Presidential administrations and the day-of-the-week effect in stock returns

This study examines the presence of a day-of-the-week effect over different presidential administrations. The results indicate that the day-of-the-week effect prevails during the Democratic and Republican administrations. However, the pattern of the day-of-the-week effect differs between the two presidential administrations. Specifically, the negative returns on Monday are more pronounced during the Republican than during the Democratic administrations. Therefore, explanations for the day-of-the-week effect should take into account the changing pattern of the day-of-the-week effect across presidential administrations.     

Day-of-the-week and intraday effects in stock returns

This study examines day-of-the-week effects using hourly values of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. We find that over the 1963–1983 period the weekend effect has sifted from characterizing active trading on Monday to characterizing the non-trading weekend. Over the early part of our sample period negative returns characterize each hour of trading on Monday, while the return from Friday close to Monday open is positive. In the most recent subperiod, Monday average hourly returns after noon are all positive and the weekend effect is due to negative average returns from Friday close to Monday open.     

The day-of-the-week effect in conditional correlation

The day-of-the-week effect in the first and second moments of the return distribution is a well researched area. However, not many studies have attempted to identify this effect in the comovement or correlation of the markets. This paper models the day-of-the-week effect in the returns and the conditional correlation for some Asia-Pacific equity markets. The paper finds a Monday, Wednesday and Friday effects in the returns for some of the markets. The effect is totally absent in the returns for Australia, Japan and Korea. For the fifteen conditional correlation series estimated, a predominant Tuesday effect is detected for five series. Three series exhibit a Monday effect. A Thursday effect is detected between the Singapore market and the markets of Australia, Hong Kong and Thailand. The paper finds no consistent day-of-the-week effect in the returns and the correlations for this region. JEL Classification G15 · G14     

European day-of-the-week effects,beta asymmetries and international herding*

European equity markets with the most robust day-of-the-week effects in mean returns also exhibit day-of-the-week effects in risk. Betas measured relative to a world index are higher on Monday than on other days of the week, especially when returns on the world market are negative. After adjustments for beta asymmetries and for weekend vs weekday holding period horizons, day-of-the-week effects in residual risk and risk-adjusted mean returns weaken substantially compared to such effects measured with constant betas. These findings are consistent with the recent work of King and Wadhwani (1990), Froot et al. (1992) and Lakonishok and Maberly (1990).     

New Findings Regarding Day-of-the-Week Returns over Trading and Non-Trading Periods: A Note

This paper decomposes daily close to close returns into trading day and non-trading day returns. We discover that all of the average negative returns from Friday close to Monday close documented in the literature for stock market indexes occurs during the non-trading period from Friday close to Monday open. In addition, average trading day returns (open to close) are identical for all days of the week. January/firm size/turn-of-the-year anomalies are shown to be interrelated with day-of-the-week returns.     

A Further Investigation of the Weekend Effect in Stock Returns

This study uses a longer time period and additional stocks to further investigate the weekend effect. We find consistently negative Monday returns (1) for the S & P Composite as early as 1928, (2) for Exchange-traded stocks of firms of all sizes, and (3) for actively traded over-the-counter (OTC) stocks. The OTC results are based on bid prices and therefore appear to reject specialist-related explanations. For the 30 individual stocks of the Dow Jones Industrial Index, the average correlation between Friday and Monday returns is positive and the highest of all pairs of successive days. The latter finding is inconsistent with fairly general measurement-error explanations.     

THE HOLIDAY EFFECT IN STOCK RETURNS: EVIDENCE FROM THE OTC MARKET

The patterns of daily returns in over-the-counter (OTC) stocks are examined to determine if a holiday effect exists in the OTC market. For the sample period of 1973–1989, test results provide evidence of unusually high returns on pre-holiday trading days and unusually low returns on post-holiday trading days in the OTC market. Additional analyses indicate that other documented calendar anomalies do not cause the pre-holiday effect, but the day-of-the-week effect apparently drives the post-holiday effect.     

GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, VOLUME, AND THE MONDAY EFFECT

New evidence is presented on the nature of the Monday effect in stock market returns. Using stock returns for the years 1962-1986, the Monday effect is found to be confined to periods of negative market returns. Monday's returns are no different from other weekday returns in periods of positive returns. In addition, trading volume and the Monday effect are related. Monday's volume is lower than the other weekdays. When returns are compared controlling for trading volume, we find that the Monday effect is confined to negative return periods with above normal volume, which represent only two per cent of the sample period.     

DAY OF THE WEEK EFFECTS: A TEST OF THE INFORMATION TIMING HYPOTHESIS

Many explanations have been offered for the negative Monday effect. An obvious conjecture is that the negative return might be due to firms timing the release of information after the market closes on Friday. We test this conjecture on a sample of 233 firms for 1986. Using a firm's board meeting date as a proxy for high information days we find that a firm's Monday return near a board meeting date is more likely to be negative than other Monday returns. Also the remaining days of the week tend to be more positive than similar days further away from the board meeting. Our results appear to explain part of the negative Monday effect.     

Short Selling and the Weekend Effect for NYSE Securities

Using short-sale transactions data, we examine the relation between short selling and the weekend effect. We do not find that short selling is more abundant on Monday than on Friday, even for stocks that have higher Friday returns. We find that short sellers execute more short-sale volume during the middle of the week, and that the positive correlation between short selling and returns on Monday is greater, on average, than the correlation on the other days of the week. Our results are robust to subsamples of stocks with larger weekend effects and stocks that do not have listed options.     

SMALL FIRM AND VALUE EFFECTS IN THE CANADIAN STOCK MARKET

We examine the relation among average returns, market beta, firm size, and book-to-market value for Canadian stocks during 1975–92. We document a negative relation between average return and the market capitalization of firms, but find no relation between average return and market beta. While the small firm effect is significant during a period of reduced capital gains tax, it is noticeably lower than during the period leading up to the change. We find that average returns are positively related to book-to-market value especially during the period of lower capital gains tax.     

The information content of stock split announcements: Do options matter?

We provide a new test of the informational efficiency of trading in stock options in the context of stock split announcements. These announcements tend to be associated with positive abnormal returns. Our traditional event study results show abnormal returns that are significantly lower for optioned than non-optioned stocks, whether traded on the NYSE, Amex, or Nasdaq. After controlling for market returns, capitalization, book-to-market ratio, and trading volume, we find that the abnormal returns are significantly lower for NYSE/Amex optioned than non-optioned stocks. Although the results for Nasdaq stocks are not as clear, the overall effects tend to be lower after optioning. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the prices of optioned stocks embody more information, diminishing the impact of the stock split announcement. They provide new evidence of the beneficial effects of options on their underlying stocks.     

A New Look at the Monday Effect

It is well documented that expected stock returns vary with the day-of-the-week (the Monday or weekend effect). In this article we show that the well-known Monday effect occurs primarily in the last two weeks (fourth and fifth weeks) of the month. In addition, the mean Monday return of the first three weeks of the month is not significantly different from zero. This result holds for most of the subperiods during the 1962–1993 sampling period and for various stock return indexes. The monthly effect reported by Ariel (1987) and Lakonishok and Smidt (1988) cannot fully explain this phenomenon.     

PRICE AND VOLUME EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CREATION OF STANDARD & POOR'S MIDCAP INDEX

In this paper we explore price and volume effects associated with the 1991 creation of Standard & Poor's MidCap 400 index. Prior work on changes in the composition of existing indices finds a significant price response to the announcement. Various authors link the effect to price pressure, information, an outwardly shifting demand curve for securities, and the increased attention that comes with inclusion in an index. Using event study methodology, we find significant price and volume effects during the two weeks leading up to the Standard & Poor's announcement, but no significant effect in the two-day interval around the event. Apparently, information leakage and/or anticipation preceded the creation of the index. The price run-up is permanent since the positive abnormal returns leading up through the announcement are not associated with significantly negative abnormal returns after the announcement. In addition, MidCap stocks significantly outperform the market during the fifty-two weeks following the announcement. Using cross-sectional regressions, we show that these prior-period abnormal returns are positively related to abnormal volume and institutional holdings. We also find that firms trading over-the-counter had larger price run-ups than NYSE or AMEX firms.     

The day-of-the-week effect in foreign exchange markets: multi-currency evidence

To investigate to what extent transaction mechanism matters, we examine the daily returns of 29 foreign exchange rates in the New York market. This paper finds that the day-of-the-week effect existed in the 1980s for some, not all, currencies. The fact that the day-of-the-week effect existed for only some currencies suggests that the US transaction mechanism alone cannot explain the anomaly. Furthermore, this paper finds that the day-of-the-week effect disappears for almost all currencies in the 1990s. This latter result is consistent with previous studies on anomalies in the stock markets.     

Weekend Effect, 'Reverse' Weekend Effect, and Investor Trading Activities

Abstract:   In this study, we document evidence of a 'reverse' weekend effect – whereby Monday returns are significantly positive and they are higher than the returns on other days of the week – over an extended period of eleven years (from 1988 to 1998). We also find that the 'traditional' weekend effect and the 'reverse' effect are related to firm size in that the 'traditional' weekend effect tends to be associated with small firms while the 'reverse' weekend effect tends to be associated with large firms. In addition, we find that during the period in which the 'reverse' weekend effect is observed, Monday returns for large firms tend to follow previous Friday returns when previous Friday returns are positive , but they do not follow the previous Friday returns when Friday returns are negative . Furthermore, we find that during the period in which the 'reverse' weekend effect is observed, Monday returns are positively related to the volume of medium‐size and block transactions, but negatively related to the volume of odd‐lot transactions.     

Reconcilable Differences: Momentum Trading by Institutions

A growing literature evaluates the relation between lag returns and demand by institutional investors. Given that lag returns and institutional ownership are directly observable, it is surprising that previous tests yield dramatically different conclusions. This study examines differences across studies and finds that four factors account for these discrepancies: (1) value‐weighting versus equal‐weighting across stocks, (2) averaging versus aggregating over managers, (3) disagreement in the signs of measures of institutional demand, and (4) correlation between current capitalization and both lag returns and measures of institutional demand. Controlling for these factors, the results across different methods are remarkably uniform.     

Explaining Monday Returns

The Monday effect is reexamined using two stock indexes and a sample of 452 individual stocks that trade on the London Stock Exchange. The results based on conventional test methods reveal a negative average return on Monday. Extending the analysis to examine the effects of various possible influences simultaneously, the average Monday return becomes positive and does not differ significantly from the average returns of most other days of the week. Fortnight, ex‐dividend day, account period, (bad) news flow, trading activity, and bid‐ask spread effects are all controlled for. The results broadly support the trading time hypothesis.     

The turn-of-the-year effect and tax-loss-selling by institutional investors

Prior studies attribute the turn-of-the-year effect whereby small capitalization stocks earn unusually high returns in early January to tax-loss-selling by individual investors and window-dressing by institutional investors. My results suggest that a significant portion of the effect on turn-of-the-year returns that prior studies attribute to window-dressing is actually attributable to tax-loss-selling by institutional investors. Among small capitalization stocks, I find that institutional investors with strong tax incentives and weak window-dressing incentives realize significantly more losses in the fourth quarter than in the first three quarters of the calendar year, and that their fourth quarter realized losses have a significant impact on turn-of-the-year returns. A one percentage point change in these institutional investors' fourth quarter realized losses scaled by a firm's market capitalization results in an increase of 47 basis points in the firm's average daily return over the first three trading days of January, which represents a 46 percent change for the mean firm.     

Evidence on the Characteristics of Cross Sectional Variation in Stock Returns

Firm sizes and book-to-market ratios are both highly correlated with the average returns of common stocks. Fama and French (1993) argue that the association between these characteristics and returns arise because the characteristics are proxies for nondiversifiable factor risk. In contrast, the evidence in this article indicates that the return premia on small capitalization and high book-to-market stocks does not arise because of the comovements of these stocks with pervasive factors. It is the characteristics rather than the covariance structure of returns that appear to explain the cross-sectional variation in stock returns.