Search results

Following the Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Basic, securities class plaintiffs can invoke the “rebuttable presumption of reliance on public, material misrepresentations regarding securities traded in an efficient market” [the “fraud-on-the-market” doctrine] to prove classwide reliance. Although this requires plaintiffs to prove that the security traded in an informationally efficient market throughout the class period, Basic did not identify what constituted adequate proof of efficiency for reliance purposes.

Market efficiency cannot be presumed without proof because even large publicly traded stocks do not always trade in efficient markets, as documented in the economic literature that has grown significantly since Basic. For instance, during the recent global financial crisis, lack of liquidity limited arbitrage (the mechanism that renders markets efficient) and led to significant price distortions in many asset markets. Yet, lower courts following Basic have frequently granted class certification based on a mechanical review of some factors that are considered intuitive “proxies” of market efficiency (albeit incorrectly, according to recent studies and our own analysis). Such factors have little probative value and their review does not constitute the rigorous analysis demanded by the Supreme Court.

Instead, to invoke fraud-on-the-market, plaintiffs must first establish that the security traded in a weak-form efficient market (absent which a security cannot, as a logical matter, trade in a “semi-strong form” efficient market, the standard required for reliance purposes) using well-accepted tests. Only then do event study results, which are commonly used to demonstrate “cause and effect” (i.e., prove that the security’s price reacted quickly to news – a hallmark of a semi-strong form efficient market), have any merit. Even then, to claim classwide reliance, plaintiffs must prove such cause-and-effect relationship throughout the class period, not simply on selected disclosure dates identified in the complaint as plaintiffs often do.

These issues have policy implications because, once a class is certified, defendants frequently settle to avoid the magnified costs and risks associated with a trial, and the merits of the case (including the proper application of legal presumptions) are rarely examined at a trial.

Introduction: According to the effective market hypothesis, investors act rationally when making an investment decision. The hypothesis assumes that investors invest in a way that maximizes their returns, taking into account the new information received. If the information released on the market is interpreted in the same way by all investors, no investor would be able to earn above the market. This hypothesis is valid in case of efficient markets. In the event that investors show irrational behavior to the information released on the market, the markets move away from efficiency. Overreaction behavior is one of the non-rational behaviors of investors. Overreaction behavior involves investors overreacting by misinterpreting the new information released to the market. According to De Bondt and Thaler’s (1985), overreaction hypothesis in the event that investors overreact to the news coming to the market, after a period the false evaluation, the price of the security is corrected with the reversal movement, without the need of any positive or negative information. Aim: The purpose of this study is to examine investors’ overreaction behavior in mergers and acquisitions. For this purpose, overreaction behavior was analyzed for companies whose stocks are traded on the Borsa Istanbul, which were involved in mergers or acquisitions. Method: In the study, companies that made mergers and acquisitions for the period 2007–2017 were determined, and abnormal returns and cumulative abnormal returns were calculated by using monthly closing price data of these companies. Moreover, whether investors overreact to the merger and acquisition decision is examined separately for one-, three- and five-year periods. Findings: As a result of the research, it has been observed that there is a reverse return for one-, three-, and five-year periods. However, it has been determined that the overreaction hypothesis is valid for only one year.

Design/Methodology/Approach: This chapter applies tests associated with the adaptive market hypothesis (AMH) and Johansen cointegration test. AMH acknowledges the views of the efficient market hypothesis and behavioural finance approach.

Purpose: Cryptocurrencies are considered a new asset class by multiasset portfolio managers. Hence, we examine the AMH and cointegration in the cryptocurrency market to know whether select cryptocurrencies can be diversified.

Findings: We find that cryptocurrencies are efficient and there is a long-run relationship among constituent series, and there is no short-run causality derived from bitcoin, Ethereum and litecoin to bitcoin, while stellar and Dogecoin have short-run causality to bitcoin.

Originality/Value: This chapter is different from the existing one as this is the first study in which the AMH and Johansen cointegration test are applied to check the efficiency and relationship of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Monero, Stellar, litecoin and Dogecoin.

Starting in the 1980s, financial liberalization and technological developments have enabled individual investors to participate in financial markets and carry out easy transactions. With these developments, academics began to wonder how the individual investors decide to invest and what factors affect these decisions.

According to traditional finance theory, it is suggested that markets are efficient and investors show rational behaviors in their financial purchasing decisions. However, in many studies conducted in recent years, it was determined that investors included emotional elements as well as rational elements in their decision-making process and therefore exhibited irrational behaviors by believing rumors instead of real information. It is thought that many factors such as personal characteristics, psychological factors, demographic and socio-economic factors play a role in the behavior of investors in purchasing a financial product.

In this study, the importance of herd behavior, which is one of the psychological factors that play a very important role in financial markets, on financial product purchasing process is examined in the light of the behavioral finance theory. It is thought that information included in the study will be useful for researchers who want to study herd behavior and for those who are interested in the subject.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to existing financial literature within a less researched area through a systematic, organized, and holistic approach. This study advances the notion of considering terrorist attacks as a heterogeneous group of events by employing a multidimensional approach. The event study methodology was used to investigate the impact of 46 terrorist attacks occurring on the soil of OECD countries since 1990 on stock markets in US, UK, Spain, and Denmark. Thereby, terrorist attacks are considered as events conveying information to financial markets, which is processed by investors and subsequently reflected in security prices. This chapter is the first contribution within financial literature to distinguish and categorize terrorist attacks through several dimensions and investigate the effect of various characteristics on stock markets. The multidimensional analytical approach consisted of six dimensions, which included an examination of the national stock markets, differences across industries, the underlying threat characteristics, the size of the attack, and the development over time and geospatial aspects. It is concluded that terrorist attacks exhibiting international threat characteristics result in significantly larger and boundary spanning negative abnormal returns, which impact stock markets beyond the country in which the attack occurred. Additionally, the size of the terrorist attack amplifies the negative impact on stock markets. However, while the impact on stock markets was found to be immediate indicating that stock markets are quick and efficient in absorbing new information, the negative impact is likely to evaporate within five trading days.

The uncertainty as to whether investments in riskier and less efficient markets allow managers to ‘beat the market’ remains a question to which answers are required. Accordingly, the purpose of this chapter is to offer new insights on portfolios of the US, European and Emerging Market (‘EM’) domiciled equity mutual funds whose objectives are the investment in emerging economies, and specifically analyses two main issues: alpha generation and the influence of the funds’ characteristics on their risk-adjusted performance.

The dataset is made up a survivorship-bias controlled sample of 137 equity funds over the period January 2004 to December 2014, which are then grouped into equally weighted portfolios according to the scheme’s origin. The Jensen’s (1968) Single-Factor model along with the Fama and French’s (1993) and Carhart’s (1997) multifactor models are employed to authenticate results and answer both research questions.

Research analysis reveals that EM exposed fund managers fail to collectively outperform the market. It thereby offers ground to believe that the emerging world is very close to being efficient, proving that the Efficient Market Hypothesis (‘EMH’) ideal exists in this scenario where market inefficiency might only be a perception of market participants as any apparent opportunity to achieve above-average returns is speedily snapped up by very active managers. Overall these managers take a conservative approach to portfolio construction, whereby they are more unperturbed investing in large cap equity funds so as to lessen somewhat the exposure towards risks associated with liquidity, stability and volatility.

Furthermore, the findings show that large-sized equity portfolios have the lead over the medium and small-sized competitors, whilst the high cost and mature collective investment vehicles enjoy an alpha which although is negative is superior to their peers. The riskiest funds generated the lowest alpha, and thereby produced doubts as to whether investors should accept a higher risk for the hope of earning higher returns, at least when aiming to gain an exposure into the emerging world.

Mutual fund performance is not an innovative topic so to speak. Nonetheless, researchers and academia have centred their efforts on appraising the behaviour of fund managers domiciled primarily in developed and more efficient economics, leaving the emerging region highly uncovered in this respect. This study, therefore aims at crafting meaningful contributions to the literature as well as to the practical perspective.

Product intervention power is introduced under the markets in financial instruments regulation (MiFIR) and packaged retail and insurance-based investment products (PRIIPs) Regulation for all EU Member States and gives National Competent Authorities (NCAs), European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), and European Banking Authority (EBA) powers to monitor financial products (and services) under their supervision and to “temporarily” prohibit or restrict the marketing, distribution, or sale of certain financial instruments, or to intervene in relation to certain financial activities or practice. This extends the supervisory measures defined in MiFID II to any PRIIPs (including insurance-based investment products “IBI products”) that would not otherwise fall under the scope of MiFID II. Product intervention power is given to the NCAs, and in order to use power, it requires to take the specifics of the individual case into account and a series of conditions, criteria, and factors to fulfill. Moreover, ESMA and the EBA have a type of control function and ability to override national regulators on product. The aim of product intervention powers is to ensure strengthening of investor protection, but given the potential significant impact of this power, calls into question of possibility to delay innovation and slow down product developments on the capital market.

This paper provided an overview of supervisory measures on product intervention, that is, scope of the product intervention power, criteria, factors, and risks which have to be taken into consideration when using this regulator’s tool.

This study uses an event study approach which is the development of the efficient market hypothesis theory. First, the random walk test was conducted on the Jakarta Composite Index (JCI) to test the efficiency in the weak form. Furthermore, event study analysis was carried out on JCI and nine sectoral indices to determine the impact of COVID-19 related events on price movements. The study found that JCI prices follow a random walk pattern so that the stock market in Indonesia is efficient, at least in a weak form. In the event study testing, only events related to the first confirmed case of COVID-19 and the implementation of large-scale social restriction in Indonesia affected the composite index. From a sectoral point of view, only the event of Jakarta’s call center had no impact on price changes in the sectoral index. Thus, each index had a different effect throughout the event. The reaction seen from the movement of prices for the composite and sectoral index to the public information explains that the condition of the Indonesian capital market is efficient, at least in semi-strong form.