A Comparison of the Efficacy of Liquidity, Momentum, Size and Book-to-Market Value Factors in Equity Pricing on a Heterogeneous Sample: Evidence from Asia
{"title":"A Comparison of the Efficacy of Liquidity, Momentum, Size and Book-to-Market Value Factors in Equity Pricing on a Heterogeneous Sample: Evidence from Asia","authors":"Bruce Hearn","doi":"10.1111/fmii.12078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper compares the size and book-to-market value factors of Fama and French (1993) alongside Momentum of Jagadeesh and Titman (<span>1993</span>) with two Liu (<span>2006</span>) liquidity factors formed from 1 year rebalancing and 1 month rebalancing respectively. A heterogeneous and comprehensive sample of the top blue chip stocks of all national Asian equity markets with further differentiation undertaken between sub samples formed for Japan only and Asia excluding Japan for period January 2000 to August 2014. Our empirical results suggest that multifactor time invariant pricing models based on augmented capital asset pricing model (CAPM) framework are ineffective in explaining the cross section of stock returns in the presence of significant inter and intra-market segmentation. However an alternative model specification based on a time varying parameter specification and using same sets of factors yields significant enhancements in explaining cross section of stock returns across universe. We find that momentum factor largely lacks significance while a time varying two factor model, based on CAPM plus liquidity factor, is optimal. The liquidity factor being that of Liu (2006) and annually rebalanced. Our findings are important for investment managers seeking appropriate factors and modelling techniques to hedge against risks as well as firm's financial managers seeking to reduce costs of equity capital.</p>","PeriodicalId":39670,"journal":{"name":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","volume":"25 4","pages":"253-330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/fmii.12078","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
This paper compares the size and book-to-market value factors of Fama and French (1993) alongside Momentum of Jagadeesh and Titman (1993) with two Liu (2006) liquidity factors formed from 1 year rebalancing and 1 month rebalancing respectively. A heterogeneous and comprehensive sample of the top blue chip stocks of all national Asian equity markets with further differentiation undertaken between sub samples formed for Japan only and Asia excluding Japan for period January 2000 to August 2014. Our empirical results suggest that multifactor time invariant pricing models based on augmented capital asset pricing model (CAPM) framework are ineffective in explaining the cross section of stock returns in the presence of significant inter and intra-market segmentation. However an alternative model specification based on a time varying parameter specification and using same sets of factors yields significant enhancements in explaining cross section of stock returns across universe. We find that momentum factor largely lacks significance while a time varying two factor model, based on CAPM plus liquidity factor, is optimal. The liquidity factor being that of Liu (2006) and annually rebalanced. Our findings are important for investment managers seeking appropriate factors and modelling techniques to hedge against risks as well as firm's financial managers seeking to reduce costs of equity capital.
本文比较了Fama and French(1993)和Jagadeesh and Titman(1993)的动量(Momentum)的规模和账面市值因子与Liu(2006)分别由1年和1个月再平衡形成的两个流动性因子。对所有亚洲国家股票市场的顶级蓝筹股进行了异质性和综合性样本分析,并对2000年1月至2014年8月期间仅针对日本和不包括日本的亚洲形成的子样本进行了进一步区分。我们的实证结果表明,基于增强型资本资产定价模型(CAPM)框架的多因素时不变定价模型在存在显著的市场间和市场内分割的情况下无法解释股票收益的横截面。然而,另一种基于时变参数规范并使用相同因素集的模型规范在解释整个宇宙的股票收益横截面方面产生了显着增强。我们发现动量因素在很大程度上缺乏显著性,而基于CAPM +流动性因素的时变双因素模型是最优的。流动性因素为Liu(2006),每年进行再平衡。我们的发现对于寻求适当因素和建模技术来对冲风险的投资经理以及寻求降低股权资本成本的公司财务经理都很重要。
期刊介绍:
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments bridges the gap between the academic and professional finance communities. With contributions from leading academics, as well as practitioners from organizations such as the SEC and the Federal Reserve, the journal is equally relevant to both groups. Each issue is devoted to a single topic, which is examined in depth, and a special fifth issue is published annually highlighting the most significant developments in money and banking, derivative securities, corporate finance, and fixed-income securities.