Search results

The present study aims to examine the effects of the Islamic sacred months, namely, Muḥarram, Rajab, Dhu al-Qaʿdah and Dhu al-Ḥijjah, on stock prices on the Iran and Iraq Stock Exchanges.

Using the infrastructure models of the capital market, the daily stock prices were calculated for the sacred and non-sacred months. As the data of this study are non-stationary, the AMIRA time-series model was used for better understanding of the model or future projections. The dependent variables of this study are the daily stock indexes for Iranian and Iraqi Stock Exchanges, and independent ones are the sacred and non-sacred months of a lunar year. Data were gathered daily from the financial statements of Iranian and Iraqi Stock Exchanges websites. To test the hypotheses under study, a five-year period from 2012 to 2016 was considered for both Iraqi and Iranian Stock Exchanges, which corresponds with the lunar calendar from 1433-1437AH.

The obtained results indicated that there is no significant difference in stock prices between the sacred months of Muḥarram, Rajab, Dhu al-Qaʿdah and Dhu al-Ḥijjah and other non-sacred months. However, the stock price in the Iranian Stock Exchange has a significant difference in Rajab and Dhu al-Qaʿdah with other non-sacred months.

The results of this study will reveal more than ever the role of Islamic sacred months for society and users of financial statements to make better financial decisions especially in Islamic emerging markets.

This study broadly attempts to explore adaptive or dynamics patterns of calendar effects existed in the cryptocurrency market as per the adaptive market hypothesis (AMH) framework. Another agendum of this study is to investigate the quantum of extra returns which may result from the presence of calendar effects.

The present study considers both parametric and non-parametric approaches to verify calendar effects empirically. Specifically, this study has implemented Generalised Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity (1, 1) and Kruskal–Wallis tests in the rolling window approach to reveal adaptive patterns of calendar effects. Additionally, the present study has used the implied trading strategy to evaluate the volume of excess returns resulted from calendar effects than buy-and-hold (BH) strategy.

The overall results of the current study exhibit that calendar effect in the cryptocurrency market is dynamic rather than static which indicates the calendar effect is a time-varying phenomenon. Moreover, this study also confirmed that ITS is not suitable to obtain extra returns despite the existence of calendar effects.

The present study has covered some broad aspects of calendar anomalies in the cryptocurrency market, keeping aside certain other limitations which need to be addressed in the following dimensions. Future studies may aim at addressing issues like, Turn-of-the-Year effect, Halloween effect, weather effect, and Month-of-the-Year effects, and try to explore the reasons of presence of dynamic patterns of calendar effects.

The significant implication of this study is that it alerts investors about market return predictability due to calendar patterns or effects in different periods. It also suggests the period in which the ITS can perform better than the BH strategy.

It is the first study in the cryptocurrency literature which has adopted the AMH framework to verify adaptive calendar effects or anomalies. Furthermore, this study, instead of a mere examination of the presence of calendar effects, has evaluated the potential of calendar effects to produce extra returns through trading strategies.

This research investigates whether authoritative guidance regarding financial statement disclosures is incorporated into practice as envisioned by the promulgating body. Such assimilation is important from the standpoint of corporate accountability reporting as well as development of greater transparency in the extant accounting model. Specifically, we empirically test whether American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position 96-1 led to improved reporting of environmental remediation costs and liabilities.

A repeated-measures design was used to assess the level of disclosure by 126 large U.S. firms, each of which had been identified by the Environmental Protection Agency as being potentially responsible for the cost of cleanup efforts at multiple Superfund sites. By performing a content analysis of the pre- and post-issuance annual reports of these companies, a disclosure score was derived for each. Comparison of disclosures in the two fiscal periods following the effective date of this new guidance with the pre-issuance reporting shows no overall enhancement or improvement in either the level or quality of disclosures. We conclude that when viewed from the perspective of the two years subsequent to its effective date the promulgation of this additional authoritative reporting and display guidance did not attain the espoused objective.