Search results

The purpose of this paper is to study if actively managed exchange-traded funds (AMETFs) and actively managed mutual funds (AMMFs) are complements or substitutes. It also tests if there are tax or liquidity clientele effects.

The study investigates the relation between individual AMMF flows and aggregate AMETF flows as well as individual AMETF flows and aggregate AMMF flows. A 2013 tax change is used to analyze if a tax clientele effect exists between the AMETF and AMMF markets. The authors use differences in investor groups for institutional vs retail fund share classes to test for liquidity clientele effects.

The authors find that equity and mixed AMETFs and AMMFs are substitutes, although not perfect substitutes. Taxation-related differences between the two products create a clientele effect for fixed income and mixed funds where tax-sensitive investors are more likely to substitute AMETFs for AMMFs surrounding tax increases. There is weak evidence that institutional investors may prefer AMETFs more than retail investors because of their enhanced liquidity.

This is the first study to investigate the flow relation between AMETFs and AMMFs. The fast-paced growth of the AMETF area coupled with the substitutability between the two products and tax advantages of AMETFs has the capability to gain significant market share from AMMFs in the future.

The positive illiquidity–return relationship (so-called liquidity premium) is a well-established pattern in international developed stock markets. The magnitude of liquidity premium should increase with market illiquidity. Existing studies, however, do not confirm this conjecture with regard to frontier markets. This may result from applying different approaches to the investors' holding period. The paper aims to identify the role of the holding period in shaping the illiquidity–return relationship in emerging and frontier stock markets, which are arguably considered illiquid.

The authors utilise the data on stocks listed on fourteen exchanges in Central and Eastern Europe. The authors regress stock returns on liquidity measures variously transformed to reflect the clientele effect in a liquidity–return relationship.

The authors show that the investors' holding period moderates the illiquidity–return relationship in CEE markets and also show that the liquidity premium in these markets is statistically and economically relevant.

The findings may be of great interest to investors, companies and regulators. Investors and companies should take liquidity into account when making decisions; regulators should employ liquidity-enhancing actions to decrease companies' cost of capital and expand firms' investment opportunities, which will improve growth perspectives for the entire economy.

These findings enrich the understanding of the role that the investors' holding period plays in the illiquidity–return relationship in CEE markets. To the best knowledge, this is the first study which investigates the effect of holding period on liquidity premium in emerging and frontier markets.

The dividend month premium is the phenomenon that firms have abnormal returns in predicted dividend month. This study aims to examine the dividend month premium in the Korean stock market, using common stocks listed on the KOSPI and KOSDAQ from January 1999 to December 2016. Abnormal returns are estimated using the following asset price models: capital asset pricing model, Fama–French three-factor model and the Fama–French–Carhart four-factor model. This study finds positive abnormal returns in predicted dividend months, and even for the within-firm portfolio that buys stocks in the predicted dividend months and sells the same stocks in other months. The price impact and the subsequent reversals are greater with lower liquidity and higher dividend yield, implying that the price pressure from dividend-seeking investors affects this dividend month premium. In addition, the anomalies with the pre-declaration stock are smaller than the post-declaration stock, suggesting the necessity to improve the cash dividend policy of post-declaration for market efficiency.

The purpose of this study is to comparatively analyze the effect of dividend policy on shareholders’ wealth in Shariah-compliant (SC) and noncompliant (NC) nonfinancial firms in Pakistan.

All the nonfinancial firms listed on the Pakistan stock exchange have been taken as a sample for 2016–2021. The Karachi Meezan index screening criteria were applied to screen SC firms. Based on the BPLM and Hausman test results, the authors used the fixed-effect and pooled OLS model for SC and NC firms, respectively. The F-test was used to compare the effect of each dividend policy variable on shareholders’ wealth for both firm types.

The findings reveal that the dividend policy does affect the shareholders’ wealth in both firm types. Dividend per share (DPS), dividend yield (DY) and earnings per share significantly affect the shareholders’ wealth in SC firms. For NC firms, the dividend payout, DPS and DY are critical. Moreover, the F-test results show that the DPS, DY and leverage effect on the shareholders’ wealth significantly differ for both firm types.

This study fills the research gap in the Pakistani context specifically as well as globally by providing important insights into the relationship between a firm’s dividend policy and shareholders’ wealth for SC and NC firms. In addition, this study comprehensively compares the results for both firm types, which is also lacking in the existing literature. Because this study is based in Pakistan, the generalizability of the results would be limited.

The findings of this study are helpful for the management of SC and NC firms in devising their dividend policies that can maximize their shareholders’ wealth. This study also provides guidance and knowledge to investors in choosing companies for their investments that can maximize their wealth.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that analyzes the relationship between dividend policy and shareholders’ wealth for SC firms in Pakistan. It is also the first study that comprehensively compares the dividend policy relationship with shareholders’ wealth for SC and NC firms. In addition, using the F-test for joint hypotheses to compare the specific effect of each dividend policy variable is a methodological contribution of the study.

This paper examines the impact of dividend policy on stock market liquidity, and whether the dividend payouts has an asymmetric effect on stock liquidity.

A multivariate panel-data regression analysis is conducted for a sample of the largest 411 nonfinancial US firms. Three main hypothesis are tested: (1) whether dividend payouts impact affect stock liquidity, (2) whether low and high dividend payments can asymmetrically effect on stock liquidity and (3) whether the presence of the GFC has an impact the relationship between dividend payments and stock liquidity.

The study finds that dividend policy is adversely associated with stock liquidity. This supports the prediction of the liquidity-dividend hypothesis. The authors also report that stock liquidity asymmetrically responds to changes in dividend payouts, confirming the prediction of the dividend-signaling approach. More specifically, higher dividend payments decrease stock liquidity by a lower magnitude than the increase in stock liquidity resulting from lower dividend payments. Finally, the presence of the GFC weakened the relationship between dividend payments and stock liquidity.

The paper can help in performing future research by using different dataset covering the COVID-19 crisis.

The paper allows market participants to better understand the impact of dividend policy and its asymmetric effects on stock liquidity. The authors’ analyses can direct investors and regulators to adopt new supervisory devices to create an appropriate level of dividend payouts that helps to effectively support the level of stock liquidity.

The paper intends to support the business community and to make strong contributions to the economic development and the welfare of the community.

The originality comes from its new evidence as it can help in assessing the importance of dividend policy and its asymmetric impact on stock liquidity in the full sample and during the GFC. The paper is helpful in performing future analyses using a new sample period for another set of data as well as accounting for COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

This study investigates the ex-dividend day stock prices of the firms listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE) where the tax rate is higher on dividends than on capital gains. The results help to explain what impact taxes have on the ex-day stock prices behavior in an emerging market.

To examine the tax effect on the ex-day stock prices behavior, this study considers after-tax dividends and computes the raw price ratio, market-adjusted price ratio, raw price drop, market-adjusted price drop. The market-adjusted ex-dividend day abnormal returns and relative trading volume are also examined to determine the direction of investor trading around the ex-day.

The main hypotheses examine whether the mean (median) differs from its theoretical value by using a t-test and nonparametric sign-rank test. The findings suggest that the drop of stock prices on the ex-day on the DSE is not due to taxes or transaction costs but to valuation assumptions made by investors in determining the equilibrium stock price.

Findings of this study will be useful for investors and traders in their valuation assumption to trade around the ex-dividend day.

Market participant’s preference of dividends, and exempted tax and its ultimate contribution to the equity value explain the ex-day stock prices behavior in the Dhaka Stock Exchange.

In mid-1992, Christine Olsen, the chief financial officer (CFO) of this large CAD/CAM equipment manufacturer, must decide on the magnitude of the firm's dividend payout. A subsidiary question is whether the firm should embark on a campaign of corporate-image advertising and change its corporate name to reflect its new outlook. The case serves as an omnibus review of the many practical aspects of the dividend decision, including (1) signaling effects, (2) clientele effects, and (3) finance and investment implications of increasing dividend payout.

This paper aims to analyze the stock price reaction because of dividend reduction (DR) announcements in the Indian equity market, controlling for share repurchases.

The sample comprises National Stock Exchange (NSE) 500 companies listed in the NSE Ltd. covering a time span from year 2009 to 2019. Using the event study methodology, the authors measure the impact of DR announcements on security prices around the event day. The authors also examine the price response to DRs at the interim stage versus the final stage and identify the factors that drive the decision to reduce dividends at the interim level versus final level.

The authors find that overall DR announcements negatively impact abnormal returns. Firms that experience stronger adverse price reaction following DR announcements resort to share repurchase in the same year to boost stock prices. The authors find that interim DRs create more negative price reactions than final DRs. Finally, firms experiencing lower levels of prior year earnings, firms with smaller sizes and overvalued firms tend to reduce dividends at the interim level instead of postponing the reduction to the final level.

This paper examines stock price reaction because of DR announcements of Indian firms. The sample comprises firms that reduce dividends with contemporaneous share repurchases as well as firms that reduce dividends without contemporaneous repurchase activity. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, studies on substitution effect of dividends with buyback in the context of Indian equity market are rare. Further, investigating the difference in stock price movement because of DRs at the interim level versus the final level is the unique contribution of this paper.

As a financial policy, dividend policy significantly affects firm value. This chapter analyzes how stock prices react to dividend decisions. First, a dividend payment is an extraction of value; therefore, stock price theoretically drops by the dividend amount on the ex-dividend day. In practice, the price drop and the dividend magnitude are not equal because of tax clientele, short-term trading, and market microstructure. Investors are indifferent in trading stocks before and after stocks go ex-dividend if they obtain equal marginal benefits from the two trading times. The difference in tax rates on dividends and capital gains leads to the gap between the price drop and the dividend amount. Moreover, if transaction costs are considerable, investors have high incentives to short-sell stocks until they cannot obtain more profits. The final outcome of this short-term trading is the difference between the price drop and the dividend amount. Furthermore, market microstructure factors such as limit orders, bid-ask spread, and price discreteness also create this gap. Second, dividend announcements convey valuable information to outsiders. When firms announce increases (decreases) in dividends, their stock prices tend to increase (decrease). Third, dividend policy is negatively related to stock price volatility. This negative relationship is explained by duration effect, rate of return effect, arbitrage realization effect, and information effect. Empirical evidence for this relationship is found in many countries. Finally, dividend smoothing is also considered as a signal about firms' future earnings. Consequently, firms with stable dividends have higher market value. In other words, dividend stability has a positive effect on stock prices.

Are franking credit balances priced? This paper aims to investigate the valuation of franking credit balances via a determinant analysis and value relevance analysis.

The determinant analysis examines the factors that contribute to the increasing cumulative level of franking credit balances. Value relevance studies explore whether franking credit balances are priced in the market.

The results provide strong evidence of a size effect that the level of franking credit balances increases with firm size and weak evidence of an international focus effect that the level of franking credit balances increases with international ownership. They also find an individual dividend clientele effect that the level of franking credit balances decreases with individual ownership. They find significant evidence that franking credit balances are priced in the market. One dollar of franking credit is worth 1.4 dollars in firm value. That franking balances are capitalized at more than their face value suggests that franking credits signal firms' future dividend policy. They also find that the market valuation of franking balances increases with firm size but decreases with international focus.

This study provides direct evidence that franking credit balances are capitalized into equity prices. In the determinant analysis, this paper improves Heaney's (2009) model by using the percentage of international ownership as the proxy of international focus, thus addressing the limitation of his measure. In the value relevance tests, the study uses a modified model that includes log-transformation to reduce the skewness of variables based on Tanza's (2014) value relevance model. Moreover, the study suggests that the market valuation of franking credit balances increases with firm size, which contradicts Heaney's (2009) findings.