Calendar anomalies in the Ukrainian stock market

  • Published March 31, 2017
  • Author(s)
    Guglielmo Maria Caporale ,
    E-mail:
    Alex Plastun
    ORCID Researcher ID
  • DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.14(1).2017.11
  • Article Info
    Volume 14 2017, Issue #1, pp. 104-114
  • TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
  • Cited by
    7 articles
  • 1625 Views
  • 400 Downloads

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

This paper is a comprehensive investigation of calendar anomalies in the Ukrainian stock market. It employs various statistical techniques (average analysis, Student’s t-test, ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and regression analysis with dummy variables) and a trading simulation approach to test for the presence of the following anomalies: day-of-the-week effect; turn-of-the-month effect; turn-of-the-year effect; month-of-the-year effect; January effect; holiday effect; Halloween effect. The results suggest that in general calendar anomalies are not present in the Ukrainian stock market, but there are a few exceptions, i.e. the turn-of-the-year and Halloween effect for the PFTS index, and the month-of-the-year effect for UX futures. However, the trading simulation analysis shows that only trading strategies based on the turn-of-the-year effect for the PFTS index and the month-of-the-year effect for the UX futures can generate exploitable profit opportunities that can be interpreted as evidence against market efficiency.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Fig. B1. Average analysis case of PFTS index
    • Fig. B2. Average analysis case of UX index
    • Fig. B3. Average analysis case of UX futures
    • Table 1. Overall results for PFTS index
    • Table 2. Overall results for UX index
    • Table 3. Overall results for UX futures
    • Table 4. Anomalies by month for the UX futures
    • Table 5. Trading simulation results for the month-of-the-year effect (UX futures)
    • Table 6. T-test for the trading simulation results for the month-of-the-year-effect (UX futures)
    • Table 7. Trading simulation results for the Turn of the Year Effect (PFTS index)
    • Table 8. T-test for the trading simulation results for the turn-of-the-year effect (PFTS index)
    • Table 9. Trading simulation results for the Halloween effect (PFTS index)
    • Table 10. T-test for the trading simulation results for the Halloween effect (PFTS index)
    • Table A1. Literature review
    • Table B1. T-test of the day-of-the-week effect for PFTS index
    • Table B2. T-test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX index
    • Table B3. T-test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX index futures
    • Table B4. ANOVA test of the day-of-the-week effect for PFTS index
    • Table B5. ANOVA test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX index
    • Table B6. ANOVA test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX futures
    • Table B7. Kruskal-Wallis test of the day-of-the-week effect for PFTS index
    • Table B8. Kruskal-Wallis test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX index
    • Table B9. Kruskal-Wallis test of the day-of-the-week effect for UX futures
    • Table B10. Regression analysis with dummy variables of the day-of-the-week effect for PFTS index, UX index and UX index
    • Abhijeet, C. (2011). Stock Market Anomalies: A Test of Calendar Effect in the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). Indian Journal of Finance, 5(5), 23-31.
    • Huson, A., and Z. Haque (2009). The Day of the Week, Turn of the Month and January Effect on Stock Market Volatility and Volume: Evidence from Bursa Malaysia. Retrieved at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1460374.
    • Alshimmiri, T. (2011). Calendar Anomalies In Kuwait Stock Exchange: Anomalous Evidence. Journal of Business & Economics Research, I (2), 37-50.
    • Ariel, R. (1987). A Monthly Effect in Stock Returns. The Journal of Financial Economics, 18, 161-174.
    • Ariel, R. (1990). High Stock Returns before Holidays: Existence and Evidence on Possible Causes. The Journal of Finance, 45, 1611-1626.
    • Barone, E. (1990). The Italian stock market: Efficiency and calendar anomalies. Journal of Banking and Finance, 14(2-3), 483-510.
    • Bildik, R. (2004). Are Calendar Anomalies Still Alive?: Evidence from Istanbul Stock Exchange. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=598904.
    • Borowski, K. (2015). Analysis of Selected Seasonality Effects in Market of Rubber Future Contracts Quoted on Tokyo Commodity Exchange. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 7(9), 16-30.
    • Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana L. A., and A. Plastun (2016a). The weekend effect: an exploitable anomaly in the Ukrainian stock market? Journal of Economic Studies, 43(6), 954-965.
    • Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana L. A., Plastun, A., and I. Makarenko (2016b). The weekend effect: a trading robot and fractional integration analysis. International Journal of Bonds and Derivatives, forthcoming.
    • Carchano, O., and A. Pardo Tornero (2011). Calendar Anomalies in Stock Index Futures. Retrieved at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1958587.
    • Clark, R., and W. Ziemba (1987). Playing the Turn-Of-The-Year Effect with Index Futures. The Operations Research, 35, 799-813.
    • Compton, W., R. Kunkel, and G. Kuhlemeyer (2013). Calendar anomalies in Russian stocks and bonds. Managerial Finance, 39(12), 1138-1154.
    • Cross, F. (1973). The behavior of stock prices on Fridays and Mondays. Financial Analysts Journal, 29(6), 67-69.
    • Depenchuk, I., S. Compton, and R. Kunkel (2010). Ukrainian financial markets: an examination of calendar anomalies. Managerial Finance, 36(6), 502-510.
    • Fortune, P. (1998). Weekends can be rough: Revisiting the weekend effect in stock prices. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Working Paper No. 98-6.
    • Fortune, P. (1999). Are stock returns different over weekends? A jump diffusion analysis of the “weekend effect”. New England Economic Review, September-October, 3-19.
    • Georgantopoulos, A., D. Kenourgios, and A. Tsamis (2011). Calendar Anomalies in Emerging Balkan Equity Markets. International Economics and Finance Journal, 6(1), 67-82.
    • Giovanis, E. (2008). Calendar Anomalies in Athens Exchange Stock Market - An Application of GARCH Models and the Neural Network Radial Basis Function. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1264970.
    • Hansen, P., A. Lunde, and J. Nason (2005). Testing the Significance of Calendar Effects. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper No. 2005-02.
    • Hourvouliades, N., and N. Kourkoumelis (2009). New Evidence for the Day-of-the-Week Effect in the Financial Crisis. International Conference on Applied Economics – ICOAE 2009, 225-243.
    • Jacobsen, B., and S. Bouman (2002). The Halloween Indicator, 'Sell in May and Go Away’: Another Puzzle. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1618-1635.
    • Lakonishok, J., and S. Smidt (1988). Are seasonal anomalies real? A Ninety-Year Perspective. The Review of Financial Studies, 1, 403-425.
    • Olson, D., N. Chou, and C. Mossman (2010). Stages in the life of the weekend effect. Journal of Financial Economics, 21, 542-422.
    • Rozeff, M., and W. Kinney (1976). Capital Market Seasonality: The Case of Stock Returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 379-402.
    • Schwert, G. (2003). Anomalies and market efficiency. Handbook of the Economics of Finance. Elsevier Science B.V., Ch.5, 937-972.
    • Lim, S., and R. Chia (2009). Stock Market Calendar Anomalies: Evidence from ASEAN-5 Stock Markets. Economic Bulletin, 30(2), 996-1005.
    • Silva, P. (2010). Calendar “anomalies” in the Portuguese stock market. Investment Analysts Journal, 39(71), 37-50.
    • Stoica, O., and D. Diaconașu (2011). An Examination of the Calendar Anomalies on Emerging Central and Eastern European Stock Markets. University of Iasi Working Paper. Recent Researches in Applied Economics, 11, 116-121.
    • Tangjitprom, N. (2011). The Calendar Anomalies of Stock Return in Thailand. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 7(6), 565-577.
    • Wachtel, S. (2003). Certain observations on seasonal movements in stock prices. The Journal of Business of the University of Chicago, 15, 184-193.
    • Wong, W.-K., A. Agarwal, and N.-T. Wong (2006). The Disappearing Calendar Anomalies in the Singapore Stock Market. The Lahore Journal of Economics, 11(2), 123-139.
Related Articles

  • Semi-monthly effect in stock returns: new evidence from Bombay Stock Exchange

    Shakila B. , Prakash PintoORCID , Iqbal Thonse Hawaldar ORCID Researcher ID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.14(3-1).2017.01
    Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 14, 2017         Issue #3         pp. 160-172 Views: 2634 Downloads: 779 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    Semi-monthly effect is a kind of calendar anomalies which is less explored in the financial literature. The main objective of this paper to investigate the presence of semi-monthly effect in selected sectoral indices of Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). The study uses the daily stock returns of five sectoral indices viz S&P BSE Auto Index, S&P BSE Bankex, S&P BSE Consumer Durables Index, S&P BSE FMCG Index and S&P BSE Health Care Index for the period of 10 years starting from 1st April 2007 to 31st March 2017. The data were analyzed using two approaches namely calendar days approach and trading days approach. To test the equality of mean returns for the two halves of the month, Mann-Whitney U test is used. The empirical results of the study did not provide any evidence for the presence of semi-monthly effect in the selected sectoral indices. Nevertheless, BSE Auto Index showed significant difference in the mean returns of first half and second half of trading month during the study period.

  • Testing efficient market hypothesis in developing Eastern European countries

    Saša TokićORCID , Berislav BolfekORCID , Anita Radman PešaORCID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(2).2018.25
    Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 15, 2018         Issue #2         pp. 281-291 Views: 1837 Downloads: 349 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    This paper analyzes financial markets in four developing countries (Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia) using daily returns of their respective stock market indices from January 1, 2006 till December 31, 2016, timeframe which was rarely analyzed. Analysis was conducted by various statistical tests, more precisely serial correlation test, runs test, Augmented Dickey-Fuller test, unit root test, variance ratio test and test of January effect. Results suggest that all analyzed indices, except BelexLine (Serbia), confirm weak form of efficient market hypothesis, while the results on the index BelexLine are mixed and it can be concluded that it does not follow weak form of efficient market hypothesis. Given these results, it can be said that not only passive approach to portfolio management is more appropriate on all indices, except BelexLine, but also additional test and more complex models are necessary in order to confirm this conclusion.

  • The January barometer in emerging markets: new evidence from the Gulf Cooperation Council stock exchanges

    Costas SiriopoulosORCID , Layal Youssef doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.16(4).2019.06
    Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 16, 2019         Issue #4         pp. 61-71 Views: 1092 Downloads: 140 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    International investors’ interest in the capital markets in the region of Gulf countries has dramatically increased in last two decades. Thus, it would be motivating to investigate their characteristics, where the January anomaly is a major one. This paper studies the veracity of the January effect rule in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets and examines the predictive power of January returns. Seven GCC stock markets are tested – the market indices in Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia – from January 1, 2001 until December 31, 2018, a timeframe which has rarely been analyzed. Ordinary least square (OLS)-based dummy variable regression equation was used as the conventional econometric procedure in the works of financial calendar anomalies in stock markets. Some evidence is reported for the markets of Dubai and Kuwait. The paper also provides an additional explanation for the performance of stock market of Kuwait. The findings are opposite to the well documented evidence that emerging markets are less efficient and hence it is likely that several market anomalies are further pronounced. The results suggest that the predictive power of the January anomaly can be considered as a temporary anomaly in the GCC markets, since it is concentrated in only a couple of GCC markets and does not persist in time.

Download Preview
Close
Investment Management and Financial Innovations
Investment Management and Financial Innovations