Low-Volatility Anomaly in Helsinki Stock Exchange

International research shows that low-volatility stocks have beaten high-volatility stocks in terms of returns for decades on multiple markets. This abbreviation from traditional risk-return framework is known as low-volatility anomaly. This study focuses on explaining the anomaly and finding how strongly it appears in NASDAQ OMX Helsinki stock exchange. Data consists of all listed companies starting from 2001 and ending close to 2015. Methodology follows closely Baker and Haugen (2012) by sorting companies into deciles according to 3-month volatility and then calculating monthly returns for these different volatility groups. Annualized return for the lowest volatility decile is 8.85 %, while highest volatility decile destroys wealth at rate of -19.96 % per annum. Results are parallel also in quintiles that represent larger amount of companies and thus dilute outliers. Observation period captures financial crisis of 2007-2008 and European debt crisis, which embodies as low main index annual return of 1 %, but at the same time proves the success of low-volatility strategy. Low-volatility anomaly is driven by multiple reasons such as leverage constrained trading and managerial incentives which both prompt to invest in risky assets, but behavioral matters also have major weight in maintaining the anomaly.

Three Essays on the Volatility of Finnish Stock Returns (summary section only)

First, in Essay 1, we test whether it is possible to forecast Finnish Options Index return volatility by examining the out-of-sample predictive ability of several common volatility models with alternative well-known methods; and find additional evidence for the predictability of volatility and for the superiority of the more complicated models over the simpler ones. Secondly, in Essay 2, the aggregated volatility of stocks listed on the Helsinki Stock Exchange is decomposed into a market, industry-and firm-level component, and it is found that firm-level (i.e., idiosyncratic) volatility has increased in time, is more substantial than the two former, predicts GDP growth, moves countercyclically and as well as the other components is persistent. Thirdly, in Essay 3, we are among the first in the literature to seek for firm-specific determinants of idiosyncratic volatility in a multivariate setting, and find for the cross-section of stocks listed on the Helsinki Stock Exchange that industrial focus, trading volume, and block ownership, are positively associated with idiosyncratic volatility estimates––obtained from both the CAPM and the Fama and French three-factor model with local and international benchmark portfolios––whereas a negative relation holds between firm age as well as size and idiosyncratic volatility.

Monetary Policy, Stock Price Misalignments and Macroeconomic Instability

Perhaps the most fundamental prediction of financial theory is that the expected returns on financial assets are determined by the amount of risk contained in their payoffs. Assets with a riskier payoff pattern should provide higher expected returns than assets that are otherwise similar but provide payoffs that contain less risk. Financial theory also predicts that not all types of risks should be compensated with higher expected returns. It is well-known that the asset-specific risk can be diversified away, whereas the systematic component of risk that affects all assets remains even in large portfolios. Thus, the asset-specific risk that the investor can easily get rid of by diversification should not lead to higher expected returns, and only the shared movement of individual asset returns – the sensitivity of these assets to a set of systematic risk factors – should matter for asset pricing. It is within this framework that this thesis is situated. The first essay proposes a new systematic risk factor, hypothesized to be correlated with changes in investor risk aversion, which manages to explain a large fraction of the return variation in the cross-section of stock returns. The second and third essays investigate the pricing of asset-specific risk, uncorrelated with commonly used risk factors, in the cross-section of stock returns. The three essays mentioned above use stock market data from the U.S. The fourth essay presents a new total return stock market index for the Finnish stock market beginning from the opening of the Helsinki Stock Exchange in 1912 and ending in 1969 when other total return indices become available. Because a total return stock market index for the period prior to 1970 has not been available before, academics and stock market participants have not known the historical return that stock market investors in Finland could have achieved on their investments. The new stock market index presented in essay 4 makes it possible, for the first time, to calculate the historical average return on the Finnish stock market and to conduct further studies that require long time-series of data.

Do Low-Priced Stocks Drive Long-Term Contrarian Performance on the London Stock Exchange?

We investigate whether low-priced stocks drive long-term contrarian performance on the U.K. market. We find that contrarian performance at low, middle, and high price levels is positive. On the Fama-French risk adjusted basis, we find both low-priced and middle-priced losers have significantly positive returns. When we adjust returns by market and liquidity risk, only middle-priced losers maintain their positive returns. Our results reveal that low-priced stocks are not fully responsible for contrarian performance. Our empirical evidence is generally consistent with the overreaction hypothesis and behavioral models of value investing.

Momentum Trading in New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) Energy Stocks

This paper investigates whether the momentum effect exists in the NYSE energy sector. Momentum is defined as the strategy that buys (sells) these stocks that are best (worst) performers, over a pre-specified past period of time (the 'look-back' period), by constructing equally weighted portfolios. Different momentum strategies are obtained by changing the number of stocks included in these portfolios, as well as the look-back period. Next, their performance is compared against two benchmarks: the equally weighted portfolio consisting of most stocks in the NYSE energy index and the market portfolio, and the S&P500 index. The results indicate that the momentum effect is strongly present in the energy sector, and leads to highly profitable portfolios, improving the risk-reward measures and easily outperforming both benchmarks.

Volatility and VaR Forecasting in the Madrid Stock Exchange

This paper provides an empirical study to assess the forecasting performance of a wide range of models for predicting volatility and VaR in the Madrid Stock Exchange. The models performance was measured by using different loss functions and criteria. The results show that FIAPARCH processes capture and forecast more accurately the dynamics of IBEX-35 returns volatility. It is also observed that assuming a heavy-tailed distribution does not improve models ability for predicting volatility. However, when the aim is forecasting VaR, we find evidence of that the Student’s t FIAPARCH outperforms the models it nests the lower the target quantile.

How differently do our non-large companies listed on the Portuguese Stock Exchange perform?

A Work Project, presented as part of the requirements for the Award of a Masters Degree in Economics from the NOVA – School of Business and Economics

Pricing of Liquidity Risks in London Stock Exchange

This thesis aims to investigate pricing of liquidity risks in London Stock Exchange. Liquidity Adjusted Capital Asset Pricing Model i.e. LCAPM developed by Acharya and Pedersen (2005) is being applied to test the influence of various liquidity risks on stock returns in London Stock Exchange. The Liquidity Adjusted Capital Asset Pricing model provides a unified framework for the testing of liquidity risks. All the common stocks listed and delisted for the period of 2000 to 2014 are included in the data sample. The study has incorporated three different measures of liquidity – Percent Quoted Spread, Amihud (2002) and Turnover. The reason behind the application of three different liquidity measures is the multi-dimensional nature of liquidity. Firm fixed effects panel regression is applied for the estimation of LCAPM. However, the results are robust according to Fama-Macbeth regressions. The results of the study indicates that liquidity risks in the form of (i) level of liquidity, (ii) commonality in liquidity (iii) flight to liquidity, (iv) depressed wealth effect and market return as well as aggregate liquidity risk are priced at London Stock Exchange. However, the results are sensitive to the choice of liquidity measures.