How asymmetric is U.S. stock market volatility?

This paper explores differences in the impact of equally large positive and negative surprise return shocks in the aggregate U.S. stock market on: (1) the volatility predictions of asymmetric time-series models, (2) implied volatility, and (3) realized volatility. Following large negative surprise return shocks, both asymmetric time-series models (such as the EGARCH and GJR models) and implied volatility predict an increase in volatility and, consistent with this, ex post realized volatility normally rises as predicted. Following large positive return shocks, asymmetric time-series models predict an increase in volatility (albeit a much smaller increase than following a negative shock of the same magnitude), but both implied and realized volatilities generally fall sharply. While asymmetric time-series models predict a decline in volatility following near-zero returns, both implied and realized volatility are normally little changed from levels observed prior to the stable market. The reasons for the differences are explored.     

Information, Trading Demand, and Futures Price Volatility

We examine the relation between futures price volatility and trading demand by type of trader in the Standard & Poor's (S&P) 500-stock index futures market. We find that volatility covaries negatively with signed speculative demand shocks but is positively related to signed hedging demand shocks. No significant relation between volatility and demand shocks for small traders is found. Our results suggest that changes in positions of large hedgers destabilize the market, whereas changes in positions of large speculators stabilize volatility. Consistent with models with asymmetrically informed traders, we find that large speculators are likely to possess superior forecasting ability, large hedgers behave like positive feedback traders, and small traders are liquidity traders.     

Oil shocks and stock market volatility of the BRICS: A GARCH-MIDAS approach

In this study, we employ the GARCH–MIDAS (Generalised Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity variant of Mixed Data Sampling) model to investigate the response of stock market volatility of the BRICS group of countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) to oil shocks. We utilise the recent datasets of Baumeister & Hamilton (2019), where oil shocks are decomposed into four variants: oil supply shocks, economic activity shocks, oil consumption shocks, and oil inventory shocks. We further decompose each of these shocks into positive and negative shocks, and our findings show heterogeneous response of stock market volatility of the BRICS countries to the alternative oil shocks, including positive and negative shocks. The differing responses across the BRICS countries could be attributed to differences in the economic size, oil production, and consumption profile of the countries, market share distribution across firms, and financial system and regulation efficiency.     

Local and spillover shocks in implied market volatility: evidence for the U.S. and Germany

The occurrence and the transmission of large shocks in international equity markets is of essential interest to the study of market integration and financial crises. To this aim, implied market volatility allows to monitor ex ante risk expectations in different markets. We investigate the behavior of implied market volatility indices for the U.S. and Germany under a straightforward mean reversion model that allows for Poisson jumps. Our empirical findings for daily data in the period 1992 to 2002 provide evidence of significant positive jumps, i.e. situations of market stress with positive unexpected changes in ex ante risk assessments. Jump events are mostly country-specific with some evidence of volatility spillover. Analysis of public information around jump dates indicates two basic categories of events. First, crisis events occurring under spillover shocks. Second, information release events which include three subcategories, namely—worries about as well as actual—unexpected releases concerning U.S. monetary policy, macroeconomic data and corporate profits. Additionally, foreign exchange market movements may cause volatility shocks.     

Harnessing jump component for crude oil volatility forecasting in the presence of extreme shocks

Oil markets are subject to extreme shocks (e.g. Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait), causing the oil market price exhibits extreme movements, called jumps (or spikes). These jumps pose challenges on oil market volatility forecasting using conventional volatility dynamic models (e.g. GARCH model) This paper characterizes dynamics of jumps in oil market price using high frequency data from three perspectives: the probability (or intensity) of jump occurrence, the sign (e.g. positive or negative) of jumps, and the concurrence with stock market jumps. And then, the paper exploits predictive ability of these jump-related information for oil market volatility forecasting under the mixed data sampling (MIDAS) modeling framework. Our empirical results show that augmenting standard MIDAS model using the three jump-related information significantly improves the accuracy of oil market volatility forecasting. The jump intensity and negative jump size are particularly useful for predicting future oil volatility. These results are widely consistent across a variety of robustness tests. This work provides new insights on how to forecast oil market volatility in the presence of extreme shocks.     

Asymmetric volatility spillover among Chinese sectors during COVID-19

Inter-sectoral volatility linkages in the Chinese stock market are understudied, especially asymmetries in realized volatility connectedness, accounting for the catastrophic event associated with the COVID-19 outbreak. In this paper, we examine the asymmetric volatility spillover among Chinese stock market sectors during the COVID-19 pandemic using 1-min data from January 2, 2019 to September 30, 2020. In doing so, we build networks of generalized forecast error variances by decomposition of a vector autoregressive model, controlling for overall market movements. Our results show evidence of the asymmetric impact of good and bad volatilities, which are found to be time-varying and substantially intense during the COVID-19 period. Notably, bad volatility spillover shocks dominate good volatility spillover shocks. The findings are useful for Chinese investors and portfolio managers constructing risk hedging portfolios across sectors and for Chinese policymakers monitoring and crafting stimulating policies for the stock market at the sectoral level.     

Asymmetric volatility spillovers between economic policy uncertainty and stock markets: Evidence from China

This study explores the spillovers between economic policy uncertainty (EPU) and stock market realized volatility (RV). The monthly index of Chinese and US EPU and RV are used to analyze the pairwise directional spillovers. We find that RV is a net receiver that is more vulnerable to shocks from U.S. EPU than to shocks from Chinese EPU. We further decompose the RV into good and bad volatility to test the asymmetric spillover effect between the stock market and EPU. The results suggest that EPU has a bigger effect on bad volatility in the stock market throughout most of the sample period. However, we find that good volatility spillovers become larger during periods of stimulated reform, whereas bad volatility spillovers become larger during periods of international disputes. We show that Chinese stock market volatility is sensitive to both U.S. and Chinese EPU and that the spillover is asymmetric in different periods.     

Investor Attention and Time‐varying Comovements

This paper analyses the effect of an increase in market‐wide uncertainty on information flow and asset price comovements. We use the daily realised volatility of the 30‐year treasury bond futures to assess macroeconomic shocks that affect market‐wide uncertainty. We use the ratio of a stock's idiosyncratic realised volatility with respect to the S&P500 futures relative to its total realised volatility to capture the asset price comovement with the market. We find that market volatility and the comovement of individual stocks with the market increase contemporaneously with the arrival of market‐wide macroeconomic shocks, but decrease significantly in the following five trading days. This pattern supports the hypothesis that investors shift their (limited) attention to processing market‐level information following an increase in market‐wide uncertainty and then subsequently divert their attention back to asset‐specific information.     

Does Bitcoin still own the dominant power? An intraday analysis

The study investigates the intraday dynamics and price patterns of the primary cryptocurrencies. The Granger Mackey-Glass (M-G) model is employed to examine the asymmetric and nonlinear dynamic interactions in the first moment using positive and negative returns. The bivariate BEKK-GARCH model is applied to identify cross-market volatility shocks and volatility transmissions in the cryptocurrency market. The intra-cryptocurrency market analysis reveals that Bitcoin contains predictive information that can nonlinearly forecast the performance of other digital currencies when cryptocurrency prices either are rising or declining. The dominant power of Bitcoin is not dismissed using the intraday data. Further, Bitcoin's intraday lagged shocks and volatility induces more rapid and destabilizing effects on the conditional volatility of other currencies than each of the other currencies does on BTC's conditional volatility. The virtual currency markets are dynamically correlated and integrated through first and second-moment spillovers.     

Asymmetric risk premium in value and growth stocks

There are two competing explanations for the existence of a value premium, a rational market risk explanation, whereby value stocks are inherently more risky than growth stocks, and a market over-reaction hypothesis, where agents overstate future returns on growth stock. Using asymmetric GARCH-M models this paper tests the predictions of the two hypotheses. Specifically, examining whether returns exhibit a positive (negative) risk premium resulting from a negative (positive) shock and the relative size of any premium. The results of the paper suggest that following a shock, volatility and expected future volatility are heightened, leading to a rise in required rates of return which depresses current prices. Further, these effects are heightened for value stock over growth stock and for negative shocks over positive shocks. Thus, in support of the rational risk interpretation, with a volatility feedback explanation for predictive volatility asymmetry.     

Return and volatility co-movement in commodity futures markets: the effects of liquidity risk

Commodity markets are a widely researched topic in the field of finance. In this paper, we investigate the co-movement of return and volatility measures in different commodity futures markets and how these measures are affected by liquidity risk. First, we find that commodity returns display co-movement and that liquidity risk plays a key role in shaping asset return patterns. Moreover, we show that the volatilities of commodity returns co-move, and we demonstrate the role of liquidity risk in this joint pattern. We also find that the commodity markets we investigated share a common volatility factor that determines their joint volatility co-movement. Because liquidity risk affects both commodity returns and volatility shocks, it might be interpreted as the common causal factor driving both measures simultaneously. Therefore, we affirm the view that liquidity shocks are firmly related to two residual risks originating from both market return and market volatility. Finally, we also show that liquidity spillovers can significantly drive cross-sectional correlation dynamics.     

Asymmetry in return and volatility spillover between equity and bond markets in Australia

We document asymmetry in return and volatility spillover between equity and bond markets in Australia for daily returns during the period 1992–2006 using a bivariate GARCH modelling approach. Negative bond market returns spillover into lower stock market returns whereas good news originating in the equity market leads to lower bond returns. Bond market volatility spills over into the equity market but the reverse is not true. Transmission of bond volatility into equity volatility depends in a complex way upon the respective signs of the return shocks in each market.     

European equity markets volatility spillover: Destabilizing energy risk is the new normal

While energy risk is increasingly recognized as a systemic risk, there is limited comprehensive analysis of the risk propagation in regional contexts. In this study, we examine oil and natural gas price changes and shocks in relation to equity market returns and volatility for 24 European Economic Area (EEA) countries. In addition to traditional panel regressions, we also deploy the Diebold-Yilmaz (2014) spillover index for a closed network analysis. We differentiate in the cross-section across the core EU block, PIIGS countries, EU enlargement countries joining after 2004, and other non-EU countries, to provide insights into the ongoing debates on the European energy market stability. While we find evidence of the manifestation of energy risk throughout the sample period, we find that until 2019 the primary sources of volatility spillover in the EEA economic network arose from economic or political uncertainty. Energy risks, measured by large crude oil and natural gas price shocks also significantly contributed to equity market volatility, with increasing volatility risk arising from natural gas, a green labelled energy source after 2019. Last, we show that CEEC equity markets are more sensitive to oil and natural gas price shocks when domestic currencies depreciate against the Euro.     

Macroeconomic dynamics in a model of goods,labor, and credit market frictions

Goods market frictions drastically change the dynamics of the labor market, both in terms of persistence and volatility. In a model with three imperfect markets – goods, labor, and credit – we find that credit and goods market imperfections are substitutable in raising volatility. Goods market frictions are unique in generating persistence. Two key mechanisms in the goods market generate large hump-shaped responses to productivity shocks: countercyclical goods market tightness and prices alter future profit flows and raise persistence; procyclical search effort of consumers and firms raises amplification. Goods market frictions are thus key in understanding labor market dynamics.     

How do stocks react to extreme market events? Evidence from Brazil

This paper studies the short-term (21 trading days) behavior of Brazilian stocks in the event of extreme movements in the Brazilian market index. Using cumulative abnormal returns, we find that stocks tend to overreact after both positive and negative events, as well as global and domestic shocks. Interestingly, this behavior is particularly intense when the events are not clustered. This counterintuitive finding can be explained by the Contrast Hypothesis, since shocks during calm circumstances can be viewed by investors as more surprising. In fact, when we split events according to market volatility, we document a stronger overreaction when volatility is low.     

Macroeconomic news, announcements, and stock market jump intensity dynamics

This paper examines the effect of macroeconomic releases on stock market volatility through a Poisson-Gaussian-GARCH process with time-varying jump intensity, which is allowed to respond to such information. The day of the announcement, per se, is found to have little impact on jump intensities. Employment releases are an exception. However, when macroeconomic surprises are considered, inflation shocks show persistent effects while monetary policy and employment shocks reveal only short-lived effects. Also, the jump intensity responds asymmetrically to macroeconomic shocks. Evidence on macroeconomic variables relevance in explaining jump dynamics and improving volatility forecasts on event days is provided.     

Financing the green projects: Market efficiency and volatility persistence of green versus conventional bonds,and the comparative effects of health and financial crises

The establishment of the green bond market is an attempt to attain environmental sustainability from the finance perspective. One of the factors that could either hinder or promote this course is the degree of market efficiency of the market. Against this background, this study comparatively examines the market efficiency of the U.S. green and conventional bonds. In addition, the performance of both markets is investigated during global health and financial crises. Applying the fractional integration technique, we find that the overall green and conventional bonds markets are still inefficient, indicating that green and conventional investors can make excess gains by predicting the future trends of bond prices. There is also evidence that the green bond market exhibits higher volatility persistence during the global health crisis than during the global financial crisis. These findings are corroborated by the GARCH-based models, whose results show that volatility shocks are more persistent in the green bond market during the health crisis than during the financial crisis. However, the conventional bond market observes persistence in volatility shocks during both events. Towards sustainable environment goals, these results have relevant implications for green investors and policy makers.     

Estimating Volatility Persistence in Oil Prices Under Structural Breaks

Policy makers and financial market participants are interested in knowing how shocks affect the volatility of oil prices over time. We accurately compute the volatility persistence by incorporating endogenously determined structural breaks into a GARCH model. Contrary to previous findings, we find that oil shocks dissipate very quickly but have a strong initial impact. Understanding this behavior is not only important for derivative valuation and hedging decisions but for broader financial markets and the overall economy, for which there are significant consequences.     

Volatility spillover in the foreign exchange market: the Indian experience

We find evidence of significant volatility co-movements and/or spillover from different financial markets to the forex market in India. Among a large number of variables examined, volatility spillovers from domestic stock, government securities, overnight index swap, Ted spread and international crude oil markets to the foreign exchange market are found to be significant. There is evidence of asymmetric reactions in the forex market volatility. Comparisons between pre-crisis and post-crisis volatility indicate that the reform measures and changes in financial markets microstructure during the crisis period had significant impact on volatility spillover. During the post-crisis period, the lagged volatility component that represents persistent or fundamental changes had significant spillover effect on forex volatility, rather than the temporary shocks component. There is evidence of a decline in the asymmetric response in the forex volatility during the post-crisis period in India.     

做空机制对我国股市波动性影响的实证分析

我国融资融券业务于2010年3月31日正式启动,而作为一种资本市场机制,做空机 制一直以来都饱受理论界和实务界的争议,做空机制对市场波动的影响尚未达成一致结论。本 文考察了做空机制与市场波动性之间的关系。研究发现：（1）在样本期间内,市场波动与做空 机制之间存在长期的稳定关系;（2）买空交易会在一定程度上增加市场波动,而卖空交易会 在一定程度上降低市场波动,但是二者的影响均有限;（3）综合来看,做空机制并不会引起证 券市场的异常波动,即使市场出现了大幅度的震荡,也不是由于卖空机制本身造成的;（4）本 文认为进一步完善做空机制尤其是卖空交易机制有助于稳定市场。本文结论对于评估做空机 制对市场波动的影响,防范经济冲击风险以及加强市场监管具有重要启示。