Search results

There is empirical evidence that a firm's addition to S&P 500 results in significant abnormal returns and an increase in a stock's liquidity. The purpose of this paper is to argue that changes in the information environment after the year 2000 due to the implementation of Regulation Fair Disclosure (FD), decimalization and Sarbanes Oxley Act, should result in reduced abnormal returns in the post‐2000 period.

The authors compare the abnormal returns and liquidity changes around the announcement day of firm's addition to S&P 500 in the pre‐ and post‐2000 periods. Univariate and multivariate tests are used to control for factors that research shows affect the abnormal returns around additions to S&P 500.

It is found that the reduction in informational asymmetry in the post‐2000 period has resulted in a significant decrease in the abnormal return on the announcement day of additions to S&P 500 index and changes in the stock's liquidity in the post announcement period are now marginal.

Existing literature related to changes in the abnormal returns around additions to S&P 500 does not account for changes in the information environment in the two sub periods, pre‐ and post‐2000. The results may have implications for studies related to additions to S&P 500 where the sample period spans over the two sub periods.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the value investors place on S&P index additions relative to uncertainty surrounding the firm and the market. Investors look for reassuring signals or tell-tale signs around uncertainty.

Variation in the market response to announcements of S&P additions to the 400, 500 and 600 indices is examined against measures of risk factors. Internal risk factors include firm size relative to the index, total firm risk and liquidity, and whether the firm is a brand new index entrant. External risk factors related to market uncertainty are measured by the Chicago Board of Exchange volatility index.

Firms with lower market capitalization relative to the index, higher total risk, lower trading volume and first-time entrants to any S&P index elicit a positive market reaction compared to firms with less pricing uncertainty. In times of increased market uncertainty, investors tend to place more value on signals from respected institutions such as S&P, and riskier firms benefit more from inclusion in the S&P index. Overall, this study finds that the market overreaction is explained by the degree of uncertainty surrounding the added firms, as well as by the degree of market uncertainty at the time of the announcement.

The findings of this study suggest that investors interpret the prospect of S&P index addition as an opportunity for firms to reduce uncertainty surrounding them, and thus partially hedge their exposure to market uncertainty by joining an index tracked by dozens of index funds. The value of such a hedging strategy rises for riskier firms during market turbulence.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the shocks to firm's beta around the event of addition or deletion from the S&P 500 index.

The total derivative of beta and Campbell and Vuolteenaho decomposition of beta methodologies are used, on monthly and daily basis, to examine the behavior of beta around the event.

Results show a significant increase in correlations of the event firms' returns and the market proxy returns and cash‐flow betas, and decrease in discount‐rate betas for added firms and the opposite effects for deleted firms. Robustness tests indicate that the total derivative changes effects are typical for the event firms industry but that the cash‐flow correlation changes are specific to the firm. These findings suggest that addition or deletion from the S&P 500 index is not an information free event.

The Campbell and Vuolteenaho methodology has limitations – it is conditional on the selection of state variables. In future research it would be beneficial to use different state variables in the beta decomposition framework. Another relevant question for a future research is: what are the effects of the event on the Fama‐French factor model loadings?

The paper's findings contribute to the ongoing debate in the literature of the information hypothesis for addition or deletion from the S&P 500 index.

When a stock is added into the S&P 500 Index, it in effect becomes cross-listed in the Index derivative markets. When index-based trading strategies such as index arbitrage are executed, the component stocks are directly affected by such trading. We find increased volatility of daily returns, plus increased trading volume for the underlying stocks. Utilizing a list of S&P 500 Index composition changes over the period September 1976 to December 2005, we study the market-adjusted volume turnover and return variance of the stocks added to and deleted from the Index. The results indicate that after the introduction of the S&P 500 Index futures and options contracts, stocks added to the S&P 500 experience statistically significant increase in both trading volume and return volatility. Both daily and monthly return variances increase following index inclusion. When stocks are removed from the index, though, neither volatility of returns nor trading volume experiences any significant change. So, we have new evidence showing that Index inclusion changes a firm's return volatility, and supporting the destabilization hypothesis.

The purpose of this paper is to directly examine the information hypothesis of S&P 500 index inclusion announcements by investigating the degree to which information beyond Standard & Poor's eight stated criteria enters the inclusion decision.

Isolating a sample of S&P 500 additions and their eligible candidates during 1987‐2004, this paper employs logistic analysis that identifies factors ex post beyond the stated criteria that help distinguish the type of information that influences the final selection decision and that is arguably priced at the inclusion announcements.

The evidence indicates that, when choosing among new S&P 500 candidates, the S&P's committee relies primarily on publicly available information related to enterprise risk and historical performance. Material, private insight into future value‐relevant information plays at most a small part in the selection.

The results suggest that index additions convey limited new information about added firms. Studies analysing index additions should start with the presumption that index inclusion announcements are information‐free events, and focus on the consequences of index inclusions such as liquidity, awareness or arbitrage risk, in their relation to index premia.

The results indicate that the previous evidence supporting the information hypothesis using the S&P 500 inclusions is not compelling.

The purpose of this paper is to propose two hybrid forecasting models which integrate available ones. A hybrid contaminated normal distribution (CND) model accurately reflects the non‐normal features of monthly S&P 500 index returns, and a hybrid GARCH model captures a serial correlation with respect to volatility. The hybrid GARCH model potentially enables financial institutions to evaluate long‐term investment risks in the S&P 500 index more accurately than current models.

The probability distribution of an expected investment outcome is generated with a Monte Carlo simulation. A taller peak and fatter tails (kurtosis), which the probability distribution of monthly S&P 500 index returns contains, is produced by integrating a CND model and a bootstrapping model. The serial correlation of volatilities is simulated by applying a GARCH model.

The hybrid CND model can simulate the non‐normality of monthly S&P 500 index returns, while avoiding the influence of discrete observations. The hybrid GARCH model, by contrast, can simulate the serial correlation of S&P 500 index volatilities, while generating fatter tails. Long‐term investment risks in the S&P 500 index are affected by the serial correlation of volatilities, not the non‐normality of returns.

The hybrid models are applied only to the S&P 500 index. Cross‐sectional correlations among different asset groups are not examined.

The proposed hybrid models are unique because they combine available ones with a decision tree algorithm. In addition, the paper clearly explains the strengths and weaknesses of existing forecasting models.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the information content in the Standard & Poor (S&P) 500 index revision and its impact on the corporate bonds and earnings of the firms whose stocks are added to or deleted from the index.

The paper uses panel regressions on a 13-year sample of the companies added and deleted from the S&P 500 index.

The regression results on the bond yields and earnings show that analysts and investors draw positive (negative) information from Index additions (deletions) and adjust their expectations of the firm performance as well as the required rates of return on corporate bonds after index revisions.

The paper suggests that deletions from the Index have significantly negative impacts on corporate bonds and earnings performance of deleted firms while additions to the index do not have significant impacts on the bonds or realized earnings of added firms.

This paper uses corporate bonds and earnings to test competing hypotheses proposed to explain the excess stock returns of index revision, including information content hypothesis and liquidity hypothesis. The results are consistent with the information content hypothesis and do not support the liquidity hypothesis.

This study aims to explore information asymmetry (IA) (as measured by the adverse selection component of the bid-ask spread) around S&P 500 revisions.

The authors use adverse selection cost of trading measures to examine the effects of S&P 500 index composition changes on the trading environment from 2001 to 2010.

The authors find that the adverse selection cost of trading significantly decreases post-addition and increases post-deletion. However, the intraday price dynamics of additions to the index seem to be distinct from those of deletions from the index. The event period cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) for additions are significantly associated with the change in the adverse selection cost of trading. However, this association is non-significant for deletions. The CARs for deletion events are found to be significantly associated with the change in realized spreads. Realized spreads are a measure of revenue earned by liquidity providers in the market.

This study helps better understand the dynamics of two types of IA – one from a firm to investor and the other between investors – and presents evidence of the role of adverse selection in index changes. By doing so, it helps better understand the mechanism driving price formation post-addition to and deletion from an index.

Prior research on additions to the S & P 500 and the smaller MidCap 400 and SmallCap 600 indexes reach different conclusions regarding the key variables that explain the cross-section of announcement period abnormal returns. Most notable in this regard is that liquidity measures, long thought to be of importance, do not appear to explain abnormal returns of the S & P 500 when other factors are controlled for. By contrast, they do appear to matter for additions to the smaller stock indexes. To explore this difference, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the abnormal returns upon announcement that a stock will be added to the Nasdaq-100 Index in a cross-sectional manner, controlling for several possible alternative factors.

This paper analyzes abnormal returns upon announcement that a stock will be added to the Nasdaq-100 Index. The authors consider several possible sources of the positive price effects in a multivariate setting that controls simultaneously for measures of liquidity, arbitrage risk, operating performance and investor interest and awareness. The authors then analyze both trading volume and the bid-ask spreads. The authors finally examine analyst and investor interest, focussing on changes in analyst coverage.

The authors find that only liquidity variables are significant, but that factors representing feedback effects on the firm’s operations and level of managerial effort are not. The authors find that the average bid/ask spreads of stocks added to the Nasdaq-100 index are lower after the addition. The authors also find that the number of analysts following a stock increases significantly after addition, verifying increased analyst interest. Both forms of evidence are consistent with the hypothesis that the additions are associated with enhanced liquidity for the stocks.

The authors conclude that what does happen to a Nasdaq stock when it is announced that it will be added to the Nasdaq-100 Index is that more analysts are drawn to it, and its market liquidity is enhanced. The authors conclude that what does not happen is that there is no evidence of significant effects of enhanced managerial effort or operating performance associated with the inclusion. This difference is noteworthy because it suggests that a certification effect of additions to the S & P indexes associated with S & P’s selection process are unique to it and do not apply to the Nasdaq-100 Index additions based on market cap alone. The results provide indirect evidence on the existence and significance of the certification effect associated with additions to the S & P indexes.

The purpose of this study is to compare market reactions to the change in the demand by index funds between large and small company stocks by examining the transition of the S&P 500, S&P 400 MidCap and S&P 600 SmallCap indexes from market capitalization to free-float weighting. This unique information-free event allows not only avoiding confounding information signaling and investor awareness effects but also comparing the effect of the decrease in demand on stocks of different sizes.

This study uses the event study methodology to calculate abnormal returns and trading volume around the full-float adjustment day. It also tests for significant changes in institutional ownership and liquidity. Multivariate regressions are used to examine the relation of liquidity changes and price elasticity of demand to the cumulative abnormal returns around the full-float adjustment day.

This study finds significant decreases in stock price accompanied with significant increases in trading volume on the full-float adjustment day, and significant gains in quasi-indexer institutional ownership and liquidity. The main finding is that cumulative abnormal returns around the event period are related to changes in the number of quasi-indexer and transient institutional shareholders, not to changes in liquidity or price elasticity of demand.

This study provides the first comprehensive comparison analysis of stock market reactions to the decline in demand between large and small company stocks. As an important implication for future studies of the index effect, changes in institutional ownership should be considered in the analysis.