流动性冲击与资产价格波动研究——基于中国数据的实证检验

文章通过对推行改革开放以来我国流动性冲击与资产价格波动的实证研究发现,我国存在着显著的流动性冲击引致资产价格波动的现象,但流动性冲击对于资产价格波动的影响存在明显的时滞效应。对于不同的资产,流动性冲击引致资产价格波动的效应不同:对房地产市场而言,流动性冲击首先对房地产价格造成影响,但房地产价格对流动性冲击的反向影响作用并不明显,财富效应不显著;就股票市场来看,流动性冲击的效果体现得较慢,但后期二者相互影响,且关系较为稳定,存在显著的财富效应。     

我国证券市场流动性溢出效应的实证研究

2008年金融危机中的一个重要金融现象是流动性溢出效应.本文以我国沪深两市交易的国债和股票为样本,利用VAR技术分析了股票市场与债券市场之间的流动性溢出效应问题.由于我国股票市场的规模远大于交易所交易债券,我们发现存在显著的股市流向债市的流动性溢出效应,而债市流向股市的流动性溢出效应统计上却不显著.同时我们发现各个市场自身的收益率和波动率对其流动性也有着显著的影响.最后我们还发现两市自身的流动性存在着很强的自相关性.证据表明当我国资本市场出现流动性不足时,尤其要加强对股票市场流动性风险的防范和监管.同时也反映出我国要大力发展债券市场的必要,使股市和债市的流动性相互影响相得益彰.     

货币流动性过剩、噪声交易与资产价格波动

流动性过剩与投资者主体行为是影响资产价格波动的两个重要因素,通过将流动性过剩引入噪声交易模型,并在此基础上结合我国资本市场运行情况进行了分阶段的实证检验,发现我国长期存在流动性过剩现象,在资本市场平稳运行期间,流动性过剩与资产价格保持协整关系,而在资本市场过度波动时期,这种协整关系消失了,投资主体的行为特征成为这一时期资产价格的主导因素。从2000年至今的整个样本时期来看,流动性过剩并不必然导致资产价格上涨,但却对资产价格有潜在的冲击和抬升作用,因此是资产价格上涨的充分非必要条件。     

中国公司债券的信用利差与流动性风险

利用主成分分析法构造公司债券流动性风险测度指标,引入M-Copula函数和Markov机制转换模型实证分析中国公司债券的流动性风险与信用利差的关系。结果表明,M-Copula函数与Markov机制转换模型的实证结果一致。具体如下:公司债券的流动性风险对信用利差的影响是一个动态的非线性过程;两者之间存在显著的非对称尾部相关性,其中上尾相关性较高,即熊市时期流动性风险和信用利差同时增大的概率高于牛市时期,且熊市时期流动性风险对信用利差的影响程度显著高于其他时期。     

基于机构投资者交易需求的中国股市流动性研究

基于机构投资者的交易需求,结合对15家机构投资者的调研,通过实证数据发现:我国股市的流动性水平高于美国NYSE等世界其他主要证券市场,机构投资者一般对国内股市整体流动性水平比较满意。但是我国股市流动性波动率高,并且和市场回报率之间存在单向格兰杰因果关系。对机构投资者来说,当前我国股市主要的流动性问题不是流动性水平过高或过低的问题,而是流动性风险过高并难以和价格风险相分散。     

沪市内部人交易对股票流动性影响实证研究

本文选择买卖价差和报价深度作为度量流动性的指标,通过研究内部人交易信息披露日及其后的交易日股票流动性指标与内部人交易行为之间的关系,发现内部人交易行为的存在使得股票的流动性受到了影响,而内部入交易的股票数量越多则影响越大。在分析过程中纳入对于流动性同样有影响的交易量、股票价格,波动率等指标,发现在控制住这些变量后,内部人交易行为对股票流动性的影响依然显著。在分析内部人交易数量影响时,考虑到内部人交易数量与流动性之间可能具有的内生关系,建立联立方程组引入工具变量,研究发现消除内部人交易强度可能具有的内生性之后,对流动性的影响仍显著。     

中国银行间国债市场流动性及其影响因素

本文采用2002²012年由债券现券双边报价计算出的买卖价差作为衡量流动性的指标。首先,将国债按期限分为长期、中期和短期三类,再依据发行日期分为新券和旧券,文章具体分析了以上六类债券的流动性。其次,采用VAR模型分析了多个宏观经济变量对流动性指标的影响。研究表明:现券交易流动性水平与宏观经济走势相背离,且随着债券期限延长,流动性下降;在经济增长时期,短期国债旧券的流动性高于新券。此外,债券违约溢价对各期限债券的流动性有显著影响。格兰杰因果检验发现,中期和长期债券流动性分别是短/长期、短/中期债券流动性的格兰杰原因。     

运用高频数据衡量订单驱动市场的买卖价差

基于高频交易数据,运用指令簿价差、隐含价差和交易价差三种6个指标,综合衡量沪市买卖价差。发现：交易价差的时序波动明显异于其他指标,指令簿加权价差显著大于其他价差指标,其衡量结果偏大,隐含价差指标相对为优;买卖价差存在显著的价格效应,在市场剧烈波动阶段存在显著的规模效应;以相对买卖价差衡量的流动性在市场剧烈波动阶段好于市场平稳阶段。     

银行间债券市场的流动性问题分析与对策

金 融市场的流动性是指市场参与者能够迅速进行大量的金融交易 ,并且不会导致资金资产价格发生显著波动。债券市场完善的标志之一是债券的流动性 ,市场流动性的提高 ,不仅能有效降低中央财政的国债筹资成本和风险 ,而且有利于金融机构的资产负债管理和债券资产运作 ,维护投资者的切身利益 ,同时能为中央银行开展公开市场操作提供广泛的回旋余地 ,又利于促进金融市场的发展。为此 ,提高债券市场流动性成为各国债券管理政策的一项核心内容而被高度重视。一、银行间债券市场的流动性指标构建及分析(一 )市场流动性评价指标的构建。常用的评价市场流动性的指标可分为两类 :定义性指标和静态指标两类。其中衡量流动性的定义性指标是用宽度、深度及弹性来衡量 ,具体表述如下 :1、宽度 :通常用买卖报价差来衡量。买卖报价差等于做市商的卖出报价减买入报价。买卖报价差越小 ,说明市场的宽度越好。2、深度 :指的是在一个给定的买卖价格下 ,可以交易的债券数量。通常情况下 ,深度可以用盘中最高买入价乘以对应的数量与盘中最低卖出价乘以对应的数量之和来表示。其和越大 ,说明市场的深度越好。3、弹性 :是指由交易引起的价格波动恢复均衡的时间。通常通过观察交易后恢...     

流动性、交易制度与“庄家现象”

证券市场的流动性与交易制度之间存在着较强的相关性。我们区分了三种不同类型的交易制度 ,并分别讨论了不同的交易制度对流动性、价格稳定和市场透明度等方面的影响。我们观察到 ,我国目前采用的证券交易制度在流动性方面存在着较大的缺陷 ,这一缺陷的产生使得我国证券市场上的“庄家现象”更具复杂性 ,造成了市场流动性对庄家行为的不正常依赖 ,是“无庄不成市”的重要经济根源。对“庄家现象”与流动性和交易制度之间的关系进行全面梳理是本文的重点 ,特别是从经济学的角度驳斥了一些为庄家行为辩护的言论 ;在此基础上 ,我们对我国建立新的交易制度、引入做市商制度的的必要性、可行性以及主要问题等进行了讨论     

Uncertainty and liquidity in corporate bond market

We examine the uncertainty–liquidity connection in the corporate bond market. Using monthly corporate bond data from 2005 to 2010, we construct proxies for parameter uncertainty by using firm-level parameters generated from a structural model of corporate debt. We find that uncertainty about firm parameters decreases trading volume but increases bid-ask spreads and price bouncing in the cross-section and across time. In addition, the panel VAR results show that parameter uncertainty has negative forecasting power for future bond liquidity, with greater uncertainty in the current month leading to lower trading volume, higher bid-ask spreads and higher price fluctuations on subsequent months. We conclude that parameter uncertainty is one of the underlying factors giving rise to the high level of illiquidity in the corporate bond market.     

研究员收益预测差异与公司债券信用利差

机构研究员对上市公司的未来收益进行预测,预测差异常常造成债券价格出现偏差。以国内上市公司发行的债券为例,以研究员对收益预测的差异和债券信用利差进行了检验。结果发现,在卖空限制下,预测差异越大,债券信用利差越低。这种差异更多地代表了投资者的意见分歧,而非未来的风险水平。并且公司债券比企业债券的信用利差对投资者意见分歧更敏感。此外,还证实了银行间债券市场的流动性确实优于交易所债券市场;平均而言,公司债券的信用利差较企业债券的信用利差更低。     

基于风险补偿的企业债券定价研究

在有效市场中,企业债券的超额收益是对其所面临的风险可能导致损失的补偿,企业债券的理论价格是表征资金时间价值的无风险收益率和风险溢价的函数。根据市场无风险收益率、违约风险溢价,以及流动性风险溢价所遵循的随机波动方程,并考虑债券的违约回收率,本文构建了基于风险补偿的企业债券理论价格模型,并对2006年第3季度至2010年第1季度中国债券市场中32只企业债券的实际价格和理论价格进行了实证检验。研究发现,绝大多数企业债券的实际价格与理论价格差异不大,但少数中长期债券的实际价格系统性地低于理论价格;公用事业类企业债券的价格对市场信息不够敏感;我国债券市场上存在较多的套利资金。最后从所做的研究中,得出了完善我国债券市场的一些启示。     

Are Commodity Prices Driven by Fundamentals?

Physical scarcity is hardly sufficient to explain commodity price swings. However, despite of clues of commodity market inefficiency in the last decade, excess volatility in commodity markets emerges only under strong assumptions. When we allow for non‐stationarity in commodity prices and time variation in commodity‐specific risk premia, evidence of commodity market inefficiency becomes significantly weaker. Moreover, there is some evidence of commodity‐specific regime changes in commodity markets, with negligible or even positive correlation between efficiency and market liquidity.     

The time-varying and asymmetric dependence between crude oil spot and futures markets: Evidence from the Mixture copula-based ARJI–GARCH model

This paper designs a Mixture copula-based ARJI–GARCH model to simultaneously investigate the dynamic process of crude oil spot and futures returns and the time-varying and asymmetric dependence between spot and futures returns. The individual behavior of each market is modeled by the ARJI–GARCH process. The time-varying and asymmetric dependence is captured by the Mixture copula which is composed of the Gumbel copula and Clayton copula. Empirical results show three important findings. First, jumping behavior is an important process for each market. Second, spot and futures returns do not have the same jump process. Third, the tail dependence between spot and futures markets is time-varying and asymmetric with the magnitude of upper tail dependence being slightly weaker than that of lower tail dependence.     

Concentration and Liquidity in Mature Markets: Evidence from the US Dollar/Yen Futures Market

The cost of liquidity is the major cost of transacting on organised futures exchanges. Liquidity has value both to traders and to exchanges. This paper argues that liquidity varies directly with market development, and that this relationship provides a major incentive for mergers among exchanges. While previous research on liquidity has focused on spot markets for a range of securities, this paper employs data from the US dollar/Yen futures contract to investigate the relationship between liquidity and volume, between liquidity, volume and volatility, and between liquidity and the speculation ratio. The paper tests for non–linearity in these relationships, and explores the presence of Granger causality between pairs of key variables.
The results include inter alia the presence of a significant negative relationship between the cost of liquidity and volume, and evidence of a significant non–linear relationship in which the cost of liquidity varies directly with volatility and negatively with the conditional fourth moment about the mean of daily prices (a measure of kurtosis). Moreover, there is evidence that liquidity Granger causes volume, that volatility Granger causes volume, and that liquidity Granger causes the speculation ratio.     

Who poisons the pool? Time-varying asymmetric and nonlinear causal inference between low-risk and high-risk bonds markets

Corporate bond markets enable the efficient allocation of capital among competing firms, as well as an extensive degree of disintermediation. While the role of the junk bond market in financing leveraged buyouts, “fallen angels,” start-ups, small firms, and sovereign governments is known, little is known about interactions between low-risk (AAA) bonds markets and high-risk (CCC and below) bonds markets. In this study, we used a sample of daily data spanning 20 years to investigate the dynamic link in first and second moments between low-risk and high-risk bonds during calm and turbulent periods in the U.S. financial markets. Using asymmetric and nonlinear causality tests, as well as the extended DCC-GJR-GARCH model, we found evidence of an asymmetric and nonlinear unidirectional causal link from high-risk to low-risk bonds markets, which intensifies during bear markets. There is a bidirectional volatility and shock transmission only during normal bond market conditions. The high-risk bonds market induces more destabilizing effects in the corporate bond market than the low-risk bonds market. The time-varying, highly persistent, and negative correlation during normal market conditions provides the opportunity for combining low-risk and high-risk bonds to diversify a portfolio.     

中国股票市场流通性价值研究——基于非流通股协议转让与限售股转让的证据

文章利用股权分置改革前的非流通股协议转让样本与股权分置改革后的限售股票转让样本研究中国股票市场的流通性价值水平。研究结果表明,流通性存在价值,股权分置改革前,股票流通性价值水平均值约为66%,流通股市场的流动性显著影响股票流通性价值,但流通股的流动性与流通股价格波动率对股票流通性价值没有显著影响;股改后的股票流通性价值水平约为56%,流通股的流动性与波动性水平显著影响流通性价值。     

Is market liquidity less resilient after the financial crisis? Evidence for US Treasuries

Understanding market liquidity resilience, i.e. the capacity of liquidity to absorb shocks, of United States Treasuries is crucial from a financial stability standpoint. The conventional resilience measure has limitations due to the use of the liquidity level. We propose a new complementary approach to analyze resilience based on liquidity volatility. For this purpose, we focus on the link between returns volatility and liquidity volatility, which is a relatively unexplored field. We fit a bivariate conditional correlation (CC-) GARCH model for the 10-year bond returns and five liquidity indicators from January 2003 to June 2016 to analyze persistence and spillovers between these variables in a parsimonious way. We find that after the crisis, spillovers between liquidity volatility and returns volatility are higher, feedback loops are more likely and volatility persistence is lower, which is consistent with a lower resilience. Our results help to explain recent episodes of high volatility in this market.