Search results

The paper analyzes downside and upside risk spillovers between stock markets of G7 countries and China before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

By using VAR-ADCC models and conditional value at risk (CoVaR) techniques, downside and upside risk spillovers between stock markets of G7 countries and China are analyzed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The results suggested existence of a significant and asymmetrical two-way risk transmission between majority of pair markets, but the degree of asymmetry differs according to the use of the entire cumulative distributions or distribution tails. Downside and upside risk spillovers are significantly larger before the COVID-19 pandemic in all cases except between CAC 40/DAX and S&P/SSE pairs.

The paper used CoVaR and delta-CoVaR to investigate the downside and upside spillovers between stock markets of G7 countries and China before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper aims to identify and examine the determinants of downside systematic risk in Australian listed property trusts (LPTs).

Capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and lower partial moment‐CAPM (LPM‐CAPM) are employed to compute both systematic risk and downside systematic risk. The methodology of Patel and Olsen and Chaudhry et al. is adopted to examine the determinants of systematic risk and downside systematic risk.

The results confirm that systematic risk and downside systematic risk can be individually identified. There is little evidence to support the existence of linkages between systematic risk in Australian LPTs and financial/management structure determinants. On the other hand, downside systematic risk is directly related to the leverage/management structure of a LPT. The results are also robust after controlling for the LPTs' investment characteristics and varying target rates of return.

Investors and real estate analysts should conscious with the higher returns from high leverage and internally managed LPTs. Although there is no evidence that these higher returns are related to higher systematic risk, there could be the compensation for higher downside systematic risk.

This study provides invaluable insights into the management of real estate risk in Australian LPTs with implications for REITs in other countries. Unlike previous studies of systematic risk in REITs or LPTs, this is the first study to assess downside systematic risk and explore the determinants of downside systematic risk in LPTs.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how multinationality affects multinational companies’ (MNCs) downside risk and the moderate effects of ownership structure in the setting of emerging markets based on Chinese publicly traded manufacturing MNCs.

The author derives hypotheses based on real options theory and agency theory, and tests hypotheses by using Tobit model and a unique data set of Chinese A-shared publicly traded manufacturing MNCs in the period of 2010–2016.

The empirical results suggest that multinationality is positively related to downside risk and this effect is subjected to ownership structure for firms in emerging markets. In particular, multinationality of MNCs with a high level of ownership concentration, managerial ownership and institutional ownership is more likely to reduce downside risk.

The main conclusion of this paper highlights the importance of ownership structure of MNCs in explaining the real options value of multinationality, and conveys to owners of MNCs in China and other emerging markets the need to strengthen firms’ governance if they want to maximize the benefits of multinational operations.

This study extends existing studies by taking ownership structure into consideration and highlighting the importance of agency problem in the examination of multinationality and downside risk, which provides a potential explanation for previous mixed evidence. This study also provides new evidence for the relationship between multinationality and downside risk by using a unique sample from China, an emerging market country.

The beta coefficient used for the cost of equity calculation is at the heart of the valuation process. This study conducts comparative analyses of the classical capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and downside CAPM risk parameters to gain further insight into which risk parameter leads to better performing risk measures at explaining stock returns.

The study conducts a comparative analysis of 16 risk measures at explaining the stock returns of 4531 companies of 20 developed and 25 emerging market index for 2000–2018. The analyses are conducted using both the global and local indices and both USD and local currency returns. Calculated risk measures are analyzed in a panel data setup using a univariate model. Results are investigated in country-specific and model-specific subsets.

The results show that (1) downside betas are better than CAPM betas at explaining the stock returns, (2) both risk measure groups perform better for emerging markets, (3) global downside beta model performs better than global beta model, implying the existence of the contagion effect, (4) high significance levels of total risk and unsystematic risk measures further support the shortfall of CAPM betas and (5) higher correlation of markets after negative shocks such as pandemics puts global CAPM based downside beta to a more reliable position.

The data are limited to the index securities as beta could be time varying.

Results overall provide insight into the cost of equity calculation and emerging market assets valuation.

The framework and methodology enable us to compare and contrast CAPM and downside-CAPM risk measures at the firm level, at the global/local level and in terms of the level of market development.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new and improved version of arbitrage pricing theory (APT), namely, downside APT (D-APT) using the concepts of factors’ downside beta and semi-variance.

This study includes 163 stocks traded on the Malaysian stock market and uses eight macroeconomic variables as the dependent and independent variables to investigate the relationship between the adjusted returns and the downside factors’ betas over the whole period 1990-2010, and sub-periods 1990-1998 and 1999-2010. It proposes a new version of the APT, namely, the D-APT to replace two deficient measures of factor's beta and variance with more efficient measures of factors’ downside betas and semi-variance to improve and dispel the APT deficiency.

The paper finds that the pricing restrictions of the D-APT, in the context of an unrestricted linear factor model, cannot be rejected over the sample period. This means that all of the identified factors are able to price stock returns in the D-APT model. The robustness control model supports the results reported for the D-APT as well. In addition, all of the empirical tests provide support the D-APT as a new asset pricing model, especially during a crisis.

It may be worthwhile explaining the autocorrelation limitation between variables when applying the D-APT.

The framework can be useful to investors, portfolio managers, and economists in predicting expected stock returns driven by macroeconomic and financial variables. Moreover, the results are important to corporate managers who undertake the cost of capital computations, fund managers who make investment decisions and, investors who assess the performance of managed funds.

This paper is the first study to apply the concepts of semi-variance and downside beta in the conventional APT model to propose a new model, namely, the D-APT.

The purpose of this paper is to provide the modified measures of risk-adjusted performance evaluation of Malaysian mutual funds using the downside risk concepts, and promote the ability of managers and investors in making logical decisions under the market asymmetry condition.

This study focusses on the performance evaluation of Malaysian mutual funds using eight modified measures of Sharpe, Treynor, M2, Jensen’s α, information ratio (IR), MSR, SPI, and leverage factor. These modified measures use the downside systematic risk and semi-standard deviation instead of systematic risk and conventional standard deviation, respectively, to evaluate the performance of Malaysian mutual funds over the period 2000-2011.

The results indicate that the conventional measures of performance evaluation do not have a crucial influence on the relative evaluation of mutual funds. Three modified measures of Sharpe, Treynor, and M2 have a high correlation with the conventional Sharpe measure and can be used instead of the conventional Sharpe measure. Since, two modified measures of Treynor and M2 display a high rank correlation coefficient with the conventional Treynor measure, they can be replaced with this traditional measure. In addition, two modified IR and MSR measures along with the modified SPI and conventional SPI show very high rank correlation coefficients in relation to each other. The results also document a modified leverage factor less than one for all funds. It can be concluded that the strategy of un-levering the investor’s holding must be followed.

The empirical evidence of this study can be utilized as inputs in the process of decision-making by different types of investors who are interested in participating especially in Malaysian stock market and generally in global stock market under the market asymmetry condition.

The contribution of this study is to modify five measures of M2, IR, MSR, FPI, and leverage factor in the downside risk framework which is a work on a rather under-researched area.

This paper aims to extend the understanding of how real options reasoning (ROR) is associated with downside risk and how a firm’s portfolio (explore and exploit) of investment activities affects managers’ ability to effectively apply ROR in relation to downside risk.

The survey method is used. It is applied to a population of Danish firms, which in 2018 had more than 100 employees. The chief financial officer was the target respondent.

This study finds that a higher level of ROR is associated with lower levels of downside risk. ROR’s association with lower levels of the downside risk is also moderated by the level of relative exploration orientation in a negative direction.

The field of ROR research on downside risk and portfolio subadditivity has been dominated by research focused on multinationality. This paper extends extant literature on ROR by studying ROR as a multidimensional construct of firm action, which is associated with lower levels of downside risk, also when studied outside of a multinationality setting. This is the case when ROR is implemented as a complete system. This paper also applies a framework of exploitation and exploration to show that findings on subadditivity in options portfolios caused by asset correlations extend outside the scope of multinationality and into one of product/service innovation.

This paper aims to investigate patterns in UK stock returns related to downside risk, with particular focus on stock returns during financial crises.

First, stocks are sorted into five quintile portfolios based on the relevant beta values (classic beta, downside beta and upside beta, calculated by the moving window approach). Second, patterns of portfolio returns are examined during various sub-periods. Finally, predictive powers of beta and downside beta are examined.

The downside risk is observed to have a significant positive impact on contemporaneous stock returns and a negative impact on future returns in general. In contrast, an inverse relationship between risk and return is observed when stocks are sorted by beta, contrary to the classic literature. UK stock returns exhibit clear time sensitivity, especially during financial crises.

This paper focuses on the impact of the downside risk on UK stock returns, assessed via a comprehensive sub-period analysis. This paper fills the gap in the existing literature, in which very few studies examine the time sensitivity in relation to the downside risk and the risk-return anomaly in the UK stock market using a long sample period.

This study aims to comparatively analyze the systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk exposure of both Islamic and conventional funds in Pakistan to see which of the funds has higher risk exposure.

The study analyzes different types of risks involved in both Islamic and conventional funds for the period from 2009 to 2016 by using different risk measures. For systematic and idiosyncratic risk single factor CAPM and multifactor models such as Fama French three factors model and Carhart four factors model are used. For downside risk analysis different measures such as downside beta, relative beta, value at risk and expected short fall are used.

The study finds that Islamic funds have lower risk exposure (including total, systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk) compared with their conventional counterparts in most of the sample years, and hence, making them appear more attractive for investment especially for Sharīʿah-compliant investors preferring low risk preferences.

As this study shows, Islamic mutual funds exhibit lower risk exposure than their conventional counterparts so investors with lower risk preferences can invest in these kinds of funds. In this way, this research provides the input to the individual investors (especially Sharīʿah-compliant investors who want to avoid interest based investment) to help them with their investment decisions as they can make a more diversified portfolio by considering Islamic funds as a mean for reducing the risk exposure.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first attempt at world level in looking at the comparative risk analysis of various types of the risks as follows: systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk, for both Islamic and conventional funds, and thus, provides significant contribution in the literature of mutual funds.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of corporate governance, investor sentiment and financial liberalization on downside systematic risk and the interplay of socio-political turbulence on this relationship through static and dynamic panel estimation models.

The evidence is based on a sample of 230 publicly listed non-financial firms from Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) over the period 2008–2018. Furthermore, this study analyzes the data through Blundell and Bond (1998) technique in the full sample as well sub-samples (big and small firms).

The authors document that corporate governance mechanism reduces the downside risk, whereas investor sentiment and financial liberalization increase the investors’ exposure toward downside risk. Particularly, the results provide some new insights that the socio-political turbulence as a moderator weakens the impact of corporate governance and strengthens the effect of investor sentiment and financial liberalization on downside risk. Consistent with prior studies, the analysis of sub-samples reveals some statistical variations in large and small-size sampled firms. Theoretically, the findings mainly support agency theory, noise trader theory and the Keynesians hypothesis.

Stock market volatility has become a prime area of concern for investors, policymakers and regulators in emerging economies. Primarily, the existence of market volatility is attributed to weak governance, irrational behavior of market participants, the liberation of financial policies and sociopolitical turbulence. Therefore, the present study provides simultaneous empirical evidence to determine whether corporate governance, investor sentiment and financial liberalization hinder or spur downside risk in an emerging economy. Furthermore, the work relates to a small number of studies that examine the role of socio-political turbulence as a moderator on the relationship of corporate governance, investor sentiment and financial liberalization with downside systematic risk.