Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (19)
Has Fulltext
- yes (19)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (19)
Keywords
- Volatilität (19) (remove)
Institute
Der vorliegende Beitrag führt eine detaillierte empirische Untersuchung über die Rolle der amtlichen Kursmakler an der Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse durch. Der verwendete Datensatz erlaubt eine Analyse des Einflusses der Maklertätigkeit auf Liquidität und Volatilität sowie eine Beurteilung der Profitabilität der Eigengeschäfte.
Die Beteiligung der Makler am Präsenzhandel ist erheblich. Ihre Eigengeschäfte machen über 20% des Handelsvolumens zu gerechneten Kursen und über 40% des Handelsvolumens im variablen Handel aus. Für letzteren wird zudem dokumentiert, daß die Tätigkeit der Makler zu einer deutlichen Reduktion der Geld-Brief-Spannen beiträgt. Die letztendlich gezahlte effektive Spanne beträgt im Durchschnitt weniger als ein Drittel der Spanne, die sich aus dem Orderbuch ergibt.
Für den Handel zu gerechneten Kursen wird gezeigt, daß die Preisfeststellung durch die Makler zu einer Verringerung der Volatilität führt. Eine Beurteilung des Einflusses der Makler auf die Volatilität im fortlaufenden Handel scheitert daran, daß das hierfür teilweise verwendete Maß, die Stabilisierungsrate, nach unserer Einschätzung keine aussagekräftigen Resultate liefert.
Die Makler erzielten während unseres Untersuchungszeitraums im Durchschnitt keinen Gewinn aus ihren Eigengeschäften. Eine Zerlegung der Gewinne in zwei Komponenten zeigt, daß positive Spannengewinne im Aggregat nicht für entstehende Positionierungsverluste kompensieren können.
Insgesamt zeigt unsere Untersuchung, daß die Kursmakler an den deutschen Wertpapierbörsen einen Beitrag zur Sicherung der Marktqualität leisten. Die Konsequenzen dieser Resultate für die Organisation des Aktienhandels in Deutschland werden diskutiert.
We examine intra-day market reactions to news in stock-specific sentiment disclosures. Using pre-processed data from an automated news analytics tool based on linguistic pattern recognition we extract information on the relevance as well as the direction of company-specific news. Information-implied reactions in returns, volatility as well as liquidity demand and supply are quantified by a high-frequency VAR model using 20 second intervals. Analyzing a cross-section of stocks traded at the London Stock Exchange (LSE), we find market-wide robust news-dependent responses in volatility and trading volume. However, this is only true if news items are classified as highly relevant. Liquidity supply reacts less distinctly due to a stronger influence of idiosyncratic noise. Furthermore, evidence for abnormal highfrequency returns after news in sentiments is shown. JEL-Classification: G14, C32
Measuring financial asset return and volatilty spillovers, with application to global equity markets
(2008)
We provide a simple and intuitive measure of interdependence of asset returns and/or volatilities. In particular, we formulate and examine precise and separate measures of return spillovers and volatility spillovers. Our framework facilitates study of both non-crisis and crisis episodes, including trends and bursts in spillovers, and both turn out to be empirically important. In particular, in an analysis of nineteen global equity markets from the early 1990s to the present, we find striking evidence of divergent behavior in the dynamics of return spillovers vs. volatility spillovers: Return spillovers display a gently increasing trend but no bursts, whereas volatility spillovers display no trend but clear bursts.
We propose a new approach to measuring the effect of unobservable private information or beliefs on volatility. Using high-frequency intraday data, we estimate the volatility effect of a well identified shock on the volatility of the stock returns of large European banks as a function of the quality of available public information about the banks. We hypothesise that, as the publicly available information becomes stale, volatility effects and its persistence should increase, as the private information (beliefs) of investors becomes more important. We find strong support for this idea in the data. We argue that the results have implications for debate surrounding the opacity of banks and the transparency requirements that may be imposed on banks under Pillar III of the New Basel Accord.
We provide a simple and intuitive measure of interdependence of asset returns and/or volatilities. In particular, we formulate and examine precise and separate measures of return spillovers and volatility spillovers. Our framework facilitates study of both non-crisis and crisis episodes, including trends and bursts in spillovers, and both turn out to be empirically important. In particular, in an analysis of sixteen global equity markets from the early 1990s to the present, we find striking evidence of divergent behavior in the dynamics of return spillovers vs. volatility spillovers: Return spillovers display a gently increasing trend but no bursts, whereas volatility spillovers display no trend but clear bursts. JEL Classification: F30, G15, F36
Using unobservable conditional variance as measure, latent-variable approaches, such as GARCH and stochastic-volatility models, have traditionally been dominating the empirical finance literature. In recent years, with the availability of high-frequency financial market data modeling realized volatility has become a new and innovative research direction. By constructing "observable" or realized volatility series from intraday transaction data, the use of standard time series models, such as ARFIMA models, have become a promising strategy for modeling and predicting (daily) volatility. In this paper, we show that the residuals of the commonly used time-series models for realized volatility exhibit non-Gaussianity and volatility clustering. We propose extensions to explicitly account for these properties and assess their relevance when modeling and forecasting realized volatility. In an empirical application for S&P500 index futures we show that allowing for time-varying volatility of realized volatility leads to a substantial improvement of the model's fit as well as predictive performance. Furthermore, the distributional assumption for residuals plays a crucial role in density forecasting. Klassifikation: C22, C51, C52, C53
Wir verwenden eine neue, auf der Burr-Verteilung basierende Spezifikation aus der Familie der Autoregressive Conditional Duration (ACD) Modelle zur ökonometrischen Analyse der Transaktionsintensitäten während der Börseneinführung (IPO) der Deutsche Telekom Aktie. In diesem Fallbeispiel wird die Leistungsfähigkeit des neu entwickelten Burr-ACD-Modells mit den Standardmodellen von Engle und Russell verglichen, die im Burr-ACD Modell als Spezialfälle enthalten sind. Wir diskutieren außerdem alternative Möglichkeiten, Intra- Tagessaisonalitäten der Handelsintensität in ACD Modellen zu berücksichtigen.
This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the properties of popular tests for the existence and the sign of the market price of volatility risk. These tests are frequently based on the fact that for some option pricing models under continuous hedging the sign of the market price of volatility risk coincides with the sign of the mean hedging error. Empirically, however, these tests suffer from both discretization error and model mis-specification. We show that these two problems may cause the test to be either no longer able to detect additional priced risk factors or to be unable to identify the sign of their market prices of risk correctly. Our analysis is performed for the model of Black and Scholes (1973) (BS) and the stochastic volatility (SV) model of Heston (1993). In the model of BS, the expected hedging error for a discrete hedge is positive, leading to the wrong conclusion that the stock is not the only priced risk factor. In the model of Heston, the expected hedging error for a hedge in discrete time is positive when the true market price of volatility risk is zero, leading to the wrong conclusion that the market price of volatility risk is positive. If we further introduce model mis-specification by using the BS delta in a Heston world we find that the mean hedging error also depends on the slope of the implied volatility curve and on the equity risk premium. Under parameter scenarios which are similar to those reported in many empirical studies the test statistics tend to be biased upwards. The test often does not detect negative volatility risk premia, or it signals a positive risk premium when it is truly zero. The properties of this test furthermore strongly depend on the location of current volatility relative to its long-term mean, and on the degree of moneyness of the option. As a consequence tests reported in the literature may suffer from the problem that in a time-series framework the researcher cannot draw the hedging errors from the same distribution repeatedly. This implies that there is no guarantee that the empirically computed t-statistic has the assumed distribution. JEL: G12, G13 Keywords: Stochastic Volatility, Volatility Risk Premium, Discretization Error, Model Error