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.     

SEO timing and liquidity risk

We extend the market timing literature to show that SEO timing can be characterized by the dynamics of liquidity risk. That is, firms tend to issue SEOs when liquidity risk declines to the point where investors have least concern of the risk. In the absence of liquidity risk, market risk rises right before SEOs and then gradually falls afterwards, consistent with the Q-theory (Carlson et al., 2010). However, once we include liquidity risk factor into the model for expected returns, issuing firms' market risk behaves like that of matched non-issuers, suggesting an omitted risk factor problem in SEO studies that does not take into account the effect of liquidity risk on stock returns. Furthermore, there is no evidence of post-issue long-run underperformance. Our results imply that, instead of timing alpha (i.e., exploiting overpricing, as behavioral finance has suggested), issuing firms time liquidity beta to minimize their cost of equity capital. The liquidity beta timing is especially evident in large offer size issuers.     

The liquidity risk of liquid hedge funds

This paper evaluates hedge funds that grant favorable redemption terms to investors. Within this group of purportedly liquid funds, high net inflow funds subsequently outperform low net inflow funds by 4.79% per year after adjusting for risk. The return impact of fund flows is stronger when funds embrace liquidity risk, when market liquidity is low, and when funding liquidity, as measured by the Treasury-Eurodollar spread, aggregate hedge fund flows, and prime broker stock returns, is tight. In keeping with an agency explanation, funds with strong incentives to raise capital, low manager option deltas, and no manager capital co-invested are more likely to take on excessive liquidity risk. These results resonate with the theory of funding liquidity by Brunnermeier and Pedersen (2009).     

Order Flows and Stock Returns: Compensation for Market Makers with Inventory Concerns

We investigate whether market makers with inventory concerns are compensated with subsequent monthly returns in the cross‐section. We find a significant negative relation between order flows and monthly returns, “the order flow effect,” suggesting that market makers lower prices for stocks with sell order flows and demand a reward in the form of higher expected returns. Further, the order flow effect is stronger for high‐volatility or high‐volume stocks for which market makers have serious inventory concerns. Funding liquidity of market makers also affects the order flow effect. Finally, our finding is independent of existing regularities and robust to the decimalization.     

Size,value, and momentum in developed country equity returns: Macroeconomic and liquidity exposures

The paper investigates value and momentum factors in 23 developed international stock markets. We find that typically value and momentum premia are smaller and more negatively correlated for large market capitalization stocks relative to small. Momentum factors are more highly correlated internationally relative to value. We provide international evidence on three sets of risk exposures of value and momentum returns: macroeconomic risk, funding liquidity risk, and stock market liquidity risk. We find that value returns are typically lower prior to a recession while momentum returns often exhibit little sensitivity. Value returns are typically lower in times of poor funding liquidity, whereas, with notable exceptions, momentum returns are typically unaffected. Lastly, for almost all countries, value returns are high in poor stock market liquidity conditions.     

Global liquidity risk in the foreign exchange market

Using a broad data set of 20 US dollar exchange rates and order flow of institutional investors over 14 years, we construct a measure of global liquidity risk in the foreign exchange (FX) market. Our FX liquidity measure may be seen as the analog of the well-known Pastor–Stambaugh liquidity measure for the US stock market. We show that this measure has reasonable properties, and that there is a strong common component in liquidity across currencies. Finally, we provide evidence that liquidity risk is priced in the cross-section of currency returns, and estimate the liquidity risk premium in the FX market around 4.7 percent per annum.     

Stock and Bond Liquidity and its Effect on Prices and Financial Policies

An asset is liquid if it can be traded at the prevailing market price quickly and at low cost. We show that in addition to risk, liquidity affects asset prices and returns. Theories of asset pricing suggest that the expected return of an asset is increasing in its risk, because risk-averse investors require compensation for bearing more risk. Because investors are also averse to the costs of illiquidity and want to be compensated for bearing them, asset returns are increasing in illiquidity. Thus, asset prices should depend on two asset characteristics: risk and liquidity. This paper surveys research on the effects of liquidity on asset prices and returns, showing that liquidity is an important factor in capital asset pricing.     

Liquidity,liquidity risk,and information flow: Lessons from an emerging market

This paper examines the role of public and private information flows in intraday liquidity and intraday liquidity risk in the Tunisian stock market. Our empirical results are based on ARMA and GARCH-type models and show that, for major Tunisian stocks, gradually elapsed public information together with gradually elapsed private information in the market is the dominant factor in liquidity improvements in the Tunisian stock market. Liquidity improvements are generated by a decrease in the bid-ask spread accompanied by an increase in the depth at best limit. Our results clearly indicate that the arrival of public information in a sequential manner is the dominant factor generating increases in liquidity risk related to the bid-ask spread, while the advent of private information in a contemporaneous manner is the dominant factor generating increases in liquidity risk related to the depth at best limit. Additionally, our results show that liquidity risk persistence disappears when trading volume and order imbalance are included as explanatory variables in the conditional variance equation.     

Liquidity,the Value of the Firm,and Corporate Finance*

The theory of corporate finance has been based on the idea that a company's market value is determined mainly by just two variables: the company's expected aftertax operating cash flows or earnings, and the risk associated with producing them. The authors argue that there is another important factor affecting a company's value: the liquidity of its own securities, debt as well as equity. The paper supports this argument by reviewing the large and growing body of evidence showing that differences—and, perhaps even more important, sudden changes—in liquidity can have major effects on the pricing of corporate stocks and bonds or, equivalently, on investors' required returns for holding them. The authors also suggest that the liquidity of a company's securities can be managed by corporate policies and actions. For those companies whose value is likely to be increased by having more liquid securities—which is by no means true of all companies (for example, mature firms with little need for outside equity are likely to benefit from having more concentrated ownership and hence less liquidity)—management should consider actions such as reducing leverage and substituting dividends for stock repurchases as well as measures designed to increase the effectiveness of their disclosure and investor relations program and the size of their retail investor base.     

Liquidity,the Value of the Firm,and Corporate Finance

The theory of corporate finance has been based on the idea that a company's market value is determined mainly by just two variables: the company's expected after‐tax operating cash flows or earnings, and the risk associated with producing them. The authors argue that there is another important factor affecting a company's value: the liquidity of its own securities, debt as well as equity. The paper supports this argument by reviewing the large and growing body of evidence showing that differences—and changes—in liquidity can have major effects on the pricing of corporate stocks and bonds or, equivalently, on investors' required returns for holding them. The authors also suggest that the liquidity of a company's securities can be managed by corporate policies and actions. For those companies whose value is likely to be increased by having more liquid securities—which is by no means true of all companies (mature firms that don't need outside capital may well benefit from having more concentrated ownership and hence less liquidity)—management should consider actions such as reducing leverage and substituting dividends for stock repurchases as well as measures designed to increase the effectiveness of their disclosure and investor relations program and the size of their investor base.     

The world price of liquidity risk

This paper empirically tests the liquidity-adjusted capital asset pricing model of Acharya and Pedersen (2005) on a global level. Consistent with the model, I find evidence that liquidity risks are priced independently of market risk in international financial markets. That is, a security’s required rate of return depends on the covariance of its own liquidity with aggregate local market liquidity, as well as the covariance of its own liquidity with local and global market returns. I also show that the US market is an important driving force of global liquidity risk. Furthermore, I find that the pricing of liquidity risk varies across countries according to geographic, economic, and political environments. The findings show that the systematic dimension of liquidity provides implications for international portfolio diversification.     

Stock Liquidity Risk and the Cross‐sectional Earnings‐Returns Relationship

We argue that a higher sensitivity to aggregate market‐wide liquidity shocks (i.e., a higher liquidity risk) implies a tendency for a stock's price to converge to fundamentals. We test this intuition within the framework of the earnings‐returns relationship. We find a positive liquidity risk effect on the relationship between return and expected change in earnings. This effect on the earnings‐returns relationship is distinct from the negative effect observed for stock illiquidity level. Notably, the liquidity risk effect is evident (absent) during periods of neutral/low (high) aggregate market liquidity. We also show that the liquidity risk effect is dominant in firms that: (a) are of intermediate size; (b) are of intermediate book‐to‐market; and (c) are profit making.     

Does liquidity drive stock market returns? The role of investor risk aversion

In this paper, we explore the relations between liquidity, stock returns, and investor risk aversion as captured by the variance risk premium (VRP). This is motivated by theoretical and empirical evidence in the literature which suggests that investor risk aversion negatively correlates with asset liquidity, and ample empirical evidence documenting liquidity risk premium. We use monthly US data from January 1999 to December 2018 and show that innovations in the VRP Granger-cause stock returns, which in turn drive liquidity. Our findings are consistent with predictions of prior theories and highlight the predictability of the VRP. They also contribute to the on-going debate on the causal relation between stock returns and liquidity. Finally, we explore the channels through which the VRP impacts liquidity and find that the VRP influences market and momentum factors, and that movements in these factors lead to changes in liquidity.

     

An Empirical Analysis of Stock and Bond Market Liquidity

This article explores cross-market liquidity dynamics by estimatinga vector autoregressive model for liquidity (bid-ask spreadand depth, returns, volatility, and order flow in the stockand Treasury bond markets). Innovations to stock and bond marketliquidity and volatility are significantly correlated, implyingthat common factors drive liquidity and volatility in thesemarkets. Volatility shocks are informative in predicting shiftsin liquidity. During crisis periods, monetary expansions areassociated with increased liquidity. Moreover, money flows togovernment bond funds forecast bond market liquidity. The resultsestablish a link between "macro" liquidity, or money flows,and "micro" or transactions liquidity.     

The Behavior of an Institutional Investor with Arbitrage Opportunities and Liquidity Risk

This study analyzes the efficiency of liquidity flows in stabilizing distressed markets from a theoretical perspective. We show that even in the event of a major negative market shock, a financial institution can increase its investment in the market when there is a strong incentive for arbitrage profit. However, the institution may choose to reduce its investment if the fear from liquidity risk exceeds the arbitrage incentive. In addition, our model reveals a positive relationship between funding liquidity and market liquidity. Our findings help to explain several financial issues in distressed markets, including the flight to quality, liquidity dry-ups, asset fire sales, and market shock amplifications.     

Very fast money: High-frequency trading on the NASDAQ

This paper provides evidence regarding high-frequency trader (HFT) trading performance, trading costs, and effects on market efficiency using a sample of NASDAQ trades and quotes that directly identifies HFT participation. I find that HFTs engage in successful intra-day market timing, spreads are wider when HFTs provide liquidity and tighter when HFTs take liquidity, and prices incorporate information from order flow and market-wide returns more efficiently on days when HFT participation is high.     

Dynamic asset–liability management in a Markov market with stochastic cash flows

This paper provides a general model to investigate an asset–liability management (ALM) problem in a Markov regime-switching market in a multi-period mean–variance (M–V) framework. Emphasis is placed on the stochastic cash flows in both wealth and liability dynamic processes, and the optimal investment and liquidity management strategies in achieving the M–V bi-objective of terminal surplus are evaluated. In this model, not only the asset returns and liability returns, but also the cash flows depend on the stochastic market states, which are assumed to follow a discrete-time Markov chain. Adopting the dynamic programming approach, the matrix theory and the Lagrange dual principle, we obtain closed-form expressions for the efficient investment strategy. Our proposed model is examined through empirical studies of a defined contribution pension fund. In-sample results show that, given the same risk level, an ALM investor (a) starting in a bear market can expect a higher return compared to beginning in a bull market and (b) has a lower expected return when there are major cash flow problems. The effects of the investment horizon and state-switching probability on the efficient frontier are also discussed. Out-of-sample analyses show the dynamic optimal liquidity management process. An ALM investor using our model can achieve his or her surplus objective in advance and with a minimum variance close to zero.     

Market liquidity risk factor and financial market anomalies: Evidence from the Chinese stock market

The Chinese stock market is an order-driven market and hence its characteristics are structurally different from quote-driven markets. There are no studies that consider the role of the market liquidity risk factor in determining cross-sectional stock returns in a model including financial market anomalies for order-driven markets. Our aim is to test whether financial market anomalies such as firm size, the book-to-market ratio, the turnover rate, and momentum both with and without the inclusion of the market liquidity risk factor in the case of the Chinese stock market can explain cross-sectional stock returns. The empirical framework is based on the model proposed by Avramov and Chordia (AC, 2006). Our main finding is that the AC model can capture financial market anomalies except momentum when we include the market liquidity risk factor on the Chinese stock market.     

Liquidity and market efficiency: A large sample study

Chordia et al. (2008, hereafter CRS) examine short horizon return predictability from past order flows of large, actively traded NYSE firms across three tick size regimes and conclude that higher liquidity facilitates arbitrage trading which enhances market efficiency. We extend CRS to a comprehensive sample of all NYSE firms and examine the dynamics between liquidity and market efficiency during informational periods. Our results indicate that although all NYSE firms experience an overall improvement in market efficiency across periods of different tick size regimes, this improvement varies significantly across the portfolios of sample companies formed on the basis of trading frequency, market capitalization, and trading volume. After controlling for these factors, we further document a positive association between a continuous measure of liquidity and market efficiency, and show that this effect is amplified during periods that contain new information, as reflected in high adverse selection component of the bid-ask spread.     

Liquidity and Returns to Target Shareholders in the Market for Corporate Control: Evidence from the US Markets

In this paper we analyze how stock market liquidity affects the abnormal return to target firms in mergers and tender offers. We predict that target firms with poorer stock market liquidity receive larger announcement day abnormal returns based on the following considerations. First, target firms with poorer stock market liquidity receive greater liquidity improvements after a merger or tender offer. Second, deals that involve less liquid targets are less anticipated and/or more likely to be completed. Third, less liquid stocks have more diverse reservation prices across shareholders and thus require a higher takeover return. Consistent with these expectations, we show that abnormal returns to target firms’ shareholders are significantly and positively related to the difference in liquidity (measured by the bid‐ask spread) between acquirers and targets as well as the magnitude of target firms’ liquidity improvement.