Search results

Negative relationship between the return of a stock and its liquidity suggests that the illiquid stocks are riskier than liquid stocks. Thus, researchers tend to include the stock liquidity as a variable in asset pricing models, where the stock and market liquidities are usually considered as independent. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the relationship between the return of a stock and its liquidity by using a relative measure that links the individual stock liquidity with market‐wide liquidity.

Multivariate regressions are employed to examine the effect of relative market liquidity on the stock return while controlling the effects of other factors.

Negative relationship between the stock return and liquidity is confirmed, but the relationship is not linear. It is found that the relative measure of liquidity is not a substitute, but complement to other liquidity measures used in prior studies. It is also found that fluctuation in relative stock liquidity does not positively affect the return.

The study is conducted on New York Stock Exchange and American Stock Exchange exchanges using monthly data. The robustness tests using the daily or weekly data are not conducted.

Findings may suggest that investors do not seriously concern about the fluctuations of individual stock liquidity, provided that the stock liquidity is higher than the average market liquidity.

For the first time, the liquidity risk is tested using a relative measure instead of an absolute measure. Since fluctuation in stock liquidity does not positively affect the return, a new question arises whether the variability in liquidity can reflect the liquidity risk.

Given the rising need for measuring and controlling of financial risk as proposed in Basel II and Basel III Capital Adequacy Accords, trading risk assessment under illiquid market conditions plays an increasing role in banking and financial sectors, particularly in emerging financial markets. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate asset liquidity risk and to obtain a Liquidity-Adjusted Value at Risk (L-VaR) estimation for various equity portfolios. The assessment of L-VaR is performed by implementing three different asset liquidity models within a multivariate context along with GARCH-M method (to estimate expected returns and conditional volatility) and by applying meaningful financial and operational constraints. Using more than six years of daily return dataset of emerging Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets, we find that under certain trading strategies, such as short selling of stocks, the sensitivity of L-VaR statistics are rather critical to the selected internal liquidity model in addition to the degree of correlation factors among trading assets. As such, the effects of extreme correlations (plus or minus unity) are crucial aspects to consider in selecting the most adequate internal liquidity model for economic capital allocation, especially under crisis condition and/or when correlations tend to switch sings. This chapter bridges the gap in risk management literatures by providing real-world asset allocation tactics that can be used for trading portfolios under adverse markets’ conditions. The approach to computing L-VaR has been arrived at through the application of three distinct liquidity models and the obtained results are used to draw conclusions about the relative liquidity of the diverse equity portfolios.

The purpose of this paper is to test if the empirical relationship between the size of trades and market liquidity can be pooled across different block sizes on the London Stock Exchange (LSE).

The authors use pooling and non-pooling econometric tests in a panel framework.

When the authors differentiate between various block sizes, the authors find that for trades in excess of 50,000 shares, there is a positive association between the size of the trade and the bid-ask spread, due to a lack of liquidity in the financial market. The results provide strong evidence that an upstairs market may be required in order to provide liquidity for large block trades on the LSE.

This is the first study to directly test if the LSE requires an upstairs market to provide liquidity for large trade transactions.

The most commonly observed risk averse behavior in the commercial real estate market is loss aversion on the part of investors; i.e., investors are more sensitive to prospective losses than to prospective gains. This observation leads to the natural question : Does the market rationally anticipate investors' loss aversion? If not, then does loss aversion become stronger in a relatively illiquid market? The answer to these questions provides strategically important implications to institutional investors. We propose to explore the impact of loss aversion on the commercial real estate market by testing two competing hypotheses : (1) the rational market expectation hypothesis and (2) the liquidity spiral hypothesis. The rational market expectation hypothesis holds that the market rationally anticipates investors' behavioral loss aversion. As a result, the interaction between lagged market liquidity and loss aversion does not have an impact on the probability of property sales. On the other hand, the liquidity spiral hypothesis holds that the interaction between market liquidity and loss aversion has an impact on the probability of property sales due to the self-fulfilling feedback effect between loss aversion and market liquidity. In the context of REITs' property transactions, we find partial evidence for the liquidity spiral hypothesis : private market liquidity and stock market liquidity each has an additional impact on the sale probability of property.

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on liquidity in international stock markets, highlights differences and similarities in empirical results across existing studies, and identifies areas requiring further research.

International cross-country studies on stock market liquidity are categorized and reviewed. Important relevant single-country studies are also discussed.

Market liquidity is influenced by exchange characteristics (e.g. the presence of market makers) and regulations (e.g. short-sales constraints). The literature has identified the most appropriate liquidity measures for global research, and for emerging and frontier markets, respectively. Major empirical facts are as follows. Liquidity co-varies within and across countries. Both the liquidity level and liquidity uncertainty are priced internationally. Liquidity is positively associated with firm transparency and share issuance, and negatively related to dividends paid out. The impact of internationalization on liquidity is not universal across firms and countries. Some suggested areas for future studies include: dark pools, high-frequency trading, commonality in liquidity premium, funding liquidity, liquidity and capital structure, and liquidity and transparency.

The paper focusses on international stock markets and does not consider liquidity in international bond or foreign exchange markets.

This paper provides a comprehensive survey of empirical studies on liquidity in international developed and emerging stock markets.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate long-run commonality in liquidity using multiple proxies computed from limited order book data of NIFTY50 stocks. The findings indicate the existence of systematic liquidity or commonality on NIFTY50 market and comprising industries.

The sample comprises all intraday transactions corresponding to NIFTY 50 stocks for April 2015. The study runs firm by firm time series regressions to test the concept of long-run commonality, while controlling other effects.

Strong evidence is found in support of long-run commonality across three liquidity measures. On the basis of significance (10%) of long-run commonality beta (β_LR), the strength of long-run commonality is found to be highest in natural resources and infrastructure sector. Portfolios having greater exposure to these sectors will face diversification risk to a great extent.

Knowledge of long-run commonality helps portfolio managers in formulating diversification strategies and reshuffling the portfolio over the period. Commonality risk being non-diversifiable is a policy concern for regulators and central bankers. Its empirical evidence will assist in managing exchange organization and thus preventing market crashes because of sudden liquidity evaporation.

Although there are recent studies documenting commonality in short run, little empirical work has been done on commonality in the long run and in emerging markets such as India. This research contributes to the literature by testing concept of commonality in long-run on NIFTY50 stocks using detailed transaction data from National Stock Exchange.

This study aims to examine the relationship between economic policy uncertainty and stock market liquidity in an order-driven emerging stock market.

Empirical estimates are based on vector autoregressive Granger-causality tests, impulse response functions and variance decomposition analysis.

The empirical findings suggest that economic policy uncertainty moderately influences stock market liquidity during normal market conditions. However, the role of economic policy uncertainty for determining stock market liquidity is significant in times of financial crises. The authors have also observed a significant portion of variation in stock market liquidity that is attributed to investor sentiments during financial crises.

This study is original in nature and provides evidence to consider economic policy uncertainty as a possible source of commonality in liquidity in the context of an emerging market.

The purpose of this paper is to originate a proactive approach for the quantification and analysis of liquidity risk for trading portfolios that consist of multiple equity assets.

The paper presents a coherent modeling method whereby the holding periods are adjusted according to the specific needs of each trading portfolio. This adjustment can be attained for the entire portfolio or for any specific asset within the equity trading portfolio. This paper extends previous approaches by explicitly modeling the liquidation of trading portfolios, over the holding period, with the aid of an appropriate scaling of the multiple‐assets' liquidity‐adjusted value‐at‐risk matrix. The key methodological contribution is a different and less conservative liquidity scaling factor than the conventional root‐t multiplier.

The proposed coherent liquidity multiplier is a function of a predetermined liquidity threshold, defined as the maximum position which can be unwound without disturbing market prices during one trading day, and is quite straightforward to put into practice even by very large financial institutions and institutional portfolio managers. Furthermore, it is designed to accommodate all types of trading assets held and its simplicity stems from the fact that it focuses on the time‐volatility dimension of liquidity risk instead of the cost spread (bid‐ask margin) as most researchers have done heretofore.

Using more than six years of daily return data, for the period 2004‐2009, of emerging Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets, the paper analyzes different structured and optimum trading portfolios and determine coherent risk exposure and liquidity risk premium under different illiquid and adverse market conditions and under the notion of different correlation factors.

This paper fills a main gap in market and liquidity risk management literatures by putting forward a thorough modeling of liquidity risk under the supposition of illiquid and adverse market settings. The empirical results are interesting in terms of theory as well as practical applications to trading units, asset management service entities and other financial institutions. This coherent modeling technique and empirical tests can aid the GCC financial markets and other emerging economies in devising contemporary internal risk models, particularly in light of the aftermaths of the recent sub‐prime financial crisis.

This paper examines and updates an earlier study of the liquidity of an extensive array of common stocks traded on NYSE/ASE/NML‐NASDAQ. It reports apparent variances in liquidity due to trading location and other variables. The paper suggests causes for these differences.

The purpose of this paper is to test the relationship between liquidity in listed real estate markets, company size and geography during different market cycles, specifically pre-crisis (2002-2006) and post-crisis (2010-2014). Further, the study analyses the impact of stock liquidity on stock performance. In a previous study the authors examined the impact of liquidity on the valuation of European real estate shares. The result showed that there is a strong relationship between liquidity, valuation and market capitalisation post the Global Financial Crisis.

The paper studies the linkages between regional market liquidity and company size for 60 listed real estate companies globally and determines the key drivers of company stock market liquidity pre- and post-crisis as well as the impact on stock performance. Analysis of variance is used to test cross-sectional independence in market liquidity combined with the Tukey’s post hoc test. The selected test indicators of liquidity to capture market depth and market tightness are daily stock turnover as percentage of market capitalisation and daily bid-ask spreads.

Findings confirm previous studies that market liquidity factors are correlated globally over time indicating markets interdependence. However, sample groups by company size and geography form independent samples with different sample means, thus specific liquidity levels in each market may be different. First, stock turnover levels have not recovered post-crisis to pre-crisis levels in the majority of markets while spreads have continued moving downward to nearly insignificant levels in line with the rest of the equity market. Second, with regards to stock performance, the European bias previously detected is not apparent in the USA, and there is no evidence of the small cap vs large cap effect of small companies achieving superior returns, although smaller companies have outperformed in Europe and Asia in each of the last three years (2012-2014).

The key implication is that although spread levels for smaller companies are higher, implying a slight risk premium when investing in small companies, this did not manifest into consistent superior stock market returns in the periods studied. In a mature market such as the USA or UK, liquidity levels in terms of stock turnover are higher and spreads are lower thus reducing trading costs, making them more attractive for investors.

This research brings together previous analysis on stock market liquidity and stock performance on a global market level. It further tests the dependence of market liquidity on two key indicators, namely, geography and company size and analyses market changes with respect to liquidity pre- and post-crisis.