Macroeconomic announcements and stock returns in US portfolios formed on operating profitability and investment
-
Received November 9, 2017;Accepted January 9, 2018;Published January 25, 2018
-
Author(s)Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9481-3066Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6141-3173
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(1).2018.08
-
Article InfoVolume 15 2018, Issue #1, pp. 68-89
- TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
-
Cited by1 articlesJournal title: SSRN Electronic JournalArticle title: Comparing Portfolio StrategiesDOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3346139Volume: / Issue: / First page: / Year: 2019Contributors: Abalfazl Zareei
- 1291 Views
-
157 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
The authors explore the reaction of US stock portfolio returns to macroeconomic announcements spanning the period from April 1998 to May 2017. Using daily returns of 25 portfolios formed on operating profitability and investment, the authors investigate the extent to which potential asymmetries permeate the stock portfolios following macroeconomic announcements. The three methodological approaches utilized in this study suggest that the ISM non-manufacturing index, employees on non-farm payrolls, retail sales, personal consumption expenditure and initial jobless claims have a significant impact on portfolio returns. Also, portfolios consisting of companies with higher operating profitability and investment level are found to be less responsive to announcements. As the particular area has received little currency over the years, this contribution is of great significance, because it provides insights into the reaction of returns in value-weighted portfolios to announcements on certain macro-indicators. At the same time, the study informs portfolio managers of the implications of macroeconomic news, which drive economic expectations and can reverberate through the expected returns in US stock portfolios.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)E44, G12, G14
-
References59
-
Tables4
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Macroeconomic variables and summary statistics for announcements
- Table 2. The reaction of portfolios to macroeconomic announcements (OLS Newey West standard errors)
- Table 3. The reaction of portfolios to macroeconomic announcement (SUR)
- Table 4. The reaction of portfolios to macroeconomic announcements (MM weighted least squares)
-
- Abarbanell, J. S., Bushee, B. J. (1998). Abnormal Returns to a Fundamental Analysis Strategy. The Accounting Review, 73, 19-45.
- Andersen, T. G., Bollerslev, T. (1998). DM-dollar intraday volatility: activity pattern, macroeconomic announcements, and longer run dependencies. Journal of Finance, 53, 219-265.
- Andersen, T. G., Bollerslev, T., Diebold, F. X., & Vega, C. (2007). Real-time price discovery in global stock, bond and foreign exchange markets. Journal of International Economics, 73(2), 251-277.
- Balduzzi, P., Elton, E. J., & Green, T. C. (2001). Economic news and bond prices: Evidence from the U.S. Treasury market. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 36, 523-543.
- Bartolini, L., Goldberg, L. S., & Sacarny, A. (2008). How Economic News Moves Markets. Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Current Issues in Economics and Finance, 14(6).
- Basistha, A., & Kurov, A. (2008). Macroeconomic cycles and the stock market’s reaction to monetary policy. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(12), 2606- 2616.
- Bernanke, B. S., & Kuttner, K. N. (2005). What explains the stock market’s reaction to federal reserve policy? Journal of Finance, 60, 1221-1257.
- Bergbrant, M. C., & Kelly, P. J. (2016). Macroeconomic Expectations and the Size, Value, and Momentum Factors. Financial Management, 45, 809-844.
- Birz, G., & Lott Jr, J. R. (2011). The effect of macroeconomic news on stock returns: New evidence from newspaper coverage. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35, 2791-2800.
- Blose, L. E., & Shieh, J. C. P. (1997). Tobin’s q-Ratio and Market Reaction to Capital Investment Announcements. Financial Review, 32, 449-476.
- Boyd, J. H., Hu, J., & Jagannathan, R. (2005). The stock market’s reaction to unemployment news: why bad news is usually good for stocks. The Journal of Finance, 60, 649-672.
- Brennan, M. J., Jegadeesh, N., & Swaminathan, B. (1993). Investment analysis and the adjustment of stock-prices to common information. Review of Financial Studies, 6(4), 799-824.
- Carhart, M. M. (1997). On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance. Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57-82.
- Cenesizoglu, T. (2011). Size, book-to-market ratio and macroeconomic news. Journal of Empirical Finance, 18(2), 248- 270.
- Cenesizoglu, T. (2008). Asymmetries in the Reaction of Stock Prices to Macroeconomic News. HEC Montreal (Working paper).
- Chan-Lee, I. H., & Sutch, H. (1985). Profits and Rates of Return. OECD Economic Studies, 5.
- Chen, N. F., Roll, R., & Ross, S. A. (1986). Economic Forces and the Stock Market. Journal of Business, 59, 383-403.
- Cohen, R. B., Gompers, P. A., & Vuolteenaho, T. (2002). Who underreacts to cashflownews? evidence from trading between individuals and institutions. Journal of Financial Economics, 66(2-3), 409-462.
- Dechow, P. M., Hutton, A. P., & Sloan, R. G. (2000). The Relation between Analysts’ Forecasts of Long-Term Earnings Growth and Stock Price Performance Following Equity Offerings. Contemporary Accounting Research, 17(1), 1-32.
- Du, D. (2017). US macroannouncements and international asset pricing. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 22, 352-367.
- Fairfield, P. M., Whisenant, S., & Yohn, T. L. (2003) Accrued Earnings and Growth: Implications for Future Profitability and Market Mispricing. The Accounting Review, 78(1), 353-371.
- Fama, E. F. (1981). Stock returns, real activity, inflation and money. American Economic Review, 71(4), 545-565.
- Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2006). Profitability, investment and average returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 82, 491-518.
- Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2008). Dissecting Anomalies. The Journal of Finance, 63, 1653-1678.
- Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2015). A five-factor asset pricing model. Journal of Financial Economics, 116, 1-22.
- Flannery, M. J., & Protopapadakis, A. A. (2002). Macroeconomic factors do influence aggregate stock returns. Review of Financial Studies, 15, 751-782.
- Frankel, R., & Lee, C. (1998). Accounting valuation, market expectation, and cross sectional stock returns. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25(3), 283-319.
- Geske, R., & Roll, R. (1983). The fiscal and monetary linkage between stock returns and inflation. Journal of Finance, 38(1), 1-33.
- Gilbert, T., Scotti, C., Strasser, G., & Vega, C. (2015). Is the Intrinsic Value of Macroeconomic News Announcements Related to their Asset Price Impact? (Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-046). Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
- Gosnell, T., & Nejadmalayeri, A. (2010). Macroeconomic news and risk factor innovations. Managerial Finance, 36, 566-582.
- Grauer, F. L. A., Litzenberger, R. H., & Stehle, R. E. (1976). Sharing rules and equilibrium in an international capital market under uncertainty. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 233-256.
- Gregoriou, A,, Hunter, J., & Wu, F. (2009). An empirical investigation of the relationship between the real economy and stock returns for the United States. Journal of Policy Modelling, 31(1), 133-143.
- Gürkaynak, R. S., Sack, B., & Swanson, E. (2005). The sensitivity of long-term interest rates to economic news: Evidence and implications for macroeconomic models. American Economic Review, 95(1), 425-436.
- Harju, K., & Hussain, S. M. (2009). Intraday Seasonalities and Macroeconomic News Announcements. European Financial Management, 17, 367- 390.
- Haugen, R. A., & Baker, N. L. (1996). Commonalityin the determinants of expected stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 41(3), 401-439.
- Hussain, S. M. (2011). Simultaneous monetary policy announcements and international stock markets response: An intraday analysis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(3), 752-764.
- Kurov, A. (2010). Investor sentiment and the stock market’s reaction to monetary policy. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(1), 139-149.
- Lee, C., Ng, D., & Swaminathan, B. (2009). Testing International Asset Pricing Models Using Implied Costs of Capital. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 44(2), 307-335.
- Li, L., & Hu, Z. F. (1998). Responses of stock markets to macroeconomic announcements across economic states (IMF Working Paper, No. 79).
- McConnell, J., & Muscarella, C. (1985). Corporate capital expenditure decisions and the market value of the firm. Journal of Financial Economics, 14, 399- 422.
- McQueen, G., & Roley, V. V. (1993). Stock prices, news, and business conditions. Review of Financial Studies, 6(3), 683-707.
- Medovikov, I. (2016). When does the stock market listen to economic news? New evidence from copulas and news wires. Journal of Banking & Finance, 65, 27-40.
- Moerman, G. A., & Van Dijk, M. A. (2010). Inflation Risk and International Asset Returns. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34, 840-855.
- Newey, W. K., & West, K. D. (1987). A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix. Econometrica, 55(3), 703-708.
- Nguyen, T., & Ngo, C. (2014). Impacts of the US macroeconomic news on Asian stock markets. Journal of Risk Finance, 15(2), 149-179.
- Nikkinen, J., Omran, M., Sahlström, P., & Äijö, J. (2006). Global stock market reactions to scheduled US macroeconomic news announcements. Global Finance Journal, 17(1), 92- 104.
- Nikkinen, J., & Sahlström, P. (2004). Scheduled domestic and US macroeconomic news and stock valuation in Europe. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 14(3), 201-215.
- Pearce, D. K., & Roley, V. V. (1985). Stock prices and economic news. Journal of Business, 58, 49-67.
- Rahman, A. (2009). Industry-level stock returns volatility and aggregate economic activity in Australia. Applied Financial Economics, 19, 509-525.
- Rangel, J. G. (2011). Macroeconomic news, announcements, and stock market jump intensity dynamics. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(5), 1263- 1276.
- Richardson, S. A., & Sloan, R. G. (2003). External Financing and Future Stock Returns (Working Paper No. 03-03). Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
- Ross, S. A. (1976). The Arbitrage Theory of Capital Asset Pricing. Journal of Economic Theory, 13(3), 341-360.
- Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk. Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425-442.
- Solnik, B. H. (1974). An equilibrium model of the international capital market. Journal of Economic Theory, 8, 500-524.
- Simpson, M. W., & Ramchander, S. (2008). An inquiry into the economic fundamentals of the Fama and French equity factors. Journal of Empirical Finance, 15(5), 801-815.
- Titman, S., Wei, K., & Xie, F. (2004). Capital investments and stock returns. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 39, 677-700.
- Vassalou, M. (2003). News related to future GDP growth as a risk factor in equity returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 68(1), 47-73.
- Vogt, S. C. (1997). Cash flow and capital spending: evidence from capital expenditure announcement. Financial Management, 26, 44-57.
- Yohai, V. J. (1987). High breakdown-point and high efficiency robust estimates for regression. The Annals of Statistics, 15, 642-656.
-
The role of foreign direct investment and trade on carbon emissions in Turkey
Gizem Kaya , M. Özgür Kayalica , Merve Kumaş , Burc Ulengin doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.08(1).2017.01Environmental Economics Volume 8, 2017 Issue #1 pp. 8-17 Views: 2020 Downloads: 999 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis study aims to observe the long run and short run effects of gross domestic product, foreign direct investment inflows and trade on CO2 emissions and causality relationships between these factors, using annual data for the period of 1974-2010. The empirical results demonstrate that the inverted U-shaped relationship of environmental Kuznets curve is valid for Turkey. In addition, there are positive long run effects of foreign direct investment and trade openness on CO2 emissions. The authors also find a bidirectional causality relationship between CO2 emission and FDI.
-
Modeling of FinTech market development (on the example of Ukraine)
Alina Bukhtiarova , Arsen Hayriyan , Nikol Bort , Andrii Semenog doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/im.14(4).2018.03FinTech startups and services are one of the most dynamic segments of the modern economy. New financial technologies have already attracted many investors and form millions of budgets. Changing the traditional financial services concept, FinTech companies formed a new niche within the financial services market, the dynamic development of which determines the relevance of the development and implementation of an effective regulatory and oversight system.
The purpose of the article is to develop an economic and mathematical model for forecasting the development of the FinTech market on the example of Ukraine. In order to study the development of the FinTech industry, a multiple regression model was presented. The model describes the dependence of the total investment value of FinTech from venture investments in financial technology, venture investments in other technologies and venture investments in online lending. Based on this model, the effect of attracting investments with new FinTech projects on the total volume of investments in the industry was clarified. According to the model, with a change in investments in FinTech by 1%, the total rate of venture investments decreases by 0.03, funds in new projects of other companies grow by 0.05, and venture investments in online lending increase by 0.89. According to the analysis of regulatory legislation in the foreign countries of the FinTech services sphere, it was found that the regulation of most of the risks associated with the development of FinTech services falls within the competence of different supervisory authorities, requiring cross-sectoral cooperation between public institutions. -
Investment attractiveness of the Ukrainian tourism system
Margarita Boiko , Myroslava Bosovska , Nadiia Vedmid , Liudmila Bovsh , Alla Okhrimenko doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(4).2018.16Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 15, 2018 Issue #4 pp. 193-209 Views: 1838 Downloads: 197 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯGlobal and crisis transformations result in structural and functional changes in the tourism system, which combines resource potential, infrastructure, tourism entities, institutional structures, and consumers. For Ukraine, with its high tourist potential, tourism development is a significant factor after the crisis recovery of the economy. Overcoming the disparities in the tourism system functioning, shaping optimal business models of its development, increasing the sustainability and efficiency of the tourism entities functioning impose an objective need for investment. Investment attractiveness is one of the key characteristics causing the investor’s interest in financing the project, including the tourist one.
The essence, determinants of influence and characteristic features of investment attractiveness of the Ukrainian tourism system are substantiated. The investment attractiveness of the tourism system is proposed to be considered as a complex feature of conditions and advantages that form its ability to attract investment resources based on the availability of their needs, unique tourist potential, favorable environment for ensuring the efficient functioning of the tourism system and guaranteeing the investor profit and reduced risks of investing.
The article considers basic preconditions to form the investment attractiveness of the tourism system, which include unique strategic opportunities, to shape a favorable institutional environment and provide a background for an investor concerned and a system of guaranteeing the expected result.
Given the need for complex consideration of the tourism system’s investment attractiveness, a methodology based on the calculation of integrated indicators for estimating the effectiveness and prospects for the development of tourism systems in the Ukrainian regions is used. In the method considered, it is proposed to take into account not only financial aspects, but also the resource potential, its development level, the growth rates of tourism entities activities, and the prospects for the tourism system development. In general, indicators and criteria for the tourism system investment attractiveness are classified into four groups: the efficiency of investment, the effectiveness of the tourism system development, the prospects for the tourism system development, the environment and the potential for its development.
According to the method developed, the integral indicator of investment attractiveness of the tourism systems of Ukrainian regions has been calculated, and the regions are differentiated according to the level of investment attractiveness. Estimation of the investment attractiveness of Ukrainian tourism systems allows to determine their rating, differentiate them according to the maturity level of complementary preconditions to form and develop tourist potential and serves as a basis for potential investors in investment decisions-making.
Using the results of determining the level of investment attractiveness of tourism systems of Ukraine’s regions over time will help identify trends, and, accordingly, serve as a guide for potential investors in strategic proposition space of regions which are investment recipients.