Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the housing price volatility for eight capital cities in Australia over 1987‐2007. Specifically, the volatility of Australian housing and its determinants were investigated.

An exponential‐generalised autoregressive conditional heteoskedasticity (EGARCH) model was employed to analyse the volatility for eight capital cities in Australia. The Engle LM test was also utilised to examine the volatility clustering effects in these cities.

The volatility clustering effects (ARCH effects) were found in many Australian capital cities. The importance of estimating each individual city's EGARCH model was also demonstrated in which the determinants of housing volatility vary from a city to another city. Asymmetric of the positive and negative shocks were also documented.

This study has implications for investors and policy makers in which housing investors should estimate the conditional variance (EGARCH process) of a housing market in respect to the volatility of housing series is not always constant over time. Furthermore, policy makers should also address the importance of considering the sub‐national factors in formulating the national housing policy. The analysis and results are limited by the quality of the data.

This paper is one of the few studies in housing volatility. Additionally, it is probably the first attempt to assess the volatility spillover effects in the Australian housing market.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically analyze volatility properties of the house price returns of Turkey and Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir provinces over the period of July 2007-June 2014.

The paper uses conditional variance models, namely, ARCH, GARCH and E-GARCH. As the supportive approach for the discussions, we also use correlation analysis and qualitative inputs.

Empirical findings suggest several points. First, city/country-level house price return volatility series display volatility clustering pattern and therefore volatilities in house price returns are time varying. Second, it seems that there were high (excess) and stable volatility periods during observation term. Third, a significant economic event may change country/city-level volatilities. In this context, the biggest and relatively persistent shock was the lagged negative shocks of global financial crisis. More importantly, short-lived political/economic shocks have not significant impacts on house price return volatilities in Turkey, Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. Fourth, however, house price return volatilities differ across geographic areas, volatility series may show some co-movement pattern. Fifth, volatility comparison across cities reveal that Izmir shows more excess volatility cases, Ankara recorded the highest volatility point and Istanbul and national series show lower and insignificant volatilities.

The study uses maximum available data and focuses on some house price return volatility patterns. The first implication of the findings is that micro/macro dimensions of house price return volatilities should be carefully analyzed to forecast upside/downside risks of house price returns. Second, defined volatility clustering pattern implies that rate of return of housing investment may show specific patterns in some periods and volatile periods may result in some large losses in the returns. Third, model results generally suggest that however data constraint is a major problem, market participants should analyze regional idiosyncrasies during their decision-making in housing portfolio management. Fourth, because house prices are not sensitive to relatively less structural shocks, housing may represent long-term investment instrument if it provides satisfactory hedging from inflation.

The evidences and implications would be useful for housing market participants aiming to manage/use externalities of housing price movements. From a practical contribution perspective, the study provides a tool that will allow measuring first time of the return volatility patterns of house prices in Turkey and her three biggest provinces. Local level analysis for Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir provinces, as the globally fastest growing cities, would be found specifically interesting by international researchers and practitioner.

This paper aims to explore factors influencing apartment price volatility in the two biggest cities in Vietnam, Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City.

The study uses the supply and demand approach and provides a literature review of previous studies to develop four main hypotheses using four determinants of apartment price volatility in Vietnam: gross domestic product (GDP), inflation rate, lending interest rate and construction cost. Subsequently, the Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) is used to analyze a monthly data sample of 117.

The research highlights the important role of construction costs in apartment price volatility in the two largest cities. Moreover, there are significant differences in how all four determinants affect apartment price volatility in the two cities. In addition, there is a long-run relationship between the determinants and apartment price volatility in both Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City.

Limitations related to data transparency of the real estate industry in Vietnam lead to three main limitations of this paper, including: this paper only collects a sample of 117 valid monthly observations; apartment price volatility is calculated by changes in the apartment price index instead of apartment price standard deviation; and this paper is limited by only four determinants, those being GDP, inflation rate, lending interest rate and construction cost.

The study provides evidence of differences in how the above determinants affect apartment price volatility in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, which helps investors and policymakers to make informed decisions relating to the real estate market in the two biggest cities in Vietnam.

This paper makes several recommendations to policymakers and investors in Vietnam to ensure a stable real estate market, contributing to the stability of the national economy.

This paper provides a new approach using VECM to analyze both long-run and short-run relationships between macroeconomic and sectoral independent variables and apartment price volatility in the two biggest cities in Vietnam.

This paper aims to test the volatility and analyses the macroeconomic determinants of house price volatility in Namibia over the period 2007 Quarter 1 to 2017 Quarter 2. It further explores the causal relations between house price volatility and its determinants.

The study used autoregressive conditional heteroskedastic and generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedastic models to test for volatility. The vector error correction model was used to analyse the determinants and causal relations.

The results support the hypothesis that house prices in Namibia exhibits persistent volatility. It was further established that past period volatility’ GDP and mortgage loans are the key determinants of house price volatility. Additionally’ there exists unidirectional causality from GDP and mortgage loans to house price volatility.

Policy implications emanating from the study implies that macroeconomic fundamentals should be monitored closely to mitigate the issues of house price volatility.

The study is the first of its kind in Namibia to address the pertinent issues of ever increasing housing prices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the asymmetric impact of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on the volatility of the housing price index (RP) based on quarterly observations from major European countries, namely, France, Germany, Sweden, Greece Italy and the UK.

The nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag model method is used to investigate the asymmetric impact of EPU on RP. In addition to considering EPU as the explanatory variable, industrial production (IP) (as a proxy for economic growth), interest rate (I), inflationary tendency (Consumer Price Index) and share prices (S) are included as major control variables. The period of the observations runs from 1996Q1 to 2019Q1.

The Wald test confirms the long-run asymmetric relationship for all countries. The alternative specification of the data sets reconfirms the asymmetric impact on RP in the long run, thereby verifying the robustness of the study.

The study has implications for investors seeking to incorporate housing price behaviour within their portfolio structure. The analysis and findings are constrained by the availability of data.

This is one of the few studies on housing price dynamics related to the major economies of the European region that explore asymmetries. Additionally, it is the first to explore the asymmetry dynamics using the EPU variable.

This paper aims to examine real estate price volatility in Hong Kong. Monthly data on housing, offices, retail and factories in Hong Kong were analyzed from February 1993 to February 2019 to test whether volatility clusters are present in the real estate market. Real estate price determinants were also investigated.

Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity–Lagrange multiplier test is used to examine the volatility clustering effects in these four kinds of real estate. An autoregressive and moving average model–generalized auto regressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) model was used to identify real estate price volatility determinants in Hong Kong.

There was volatility clustering in all four kinds of real estate. Determinants of price volatility vary among different types of real estate. In general, housing volatility in Hong Kong is influenced primarily by the foreign exchange rate (both RMB and USD), whereas commercial real estate is largely influenced by unemployment. The results of the exponential GARCH model show that there were no asymmetric effects in the Hong Kong real estate market.

This volatility pattern has important implications for investors and policymakers. Residential and commercial real estate have different volatility determinants; investors may benefit from this when building a portfolio. The analysis and results are limited by the lack of data on real estate price determinants.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study that evaluates volatility in the Hong Kong real estate market using the GARCH class model. Also, this paper is the first to investigate commercial real estate price determinants.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the house prices in Finland share financial characteristics with assets such as stocks. The studied regions are 15 main regions in Finland over the period of 1988:Q1-2018:Q4. These regions are divided geographically into 45 cities and sub-areas according to their postcode numbers. The studied type of dwellings is apartments (block of flats) divided into one-room, two rooms and more than three rooms apartment types.

Both Ljung–Box and Lagrange multiplier tests are used to test for clustering effects (autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity effects). For cities and sub-areas with significant clustering effects, the generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH)-in-mean model is used to determine the potential impact that the conditional variance may have on returns. Moreover, the exponential GARCH model is used to examine the possibility of asymmetric effects of shocks on house price volatility. For each apartment type, individual models are estimated; enabling different house price dynamics, and variation of signs and magnitude of different effects across cities and sub-areas.

Results reveal that clustering effects exist in over half of the cities and sub-areas in all studied types of apartments. Moreover, mixed results on the sign of the significant risk-return relationship are observed across cities and sub-areas in all three apartment types. Furthermore, the evidence of the asymmetric impact of shocks on housing volatility is noted in almost all the cities and sub-areas housing markets. These studied volatility properties are further found to differ across cities and sub-areas, and by apartment types.

The existence of these volatility patterns has essential implications, such as investment decision-making and portfolio management. The study outcomes will be used in a forecasting procedure of the volatility dynamics of the studied types of dwellings. The quality of the data limits the analysis and the results of the study.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study that evaluates the volatility of the Finnish housing market in general, and by using data on both municipal and geographical level, particularly.

Extensive studies have investigated the relation between risk and return in the stock and major asset markets, whereas little studies have been done for housing, particularly the Australian housing market. This study aims to determine the relationship between housing risk and housing return in Australia.

The analysis of this study involves two stages. The first stage is to estimate the presence of volatility clustering effects. Thereafter, the relation between risk and return in the Australian housing market is assessed by using a component generalised autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity-in-mean (C-CARCH-M) model.

The empirical results show that there is a strong positive risk-return relationship in all Australian housing markets. Specifically, comparable results are also evident in all housing markets in various Australian capital cities, reflecting that Australian home buyers, in general, are risk reverse and require a premium for higher risk level. This could be attributed the unique characteristics of the Australian housing market. In addition, there is evidence to suggest that a stronger volatility clustering effect than previously documented in the daily case.

The findings enable more informed and practical investment decision-making regarding the relation between housing return and housing risk.

This paper is the first study to offer empirical evidence of the risk-return relationship in the Australian housing market. Besides, this is the first housing price volatility study that utilizes daily data.

The purpose of this paper is to show an indication that the asymmetric volatility between house price movement may account for the defensiveness of the housing market.

First the UK nation‐wide house price data from the last quarter (Q4) of 1955 to the last quarter of 2005 are used and then the most suitable mean and variance equations to estimate the conditional heteroscedasticity volatilities of the returns of house prices are selected. Second, a variable that examines the leverage effect of volatility is incorporated into the model. The GJR‐GARCH model is used.

The results of the empirical test show that while the lagged innovations are negatively correlated with housing return, that is when there is bad news, the current volatility of housing return might decline.

The results indicate that the volatilities between house prices moving up and moving down are asymmetric.

The results show that there is a defensive effect in the UK housing market during the data periods used.

Although several articles have documented that there is heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation in the volatilities of real estate prices, few of those papers have noted one of the most important advantages of the housing market, its defensiveness, from the viewpoint of volatile behavior.

This paper aims to examine the housing market responses to two outbreaks of respiratory diseases in Hong Kong during the Information Era – the 2003 SARS and COVID-19 outbreaks.

The authors first investigate the aggregate housing price changes during SARS and COVID-19. Next, the authors conduct a battery of univariate analyses pertaining to the relationship between district-level housing price movements and geographic and demographic patterns during the pandemic periods. Finally, to shed light on the housing price dynamics at the micro level, the authors conduct an estate-level analysis with the data of 234 residential estates from 2003 to 2020, focusing on the impacts of SARS and COVID-19 on the idiosyncratic volatility of residential estates.

Overall, SARS and COVID-19 outbreaks are negatively associated with housing prices. However, unlike SARS, the impact of COVID-19 on housing prices was moderate and transient. The geographic imbalances of the epidemic-induced underperformance are observed at the district and estate levels. Finally, the estate-level analysis presented in this paper indicates that the average idiosyncratic volatility of residential estates is 1.5% higher during the SARS period but 3.7% lower during the COVID-19 period. Lower volatility during COVID-19 is likely explained by household learning from the SARS period.

Regulators and investors could resort to efficient information disclosure to attenuate idiosyncratic volatility's adverse impact on housing market returns.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the authors are among the first to examine housing market responses to the 2003 SARS and COVID-19 outbreaks using the Hong Kong housing market as a laboratory.