Board of Trade's proposal to develop an exchange for trading option contracts is implemented, security option trading will become an even more important aspect of the investment world.

The purpose of this article is to explore the relevance of the theory of Markov processes to the analysis of stock price movements.

The present study was prompted by the work of Dryden [6], in which aggregate data on United Kingdom share prices were analyzed within a Markovian framework, and which indicated that it might be fruitful to apply the Markov model to more disaggregated data, specifically to individual stock price data.

The recent wave of revaluations has again brought to the fore the foreign exchange risks with which most multinational corporations have to live constantly. While these latest parity changes have tended to increase the value of foreign currencies relative to the dollar, most exchange risks arise from pending devaluations.

The current assets and current liabilities of a firm are the stock reflections of closely interrelated operational and financial cash flows. The net effect of these combined flows must be recognized in searching for the optimal credit, inventory, or short-term borrowing policies. Yet, the vast majority of models for short-term investment and borrowing decisions do not allow for the interrelationships of this system.

Under the assumption that individuals are single-period maximizers of the expected utility of their future wealth, this essay extends the mean-variance security valuation model developed by Sharpe [10], Lintner [4, 5, and 6], and Mossin [7 and 8] to a general parameter-preference model, with and without the simplifications of homogeneous subjective probabilities and the existence of a risk-free security. Results with quadratic and cubic utility are developed as special cases.

Recent theoretical and empirical work in portfolio theory has exhibited a natural evolution from the two-moment EV model popularized by Markowitz through the higher moment models to selection on the basis of the entire probability function. This latter approach, referred to as the Stochastic Dominance (SD) approach to portfolio selection, has been shown to be theoretically superior to all of the “moment methods” and has been the focus of an increasing volume of empirical work.

In a recent article, Professors Stoll and Curley (hereinafter referred to as S–C) examined results for new issues during a short-run period and over long-run periods. The authors concluded that, “investors in new small issues floated under Regulation A in 1957, 1959, and 1963 experienced lower long-run rates of return than if they had invested in a portfolio of large stocks represented by the Standard and Poor's Industrial Average.” It was pointed out that these long-run results were consistent with the results of similar studies. Alternatively, regarding short-run results it was concluded that “in the short run, the stocks in the sample showed a remarkable price appreciation.” In fact, “short-run price appreciation was, however, considerably greater than the index appreciation.” They refer to this short-run performance as “.… perhaps the most interesting and certainly the most puzzling phenomenon encountered in the study.”

Recent research focused on the market for first public offerings of common stock has indicated that investors who purchase new issues at the offering price will quickly achieve relatively large systematic profits. This is attributable to either the inability or the reluctance of investment bankers to reoffer the shares in which they deal at market-clearing prices. This paper examines factors that influence investment bankers in their pricing decisions and subsequently determine the short-run performance of new issues.

The basic model of this paper is that of a transactor who is to receive at a specified time t in the future a fixed quantity of domestic funds Ad and a fixed quantity of foreign funds Af. It is further assumed that there exists a forward market in foreign exchange in which one unit of foreign currency can be bought and sold at a given and known forward rate rf, the domestic currency price of one unit of foreign currency. Let X be the net forward purchases of foreign exchange that the transactor undertakes at the market rate rf; a negative value of X indicates net sales of forward exchange. It is assumed that at time t the foreign currency will be convertible for the transactor at a fixed but unknown spot exchange rate and that the transactor can assess or derive a probability distribution on this spot exchange rate f(rt) for rt > 0. Finally, it is assumed that the transactor can express a utility function u on the domestic currency equivalent of his ending currency holdings. This paper considers the problem of determining the optimal level of forward exchange purchases X0.

The importance of an explicit consideration of uncertainty in evaluating the economic desirability of investment propositions is generally recognized in contemporary literature on capital budgeting. The emphasis has been on analyzing the effects of uncertainty of future cash-flows which result from an investment on the economic desirability of that investment. However, although future cash-flows are one important source of uncertainty, it should be recognized that other factors may contribute to uncertainty in a significant way. Uncertainty regarding alternate future investment opportunities is of obvious importance in the capital budgeting context. Thus, an investor who makes the best possible investment decision at a given point in time may deplore such a decision a short time afterward simply because his commitment prevents him from exploiting a better opportunity. While it might be assumed implicitly that an investor, in considering his alternatives, ought to include in such deliberations all the courses of action that may become available in the future, this aspect seems important enough to warrant explicit attention.

The weighted average cost of capital is a widely used concept in the theoretical literature of finance as well as in the analysis of capital expenditures of business firms. The importance of the concept derives from its use as the cutoff point for investment in capital projects and as an indicator of optimal capital structure. Differences between the weighted average cost of capital and the true overall cost of capital are typically attributed to deviations of market values from book values, changes in the proportional use of specific capital sources, or alterations in the risk characteristics of the stream of payments to owners and creditors. This paper abstracts from the aforementioned problems to focus on the mathematical error of using weighted average cost of capital to represent the true overall capital cost. It is determined that, in general, the calculation of weighted average cost leads to an erroneous value of the minimum acceptable level of return. The fault lies in the general inability to express the root(s) of a polynomial as an algebraic combination of the roots of other related polynomials.

The interdependence of the optimal investment program and capital prices, when capital and other markets are imperfect, has been one of the least tractable problems in capital budgeting. The nature of the problem is described in Amey [1]. Suggested solutions to the problem may be found in Baumol and Quandt [2], Carleton [3], Hirshleifer [4], Lusztig and Schwab [7], and Weingartner [9]. The purpose of this note is to extend the mathematical results reported by Lusztig and Schwab (L & S) and draw implications that will shed light on the controversy.