Trading and Liquidity on the Tokyo Stock Exchange: A Bird's Eye View

The trading mechanism for equities on the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) stands in sharp contrast to the primary mechanisms used to trade stocks in the United States. In the United States, exchange-designated specialists have affirmative obligations to provide continuous liquidity to the market. Specialists offer simultaneous and tight quotes to both buy and sell and supply sufficient liquidity to limit the magnitude of price changes between consecutive transactions. In contradistinction, the TSE has no exchange-designated liquidity suppliers. Instead, liquidity is provided through a public limit order book, and liquidity is organized through restrictions on maximum price changes between trades that serve to slow down trading. In this article, we examine the efficacy of the TSE's trading mechanisms at providing liquidity. Our analysis is based on a complete record of transactions and best-bid and best-offer quotes for most stocks in the First Section of the TSE over a period of 26 months. We study the size of the bid-ask spread and its cross-sectional and intertemporal stability; intertemporal patterns in returns, volatility, volume, trade size, and the frequency of trades; and market depth based on the response of quotes to trades and the frequency of trading halts and warning quotes.     

Liquidity and stock returns in pure order-driven markets: evidence from the Australian stock market

This paper examines the relationship between liquidity and stock returns in the pure order-driven stock market of Australia. The bid-ask spread, turnover rate, and amortized spread are used as proxies for liquidity. In addition to liquidity, other factors that have been found to influence stock returns, such as beta and size, are also considered. Seemingly unrelated regressions (SUR) and the cross-sectionally correlated timewise autoregressive (CSCTA) model form the methodological basis for this research. A small liquidity premium is found in the Australian market, which persists for the entire year. There is also strong evidence of a negative size effect.     

JUNK BOND BEHAVIOR WITH DAILY RETURNS AND BUSINESS CYCLES

Using the Merrill Lynch daily junk bond index, we re-examine and extend previous junk bond return results. We include the effect of business cycles on junk and investment-grade bonds, the sensitivity of junk bond returns to economic activity and/or interest rates, and sample periods that allow us to investigate periods of reduced junk bond liquidity. Daily data confirm the same curious return behavior identified in studies using monthly returns. However, we reveal for the first time that junk bond returns track the movement of interest rates during economically good times but track stock returns during bad times.     

Trading patterns of big versus small players in an emerging market: An empirical analysis

This study uses a Vector Autoregressive (VAR) model to examine interdependencies among institutional investors, big individual investors, and small individual investors, and the effects of their trading on stock returns on the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TSE). The results imply that, during the sample period, big individual investors are the most well informed players; their trading affects not only stock returns but also small individual investors. Small individual investors are not well informed and are slow learners. Their orders to trade tend to provide liquidity to institutional and big individual investors, but there is no compensation for their liquidity services. We find that institutional investors follow neither positive-feedback nor negative-feedback trading strategies. Overall, the responses to shocks, except for those of small individual investors, decay quickly, indicating that the TSE can absorb shocks quickly and efficiently. Our analysis implies that small individual investors would be better off institutionalizing their investment decisions (e.g., by investing in mutual funds).     

Liquidity and Return Relationships in an Emerging Market

In this paper, we investigate the relationship between liquidity and stock returns in the Vietnam stock market during the global financial crisis. Vietnam is one of a new group of frontier emerging markets referred to as CIVETS (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey, and South Africa). We use a rich and detailed data set of firm characteristics to identify a positive relationship between liquidity and stock returns. This contradicts the negative correlation typically found in stock returns in developed markets. Our results support the proposition that when a market is not fully integrated with the global economy, a lack of liquidity will be a less important risk factor. Our findings contribute to those studies that highlight the diversification benefits from including frontier markets, which have a lower degree of integration with the global economy, in international portfolios.     

Real and Financial Industry Booms and Busts

We examine how product market competition affects firm cash flows and stock returns in industry booms and busts. Our results show how real and financial factors interact in industry business cycles. In competitive industries, we find that high industry-level stock market valuation, investment, and financing are followed by sharply lower operating cash flows and abnormal stock returns. Analyst estimates are positively biased and returns comove more. In concentrated industries these relations are weak and generally insignificant. Our results are consistent with participants in competitive industries not fully internalizing the negative externality of industry competition on cash flows and stock returns.     

Portfolio Returns,Market Volatility,and Seasonality

This paper examines three important issues related to the relationship between stock returns and volatility. First, are Duffee's (1995) findings of the relationship between individual stock returns and volatility valid at the portfolio level? Second, is there a seasonality of the market return volatility? Lastly, do size portfolio returns react symmetrically to the market volatility during business cycles? We find that the market volatility exhibits strong autocorrelation and small size portfolio returns exhibit seasonality. However, this phenomenon is not present in large size portfolios. For the entire sample period of 1962–1995, the highest average monthly volatility occurred in October, followed by November, and then January. Examining the two sub-sample periods, we find that the average market volatility increases by 15.4% in the second sample period of 1980–1995 compared to the first sample period of 1962–1979. During the contraction period, the average market volatility is 60.9% higher than that during the expansion period. Using a binary regression model, we find that size portfolio returns react asymmetrically with the market volatility during business cycles. This paper documents a strongly negative contemporaneous relationship between the size portfolio returns and the market volatility that is consistent with the previous findings at the aggregate level, but is inconsistent with the findings at the individual firm level. In contrast with the previous findings, however, we find an ambiguous relationship between the percentage change in the market volatility and the contemporaneous stock portfolio returns. This ambiguity is attributed to strongly negative contemporaneous and one-month ahead relationships between the market volatility and portfolio returns.

     

Stock returns and economic forces—An empirical investigation of Chinese markets

This study finds evidence that a better macroeconomic climate and an improvement in liquidity help to explain Chinese stock returns. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that growth in dividend yields can predict stock returns. The sectoral stock returns in China's markets are correlated with stock returns in the US markets as evidenced by: (i) a positive correlation with US stock returns; (ii) a significant negative error correcting term; (iii) a negative response of Chinese stocks to financial stress in the US market; and (iv) a positive correlation with a depreciation in the China/US exchange rate.     

UNLISTED TRADING PRIVILEGES,LIQUIDITY, AND STOCK RETURNS

In this study we examine the effect of dual trading through unlisted trading privileges (UTPs) on liquidity and stock returns. Stocks with UTPs trade in a different market structure than stocks listed and traded only on the AMEX and NYSE. Differences in market structure may affect stock returns through liquidity services provided by the competing markets. The sample comprises 852 AMEX and NYSE firms that began unlisted trading on the Philadelphia, Pacific, Midwest, or Cincinnati exchanges between 1984 and 1988. The results show significantly positive abnormal returns around the SEC's announcement of a regional exchange's filing for UTPs. The results also suggest that increased competition improves trading liquidity. Only stocks with low liquidity before UTPs announcements experience significantly improved liquidity and positive stock returns.     

Liquidity and asset pricing: Evidence from the Hong Kong stock market

This study investigates the role of liquidity in pricing stock returns in the Hong Kong stock market. Our results show that liquidity is an important factor for pricing returns in Hong Kong after taking well-documented asset pricing factors into consideration. The results are robust to adding portfolio residuals and higher moment factor in the factor models. The results are also robust to seasonality, and conditional-market tests. We also compare alternative factor models and find that the liquidity four-factor model (market excess return, size, book-to-market ratio, and liquidity) is the best model to explain stock returns in the Hong Kong stock market, while the momentum factor is not found to be priced.     

Stock Market Declines and Liquidity

Consistent with recent theoretical models where binding capital constraints lead to sudden liquidity dry-ups, we find that negative market returns decrease stock liquidity, especially during times of tightness in the funding market. The asymmetric effect of changes in aggregate asset values on liquidity and commonality in liquidity cannot be fully explained by changes in demand for liquidity or volatility effects. We document interindustry spillover effects in liquidity, which are likely to arise from capital constraints in the market making sector. We also find economically significant returns to supplying liquidity following periods of large drops in market valuations.     

The impact of Saturday trading on stock returns: Evidence from the Tokyo stock exchange January 1976 to January 1989

This paper examines the impact of TSE Saturday trading on daily TOPIX returns and TSE trading volume over the January 1976 to January 1989 period. Saturday trading is shown to have no significant impact on mean stock returns for the other days of the week. However, a significant shift in the pattern of Monday and Tuesday TOPIX returns is documented in the post-August 1986 period. This shift does not appear to be related to Saturday trading. TSE Saturday trading is found to have a significant impact on the variance of stock returns on surrounding days. In addition, trading volume is significantly lower on trading days surrounding Saturday trading. These findings are relevant to the timing of portfolio adjustment decisions.     

Impact of liquidity on stock returns: an empirical investigation of the Tunisian stock market

This paper investigates the return–liquidity relationship on one Middle East and North Africa frontier market, the Tunisian Stock Exchange (TSE). The findings provide evidence that there is a significant and positive premium for companies with high price impact and low trading frequency. However, Tunisian investors appreciate more low spread stocks. We show, also, a non-linear relation between potential delays of execution and stock returns. In addition, we find that Tunisian investors require a premium to compensate past cumulative illiquidity risk (high price impact, low turnover and high potential delay of execution) over the prior three to 12 months and to compensate past cumulative spread over 12 months. We point out also that these effects are seasonal.     

Systematic liquidity risk and stock price reaction to shocks

This study examines the relationship between systematic liquidity risk and stock price reaction to large 1‐day price changes (or shocks). We base our analysis on a yearly updated constituents list of the FTSE All share index. Our overall results are consistent with the price continuation hypothesis, which suggests that positive (negative) shocks will be followed by positive (negative) abnormal returns. However, further analysis indicates that stocks with low systematic liquidity risk react efficiently to both positive and negative shocks, whereas stocks with high systematic liquidity risk underreact to both positive and negative shocks. Our results are valid irrespective of various robustness tests such as size of the shock, size of the firm, month‐of‐the‐year and day‐of‐the‐week effects. We conclude that trading on price patterns following shocks may not be profitable, as it involves taking substantial liquidity exposure.     

The Impact of Short-Sales Constraints on Liquidity and the Liquidity–Return Relations

Baker and Stein's (2004) model predicts that individual stock liquidity, commonality in liquidity across stocks, the contemporaneous correlation between stock returns and liquidity, and the degree of high liquidity associated with low subsequent stock returns decrease in the absence of short-sales constraints relative to in the presence. To test these theoretical predictions, we examine both the component stocks of the Taiwan 50 index and other nonindex stocks for the sample period before and after the removal of short-sales constraints on the former and use trading turnover and Amihud's (2002) illiquidity ratio as the measure of liquidity to proxy for investor sentiment. Overall, our empirical results are consistent with these theoretical predictions and therefore provide evidence in support of Baker and Stein's (2004) model.     

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.

     

The pricing of systematic liquidity risk: Empirical evidence from the US stock market

In this study, we examine whether aggregate market liquidity risk is priced in the US stock market. We define a bivariate Garch (1,1)-in-mean specification for the market portfolio excess returns and the changes in the standardized number of shares in the S&P 500 Index, the aggregate market liquidity proxy. The findings, based on monthly data, suggest that systematic liquidity risk is priced in the US over the period January 1973–December 1997. The liquidity premium represents a non-negligible, negative and time-varying component of the total market risk premium whose magnitude is not influenced by the October’87 Crash.     

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.     

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.     

Oil price shocks and the US stock market: A nonlinear approach

We study the response of US stock market returns to oil price shocks and to what extent it behaves asymmetrically over the different phases of the business cycle. For this purpose, we decompose the oil price changes into supply and demand shocks in the oil market and assess the state-dependent dynamics of structural shocks on US stock returns using a smooth transition vector autoregression model. When nonlinearity is considered, quantitatively very different asymmetric dynamics are observed. Our findings show that the responses of US stock returns to disaggregated shocks are asymmetric over the business cycle and that the impact of demand-driven shocks on US stock returns is stronger and more persistent, especially when economic activity is depressed. Furthermore, the contribution of shocks to expectation-driven precautionary demand in recessions accounts for a larger share of the variability of US stock market returns than that predicted by standard linear vector autoregressions.