Exchange Rate Economics

Exchange Rate Economics

The Uncovered Interest Parity Puzzle and Other Anomalies

Norman C. Miller

The Uncovered Interest Parity (UIP) puzzle has remained a moot point since it first circulated economic discourse in 1984 and, despite a number of attempts at a solution, the UIP puzzle and other anomalies in Exchange Rate Economics continue to perplex economic thought in international finance. This fundamental book fill gaps in scholarly literature by amalgamating key discourse to generate synthesis models which appear consistent with the UIP puzzle and related anomalies, uniquely bringing them together in one place. Through a comprehensive and current review of the literature, Norman C. Miller reveals new explanations for exchange rate anomalies and offers an alternative approach towards the UIP puzzle, stimulating and guiding future research.

Chapter 7: More puzzles and solutions

Norman C. Miller

Subjects: economics and finance, financial economics and regulation, history of economic thought, international economics


This chapter examines three lesser known puzzles with regard to the workings of the fx market. In addition, it includes an account of two new suggestions with regard to missing variables in a Fama equation. These are “default risk” as in Coudert and Mignon (2013) and the ratio of the current interest differential (ID) to the average value for ID, as in Wagner (2012). The three new puzzling facts are as follows. First, Bansal (1997), Bansal and Dahlquist (2000), Baillie and Kilic (2006), and Coudert and Mignon (2013) obtain estimates of Fama’s β (using the USA as the home country) that are predominantly positive when ID is positive, and predominantly negative when ID is negative. Second, Clarida and Taylor (1997) and Clarida et al. (2003) find that the term structure of the forward premium has predictive power with respect to future changes in the exchange rate. Third, Brunnermeier and Pederson (2009), Clarida et al. (2009), Moore and Roche (2012), Menkhoff et al. (2012), and Coudert and Mignon (2013) find a relationship between estimates of β and either monetary or fx market volatility. More precisely, they find that estimates of β tend to be positive when the variance is high for: (a) the spot rate; (b) excess returns from carry-trade; and/or (c) the monetary growth rate. Conversely, estimates of β are negative during more tranquil periods. Existing hypotheses to explain these puzzles are given first. Then an attempt is made to explain them via Synthesis Model II.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information