Domestic liquidity and cross-listing in the United States

This study examines changes in domestic liquidity after cross-listing in the United States. Our liquidity measures are based on intraday data from domestic markets for a large sample of firms that cross-list in the United States and for a matched sample of firms that do not cross-list. We find that unadjusted liquidity significantly improves after cross-listing. However, after controlling for contemporaneous changes in liquidity for a matched sample of firms that do not cross-list, there is no evidence of improvements in domestic liquidity due to cross-listing. Our results offer no support for the bonding hypothesis, or for the hypothesis that cross-listing improves domestic liquidity because of increased intermarket competition and additional order flow.     

The impact of listing Latin American ADRs on the risks and returns of the underlying shares

This paper examines the risks and returns of Latin American stocks following American depository receipt (ADR) listings in U.S. equity markets and finds no systematic change in their volatility. This finding differs from previous results for ADR introduction on European and Asian stocks, although it is consistent with several prior findings on international stock listings. Importantly, it supports the predictions of Domowitz, Glen, and Madhavan's 1998 model of international cross-listings. This model predicts that the effects of such listings will differ across stocks because the net effect is indicative of the specific trade-off for each individual stock between benefits of enhanced intermarket competition and costs stemming from the diversion of information-linked orders out of the domestic market.     

Crises,contagion and cross-listings

We investigate whether cross-listing shares in the form of depositary receipts in overseas markets benefits investors in emerging market countries during periods of local financial crisis from 1994 to 2002. We regress cumulative abnormal returns for three windows surrounding the crisis events on the cross-listing status while controlling for cross-sectional differences in firm age, trading volume, foreign exposure, disclosure quality and corporate governance. Further, we examine cross-listing effects in countries popularly thought to experience contagious effects of these crises. We find that cross-listed firms react significantly less negatively than non-cross-listed firms, particularly in the aftermath of the crisis. The results on contagious cross-listing effects are however mixed. Our findings are consistent with predictions based on theories of market segmentation as well as differential disclosure/governance between developed and emerging markets. We do not find evidence that foreign investors “panic” during a currency crisis.     

EVIDENCE ON ADJUSTMENTS IN MAJOR NATIONAL STOCK MARKET LINKAGES OVER THE 1980S

This paper measures the alterations that have occurred in equity market correlations for six major internationally active stock exchanges between 1980 and 1987. The markets are chosen so as to allow for geographical diversity while still accounting for almost ninety percent of total worldwide equity market capitalization. The VAR variance decomposition technique is used to measure intermarket linkage patterns. We find substantial alterations in intermarket linkage patterns occurring over the 1980s. While the US market (the New York Stock Exchange) is still the dominant financial force in world equities trading, other markets (particularly those in the Pacific Basin region) now account for an increasing impact on observed index correlations in the system. This paper suggests that world financial integration is, in part, responsible for the altered linkage patterns observed over the 1980s.     

A theory of optimal expropriation, mergers and industry competition

We model a competitive industry where managers choose quantities and costs to maximize a combination of firm profits and benefits from expropriation. Expropriation is possible because of corporate governance ‘slack’ permitted by the government. We show that corporate governance slack induces managers to choose levels of output and costs that are higher than would otherwise be optimal. This, in turn, benefits consumers - the equilibrium price is lower - and other stakeholders such as suppliers and employees. Depending on the government’s social welfare objective, less-than-perfect investor protection can be optimal. We show why some mechanisms suggested by the literature as improving investor protection - legal change, cross-listing, domestic mergers - may not be effective. We provide a theoretical argument showing the efficacy of cross-border mergers. The stronger corporate governance of a foreign acquirer, imposed on the domestic target firm, benefits merging shareholders and those of competing unmerged domestic firms.     

MARKET EXPECTATIONS AND THE VALUATION EFFECTS OF EQUITY ISSUANCE

We examine how the wealth effects of equity offers are influenced by investors' expectation of the equity type (public or private) to be issued. Firms deviating to the public market may be issuing when information asymmetry or agency costs are high, and their wealth effects are more negative than for firms that are anticipated to issue equity publicly. Firms deviating to the private market, however, may signal firm undervaluation or monitoring benefits and experience more positive wealth effects than firms that are expected to issue equity privately. For the private issues, public market accessibility appears to influence the wealth effects.     

Home bias in equity portfolios, inflation hedging, and international capital market equilibrium

We test whether the home bias in equity portfolios is causedby investors trying to hedge inflation risk. The empirical evidenceis consistent with this motive only if investors have very highlevels of risk tolerance and equity returns are negatively correlatedwith domestic inflation. We then develop a model of internationalportfolio choice and equity market equilibrium that integratesinflation risk and deadweight costs. Using this model we estimatethe levels of costs required to generate the observed home biasin portfolios consistent with different levels of risk aversion.For a level of risk aversion consistent with standard estimatesof the domestic equity market risk premium these costs are abouta few percent per annum greater than observable costs such aswithholding taxes. Thus, the home bias cannot be explained byeither inflation hedging or direct observable costs of internationalinvestment unless investors have very low levels of risk aversion.     

Does cross-listing in the US foster mergers and acquisitions and increase target shareholder wealth?

We examine the role of cross-listing in alleviating domestic market constraints and facilitating mergers and acquisitions. Our results show that cross-listing allows shareholders of target firms to extract higher takeover premiums relative to their non-cross-listed peers. Moreover, shareholders of Sarbanes–Oxley-compliant targets seem to benefit from a higher premium. We also find that cross-listed firms are more likely to be acquisition targets, consistent with the belief that cross-listing increases firms’ attractiveness and visibility on the market for corporate control. Our results are robust to various specifications and to the self-selection bias arising from the decision to cross-list.     

Competition, interlisting and market structure in options trading

This paper applies a game theory approach to examine the effects of a market structure change in options trading from a monopoly to a Cournot-type oligopoly that occurred in two successive periods on the Montreal exchange. We analyze the intra-day behaviour of option bid-ask spreads and find that cross-listing has a differential impact on spreads, affecting quoted but not effective spreads under oligopoly. We also find that the impact of the change in structure on effective spreads comes mostly from an increase in limit orders and is consistent with a switch from Cournot to Bertrand-type strategic behaviour for such orders. We conclude that market structure effects within an options exchange are enough to realize most of the benefits of inter-market competition even in the context of market thinness.     

Investor communication and the benefits of cross-listing

While studies have sought to explain the benefits of cross-listing, little attention has been paid to the role of communication between managers and investors during this process. In this paper, I investigate whether managers change communication policies around U.S. cross-listings. I document significant increases in communication when firms cross-list. I then test whether these investor communication practices around cross-listing are associated with capital market benefits. I find that cross-listed firms that communicate more with investors experience greater and longer lasting cross-listing benefits. Lastly, I explore two potential reasons that may lead managers to choose higher levels of communication: to support an increase in investor recognition and to facilitate monitoring. I find results consistent with communication increasing visibility and scrutiny, suggesting that communication functions as a supporting tool to achieve managers’ cross-listing goals.     

Returns and network growth of digital tokens after cross-listings

This paper examines the role of cross-listings in the digital token marketplace ecosystem. Using a unique set of publicly available and hand-collected data from 3625 tokens traded in 108 marketplaces, we find significant increases in price, trading volume, network growth and on-chain activity around the date of a token's first cross-listing. Tokens earn a 16% crypto-market adjusted return in the two weeks around the cross-listing date. Daily network growth triples on the day of cross-listing. Using the uniquely heterogeneous characteristics of token marketplaces, we identify specific value-creation channels. We provide the first evidence supporting value creation through network externalities proposed by recent token-valuation models. Consistent with equity cross-listing theory, we find higher returns for cross-listings that reduce market segmentation and improve information production. Our reported findings have significant policy implications in terms of more transparent regulations to reduce financial misconduct in the digital marketplace.     

交叉上市、风险分散与溢出效应

本文从非交叉上市公司对交叉上市的市场反应入手，利用对比公司法（MatchedFirmApproach）和事件研究法，实证分析了交叉上市对国内非交叉上市公司带来的影响。分析表明，我国的交叉上市政策增强了国内股票市场的风险分散功能，给国内上市公司带来了正的净溢出效应。     

Cross-Listings and M&A Activity: Transatlantic Evidence

We analyze whether European firms choose to list shares in the US to facilitate acquisitions. Evidence from a sample of 547 European companies shows that cross-listed firms are significantly more active in acquiring US companies than are their domestically listed peers. This pattern holds even after we account for self-selection in the cross-listing decision. Cross-listed firms are also more likely to use equity payment in large transactions, but after taking self-selection into account, transaction size becomes the key determinant of the use of equity. After cross-listing, the proportion of aggregate M&A volume financed with equity increases.     

The Debt Equivalence Of Leases In The UK: An Empirical Investigation

In finance theory, leasing is viewed as a form of borrowing. Prior studies have indicated that secured debt and lease are regarded as equivalent by the capital market.The following questions are addressed: i) do debt and lease have the same effects on the volatility of equity return? ii) Have changes in the accounting regulations altered the effect of lease obligation on the volatility of equity return? The results indicate that, on average, finance leases have a positive effect on the volatility of the return on equity as debt does. It is also found that the market considers leases more favourably (less risky) than debt.Two explanations are possible for the favourable treatment: i) the finance lease obligations are less like debts due to the imposed capitalisation requirements; ii) firms pay high costs of leasing because of the benefits from leasing relative to debt and the market reacts to those benefits favourably.     

Competition among exchanges through simplified disclosure requirements: evidence from the American and Global Depositary Receipts

In this study, we address the ongoing debate as to whether the competition among the world's major exchanges through simplified disclosure requirements is justified. Companies from across the globe have a choice of cross-listing shares as either American or Global Depositary Receipts (ADRs and GDRs, respectively). The former are primarily listed on the US exchanges – NYSE, NASDAQ and AMEX – whereas the latter are issued into non-US markets such as the London Stock Exchange (LSE). The GDRs listed on the LSE are subject to simplified disclosure requirements compared to their exchange-listed ADR peers that have to meet more stringent compliance standards. Proponents of the ‘light touch’ approach argue that firms cross-listing as GDRs are not subject to the higher reporting costs faced by ADRs yet still face similar valuation benefits. Those who challenge this approach argue that simplified disclosure requirements set by the LSE will ultimately be recognised by the market as ineffective, diverting traders from investing in GDRs. This study provides evidence that supports the LSE's ‘light touch’ approach and shows that the benefits of information risk reduction for ADRs and GDRs are comparable. The explanation for this finding is that the two avenues through which information asymmetry is expected to be resolved after cross-listing – disclosure and analysts – are substitutive and make equally important contribution to information risk reduction, eventually leading to similar cost of capital decline for ADRs and GDRs.     

Equity cross-listings in the U.S. and the price of debt

Using a large panel from 46 countries over 20 years, we find that non-U.S. firms issue corporate bonds more frequently and at lower offering yields following an equity cross-listing on a U.S. exchange. Firms issue more bonds through public offerings instead of private placements and in foreign markets rather than at home, in both cases at significantly lower yields. Moreover, the debt-related benefits are concentrated among firms domiciled in countries with less private benefits of control, efficient debt enforcement, and developed bond markets, suggesting that equity cross-listings cannot completely offset the impact of weak home country institutions. The results support the notion that the monitoring, transparency, and visibility benefits brought about by equity cross-listings on U.S. exchanges are valuable to bond investors.     

Cost of capital effects and changes in growth expectations around U.S. cross-listings

This paper examines whether cross-listing in the U.S. reduces firms’ costs of capital. We estimate cost of capital effects implied by market prices and analyst forecasts, which accounts for changes in growth expectations around cross-listings. Firms with cross-listings on U.S. exchanges experience a decrease in their cost of capital between 70 and 120 basis points. These effects are sustained and exist after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We find smaller reductions for cross-listings in the over-the-counter market and for exchange-listings from countries with stronger legal institutions. For exchange-traded cross-listings, the cost of capital reduction accounts for over half of the increase in firm value, whereas for other types of cross-listings the valuation effects are primarily attributable to contemporaneous revisions in growth expectations.     

Cross-listing and subsequent delisting in foreign markets

Employing a sample of stocks cross-listed and subsequently delisted from foreign markets, we examine the consequences of delisting to investors in terms of price, risk, and liquidity. We also provide a direct comparison between the firm's performance after a foreign cross-listing and after its subsequent delisting. We find a positive cross-listing and negative delisting effect on stock price, both of which dissipate in the long run. No significant changes in the market risk are found for either event. Foreign cross-listing and delisting are associated with increasing and decreasing long term trading volume respectively. Further analysis reveals that firms delist in response to low host market return and low firm trading volume in the host market. The changes in liquidity and market risk from delisting relate those from cross-listing. Finally, our results show that the bonding hypothesis fails to explain the listing premium and the delisting loss.     

Calculating the equity cost of capital using the APT: the impact of the ERM

One of the expected benefits of membership of the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) was a reduction in risk which should lead to a lower cost of capital and foster investment and growth. Using the APT, we investigate the behavior of the equity market risk premium for the London Stock Exchange prior to and during sterling's membership of the ERM. We find that prior to and during the first year of membership the equity market risk premium fell quite dramatically. However, when conflict between domestic and ERM policy requirements arose at the turn of 1991, the equity risk premium increased and continued to do so until sterling's exit, partially wiping out the benefits of membership of the ERM.     

Valuation effects of domestic and international seasoned equity offerings by Canadian cross-listed firms

This paper finds significant differences in the price impacts around the announcement date for domestic and international seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) by Canadian issuers cross-listed on US trade venues. Important determinants that differ by US cross-listing trade venue are identified for the price impacts associated with domestic and international SEOs. The significant determinants are variables that proxy for positive private and public firm information for the domestic SEOs of issuers cross-listed on NASDAQ, and are mainly variables that proxy for negative private information for the domestic SEOs of issuers cross-listed on the NYSE/AMEX. Good and bad news affect domestic and international SEOs favorably and unfavorably, respectively. The only common determinant for the domestic and international SEOs and for domestic SEOs for both groupings of US listing venues is whether or not the issue is primary.