Search results

Aims to investigate whether the level and volatility of interest rates affect the excess returns of major Asian listed property markets within a time‐varying risk framework.

A three‐factor model is employed with excess return volatility, interest rate level and interest rate volatility as its factors. The generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedasticity in the mean (GARCH‐M) analyzes are undertaken on monthly excess returns of property stock indexes for the period 1987‐2003.

Property stocks are generally sensitive to changes in the long‐term and short‐term interest rates and to a lesser extent, their volatility. Moreover, there are disparities in the magnitude as well as direction of sensitivities in interest rate level and volatility across the listed property markets and under different market conditions. Overall, results indicate changes in the ARCH parameter, risk premia, volatility persistence and interest rate level and volatility effects before and after the 1997 Asian financial crisis. However, these noted changes are not uniform and depend on the individual listed property markets.

The findings enhance investors' understanding in financial asset pricing and complement existing evidence in international real estate. With the increasing significance of property stocks as real estate investment vehicles for international investors to gain property exposure in Asia and internationally, the paper is timely and provides the basis for more advanced research in international real estate investment strategies and capital asset pricing.

The authors provide a comparative analysis between emerging and developed financial markets in terms of the effects of political risks on stock market returns and volatility. The authors also examine whether this impact depends on the nature of political risks. Therefore, this study aims to detect which financial markets are the most profitable and the riskiest in terms of political risks.

The authors investigate the impact of political risks on the excess stock market return and its conditional volatility using the generalized ARCH model for a sample of 46 developed and emerging markets over a period ranging from 1995 to 2019. In order to test how the nature of political risks affects equity excess returns and volatility differently in different markets, the authors employ (1) a composite political risk score, (2) the four subgroups of political risks as defined by Bekaert et al. (2005, 2014) and (3) the individual dimensions of political risks.

The findings indicate that the composite political risk is priced into both stock markets. The effect of political risks is positive for excess returns and negative for volatility. The authors show that the political risk leads to more volatility in developed markets. Nevertheless, the effect of individual components varies according to the market category.

The authors provide a framework for predicting market returns and volatility using changes in the political risk of the country. The findings help investors make investment decisions based on the political decisions of governments. In other words, investors should consider political uncertainty when determining their expected earnings.

The authors engage monthly panel data methodology in terms of the political risk stock market relationship. In addition, the authors consider recent and very long data covering the period 1995–2019. Furthermore, this study combines three various political risk measures, and both equity returns and volatility.

The purpose of this paper is to examine if the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) resulted in lower risk premium and return volatility in the US stock markets. The paper examines the two components of excess return (total risk premium) separately: the amount of volatility (risk) and the unit price of risk (risk premium).

The authors use a Component Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity approach to estimate the permanent and transitory component of share price volatility. The authors then use the predicted volatility to measure the unit price of risk and its changes due to the enactment of the SOX Act.

The results regarding excess returns indicate that the implementation of SOX had a positive effect on the market. A positive effect means a steady decrease in required excess rates of returns due to the implementation of SOX. The years leading up to the implementation of SOX are characterized by significant sources of uncertainty. Around the implementation of SOX, the authors observe a long-term reduction in return volatility (risk), and a temporary reduction in the unit price of risk. Subsequent to the implementation, investors gained confidence in the effectiveness of internal controls over the financial reporting process, which helped in reducing the information risk and, therefore, the risk premium.

The authors find that total risk premium decreased over extended periods. The authors conclude that the enactment of SOX helped in reducing the uncertainty in the US capital market resulting in a reduction of total risk premiums and hence the cost of capital.

The results have implications for policy makers, investors and researchers in general and those in the US markets in particular. The results are important because it allows policy makers and regulators to improve on how they design and implement accounting, market and finance regulations and reforms.

The study shows how financial markets react to regulations and the authors also provide information on investors’ reaction as firms adjust to changing regulations. The results of the study allows regulators to potentially use a more refined or targeted approach when introducing new regulations. It also allows investors to make informed investment decisions as they relate to risk premium requirements, which in turn may allow investors to allocate capital more efficiently.

There are many studies concerning the enactment of SOX but few, if any, existing studies examine the original intent of SOX: to calm the US equity markets and restore market confidence from a return volatility perspective. The results have implications for policy makers, investors and researchers in general and those in the US markets in particular. The results are important because it allows policy makers and regulators to improve on how they design and implement accounting, market and finance regulations and reforms.

I survey applications of Markov switching models to the asset pricing and portfolio choice literatures. In particular, I discuss the potential that Markov switching models have to fit financial time series and at the same time provide powerful tools to test hypotheses formulated in the light of financial theories, and to generate positive economic value, as measured by risk-adjusted performances, in dynamic asset allocation applications. The chapter also reviews the role of Markov switching dynamics in modern asset pricing models in which the no-arbitrage principle is used to characterize the properties of the fundamental pricing measure in the presence of regimes.

Using a unique dataset of ownership structure for all stocks listed on the Stockholm Stock Exchange in Sweden, we examine different degrees of institutional holdings in Swedish firms during the bear market of 2000 to 2002. We find that examination by institutional investor domicile reveals that both Swedish and foreign institutions increase their equity holdings, although the increase by foreign institutions is proportionately higher, (individuals reduce their equity holdings). We find evidence that foreign and domestic institutional investors exhibit different preferences for excess returns and standard deviations in excess returns when we control for firm size; excess return is associated with changes in foreign institutional holdings while higher standard deviation in excess return is associated with the change in domestic institutional holdings. Both types of institutions are sensitive to liquidity and trading factors, causing portfolio realignment.

The purpose of this paper is to assess trading strategies adopted by each large trader group and examine their effects on the volatility in the interest rate futures markets.

The Grinblatt et al.'s (1995) measure of momentum strategy is used to estimate the degree momentum and contrarian strategies. Then, regression analysis is used to determine the effects of trading strategies on volatility.

Up until 2005, the trades by non-clearing member firms in the futures market were separated from institutional traders providing us the opportunity to study trading strategies adopted by large distinct trading groups and its effects on volatility in the futures markets. It is found that individual traders use momentum strategy, whereas market makers and institutional traders use contrarian strategy. Momentum strategy adopted by individual traders increases volatility whereas contrarian strategy dampens volatility. Moreover, it is found that institutional traders engage more actively in contrarian trading when individual traders cause excessive volatility. The two distinct trading groups were separately tracked prior to 2005 giving us a unique window to determine the effect of the traders that conduct momentum trading as opposed to the ones that are contrarian traders. After the reclassification, the institutional trading group exhibited weaker contrarian strategy which can be attributed to the inclusion of non-clearing firm traders.

This study documents the first empirical evidence that shows off-exchange futures trader group is not composed of only pure noise makers, but there are short-term forecasters in its group. The authors also show a unique finding that noises caused by off-exchange group is from momentum strategy that they use, whereas contrarian strategy is used by institutional trader lower volatility.

Recognising that different property sectors have distinct risk-return characteristics, this paper assesses whether changes in the level and volatility of short- and long-term interest rates differentially affected excess returns of sector-specific Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) in the Pacific Rim region between July 2006 and December 2018. The strategic property risk management implications for sector-specific REITs are also identified.

Daily excess returns between July 2006 and December 2018 are used to analyse the sensitivity in the level and volatility of interest rates for REITs among office, retail, industrial, residential and specialty REITs across the USA, Japan, Australia and Singapore. The generalised autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic in the mean (GARCH-M) methodology is employed to assess the linkage between interest rates and excess returns of sector-specific REITs.

Compared with diversified REITs, sector-specific REITs were less sensitive to short- and long-term interest rate changes across the USA, Japan, Australia and Singapore between July 2006 and December 2018. Of sector-specific REITs, retail and residential REITs were susceptible to interest rate movements over the full study period. On the other hand, office and specialty REITs were generally less sensitive to changes in the level and volatility of short- and long-term interest rate series across all markets in the Pacific Rim region. However, the interest rate sensitivity of industrial REITs was somewhat mixed. This sector was sensitive to interest rate movements, but no comparable evidence was found since the onset of GFC.

The insignificant exposure to interest rate risk of sector-specific REITs may imply that they have a stronger interest rate risk aversion and greater hedging benefits than their diversified counterparts, particularly for office and specialty REITs. The results support the existence of REIT specialisation value in the Pacific Rim region from the interest rate risk management perspective. This is particularly valuable to international property investors constructing and managing portfolios with REITs in the region. Property investors are advised to be aware of the disparities in the magnitude and direction of sensitivity to the interest rate level and volatility of REITs across different property sectors and various markets in the Pacific Rim region. This study is expected to enhance property investors' understanding of interest rate risk management for different property types of REITs in local, regional and international investment portfolios.

The study is the first to assess the interest rate sensitivity of REITs across different property sectors and various markets in the Pacific Rim region. More importantly, this is the first paper to offer empirical evidence on the existence of specialisation value in the Pacific Rim REIT markets from the aspect of interest rate sensitivity. This research may enhance property investors' understanding of the varying interest rate sensitivity of different property types of REITs across the USA, Japan, Australia and Singapore.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the conditions under which discount risk leads to closed‐end funds trading at a discount.

A model of investor portfolio choice is developed in which investors face proportional fees for holding managed funds but fixed transaction fees for purchasing other risky assets. The conditions under which investors will hold shares in closed‐end funds are derived.

It is shown that, with fixed transaction costs in the market for risky assets, investors with wealth below a certain threshold will hold pooled index funds that charge a proportional fee, rather than the market portfolio chosen by wealthier investors. If a portfolio of closed‐end index funds yields greater volatility of returns to investors than open‐end index funds (i.e. displays “excess volatility”), and charges the same fees, the closed‐end funds need to trade at a discount in equilibrium to attract buyers. The same applies to actively managed funds if higher fees fully reflect extra expected returns from the managers' skill.

A primary determinant of closed‐end fund discounts is discount volatility and co‐movement across funds.

Until now it has been argued that discount risk needs to be systematic (correlated with market returns) to be priced. The evidence that discount risk is systematic is weak. There is strong empirical evidence of excess volatility and co‐movement of discounts across closed‐end funds, which in our model are a sufficient condition for funds to trade at a discount, under plausible assumptions. This model thus provides a stronger argument that discount risk explains why discounts exist.

This study proposes a framework based on salience theory and shows that focusing on one type of risk (idiosyncratic or systemic) can explain overpricing of securities ex ante, and resales at low prices during crisis periods.

The author consider an overlapping generations (OLG) model where each generation lives for two periods and there is no population growth. Agents (investors) start their lives with an endowment W > 0 and have mean-variance utility. They invest their endowment when young and consume when old. Each period, the young investors optimally choose their portfolio from different risky assets acquired from the old generation, all assumed to be in fixed supply.

The author show that investor salience bias can explain excess volatility of asset prices and the resulting fire-sales in periods of financial turmoil. A change in salience – from one component (idiosyncratic) to the other (systemic) – will generate excess volatility. Interestingly, higher risk aversion generally exacerbates the excess volatility of prices. Moreover, the model predicts that if a big systemic shock hits the financial system, due to salience bias the price of systemic assets falls sharply. This relates to the observed fire-sales of assets during the global financial crisis.

The proposed model and results suggest that there may be a scope for intervention in financial markets during turbulences. In terms of ex ante policies the study suggests that investors and regulator should use better risk assessment technologies.

This is the first study constructing a tractable model based on the argument that investor salience may exacerbate the excess volatility of prices during financial downturns. The author relate salience to two types of risk; idiosyncratic and systemic and assume that investors' risk perception is biased towards the type of risk that is currently salient based on prior beliefs or past data. The author show that the diversification fallacy of the precrisis period, where seemingly safe assets were overpriced, can be explained by agents overweighing idiosyncratic risk and ignoring systemic risk.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the applicability of Shewhart methodology and other quality management principles to gain a deeper understanding of the observed volatility in stock returns and its impact on market performance.

The validity of quality management philosophy in the context of financial market behaviour is discussed. The technique of rational subgrouping is used to identify the observable variations in stock returns as either common or special cause variation. The usefulness of the proposed methodology is investigated through empirical data. The risk/return and skewness/kurtosis trade-offs of S&P 500 stocks are examined. The consistency of this approach is reviewed by relating the separated variability to “efficient market” and “behavioural finance” theories.

Significant positive and negative risk/return trade-offs were found after partitioning the returns series into common and special cause periods, respectively, while total data did not exhibit a significant risk/return trade-off at all. A highly negative skewness/kurtosis trade-off was found in total and special cause periods as compared to the common cause periods. These results are broadly consistent with the theoretical concepts of finance and other empirical findings.

The quality management principles-based approach to analysing financial data avoids the complexities commonly found in stochastic-volatility forecasting models.

The results provide new insights into the impact of volatility in stock returns. They should have direct implications for financial market participants.

The authors explore the relevance of Shewhart methodology in analysing variability in stock returns through reviewing financial market behaviour.