1 / 23

Doctoral School of Finance and Banking July 2008

Doctoral School of Finance and Banking July 2008. Lead – Lag Relationship between the Romanian Cash Market and Futures Market. MSc Student: Streche Lucian Supervisor: Mois ă Altăr Ph.D. Topics. Motivation Literature review Data Top – down approach Bottom – up approach

mika
Download Presentation

Doctoral School of Finance and Banking July 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Doctoral School of Finance and Banking July 2008 Lead – Lag Relationship between the Romanian Cash Market and Futures Market MSc Student: Streche Lucian Supervisor: Moisă Altăr Ph.D.

  2. Topics • Motivation • Literature review • Data • Top – down approach • Bottom – up approach • Conclusions and relevance

  3. Motivation • Pragmatic approach to econometrics • Value of result & immediate validation • Better understanding of the Romanian markets • Forecast value - both short term and long term • Relevant information in trading: price formation

  4. Literature Review Multitude of approaches, different periods, same markets (S&P 500) • Kawaller, Koch and Koch 1987 • Stoll and Whaley 1990 • Chan 1992 • Tse, Bandyopadhyay and Shen 2006 Constant result: Futures market leads Cash market Main difference: Temporal correlation

  5. Basic relation between Futures market & Cash market • Perfectly correlated if: • if interest rates and dividend yields were non-stochastic. • Same price if: • trading costs and markets response were identical. • Futures • Hedging • Arbitrage • Trading • Futures Market • Market sentiment • Arbitrage trading • Hedging • Cash Market Usually: interest rate > dividend => futures price > equity price

  6. Data processing • Why SIF2 and SIF5? • Largest listed investment funds • Largest trading volume (BVB & BMFMS) • Almost market portfolio (371, 257 invested companies) Available data – all market transactions from August 2007 to March 2008 Aggregation (after schedule matching): • Why this period? • liquidity • correlation/subprime • Why this aggregation method? • hidden/testing orders • futures market-orders

  7. Data statistics • Minute data series: • Five minutes data series (different aggregation):

  8. Top – Down Approach • Targets: high relevance (long period), comprehensive analysis • Only purpose: to estimate the intraday relation between listed equity prices and futures prices • Inputs: long data series (eight months), high frequency • Model used Chan(1992): • Newey-West Heteroskedasticity & Autocorr. Consistent Covariances • Disadvantages: • subjected to many perturbations and market conditions • doesn’t “explain” very well the dependent variable • infrequent trading and bid/ask spread not treated explicitly

  9. High frequency data SIF2/DSIF2 • Observations: • contemporaneous coefficient • linear decrease of coefficient value (log scale) • lag coefficient (correction/rebound; feed-back) • cash leads futures by 3 minutes • futures leads cash by 1 minute

  10. High frequency data SIF5/DSIF5 • Problems: • smaller coefficients • small relevance of 6th coeff. • Differences: • price SIF5 > price SIF2 hence more levels are used • DSIF 2 has greater liquidity than DSIF5 • lead extends to 5 minutes

  11. Medium frequency data Five minutes data series (different aggregation) • Reason: • correction/rebound effect & aggregation • lead coefficient Chan (1992): for 1985 futures lead cash by 15 min. / for 1987 lead reduced to 5 min. Cause: Romanian futures trader strategy (speculation)

  12. Behavior under bad news Data used: 1st and 5th quintiles from five minute series. 85 minutes grouping. • Observations: • large contemporaneous coefficients (data integration speed) • SIF 5 regressions: faster reaction caused by volume

  13. Behavior under good news • Conclusions: • for both SIFs the lead remains the same • short – sale constraints have no influence • Chan (1992) finds that there is no difference between bad news and good news • (five minutes for 1987 data). • Results hold also for the Romanian markets.

  14. Lead-Lag relation under heavy trading Data series obtained from the five minutes series. Three levels of trading. 85 minutes intervals • Results hold very well for high levels of trading. For SIF2 they hold across the board. • relevant coefficients decrease with the volume • lack of strong information content, at times, makes the coeffs. smaller than under news • at high volume information is integrated very fast into the price. • Chan finds that the lead-lag relation is not affected by different intensities of trading.

  15. Lead-Lag relation under medium and low trading

  16. Bottom – up approach • Targets: better accuracy (short period), extension to a large period • Only purpose: to estimate the intraday relation between listed equity prices and futures prices • Inputs: short data series (1-2 days), high frequency • Model used Kawaller, Koch & Koch (1987): • Three stage least squares estimation (simultaneous equations). • Disadvantages: • need for many data series to be tested for generalization • futures coefficients changed by the inclusion of cash lags 16

  17. High volume trading, bull market Data: 2 days, minute Lead: 3-5 minutes Result in perfect agreement with first model

  18. High volume trading, bull market Granger causality

  19. High volume trading, bear market Data: 2 days, minute Lead: 2-3 minutes Sif2: feed-back effect and correction/rebound

  20. Random days, medium trading volume Three random days, medium volume

  21. Conclusions • Conclusions: • the 3 to 5 minutes lead proven using 2 models, 2 stocks, different data frequency, • variable trading volume, variable news, bear and bull market • most information is integrated simultaneously in both markets • Romanian market resembles US markets from the late 80’s

  22. Relevance • Relevance: • high level result: data used incorporates al influences & perturbations • traders – gives important information about markets behavior • assessment of local market and investor maturity • market regulators – usage of futures • Future directions of research: • analysis of higher frequency data • study of a large temporal interval using a second model approach • analysis taking into account seasonality, foreign investor level, …

  23. Thank You

More Related