An extensive empirical literature in finance has documented not only the pr
esence of anomalies in the Black-Scholes model, but also the term structure
s of these anomalies (for instance, the behavior of the volatility smile or
of unconditional returns at different maturities). Theoretical efforts in
the literature at addressing these anomalies have largely focused on two ex
tensions of the Black-Scholes model: introducing jumps into the return proc
ess, and allowing volatility to be stochastic. We employ commonly used vers
ions of these two classes of models to examine the extent to which the mode
ls are theoretically capable of resolving the observed anomalies. We find t
hat each model exhibits some term structure patterns that are fundamentally
inconsistent with those observed in the data. As a consequence, neither cl
ass of models constitutes an adequate explanation of the empirical evidence
, although stochastic volatility models fare somewhat better than jumps.