Do institutional investors stabilize stock returns? Evidence from emerging IPO markets

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 585-600
Author(s):  
Konpanas Dumrongwong
Keyword(s):  
Initial Public Offerings ◽  
Institutional Investors ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Emerging Market ◽  
Institutional Ownership ◽  
Growth Potential ◽  
Return Volatility ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how institutional ownership is related to the stock return volatility of initial public offerings (IPOs) in an emerging market and to examine the relationship between institutional ownership and underpricing. Design/methodology/approach This paper investigates these relationships using White’s (1980) regression and 2 × 3 portfolios sorted by firm size and institutional holdings. The regression method examines the relationships across firms with different characteristics such as size, stock price, growth potential, firm age and type of investors. The data were chosen for this sample to cover the new equity issuances listed on the Thailand Stock Exchange for the period 2001–2019. Findings The empirical results suggest that institutional ownership is negatively associated with initial stock return volatility. This highlights the importance of institutional investors in maintaining stability in emerging stock markets. Additionally, it was found that institutional holding and underpricing are negatively correlated. The results are robust after controlling for potential heteroskedasticity and differences in firm characteristics. Originality/value To the best knowledge of the author, this paper is the first to study the relationship between institutional investors and volatility in Thai IPOs, and hence provides a deeper understanding of how investors influence the price formation and volatility of stock prices in emerging markets. Furthermore, besides academics, the results presented in this paper could be useful for market regulators and policymakers in designing future market regulations to efficiently stabilize equity markets.

Does domestic institutional ownership increase return volatility? The French context

2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 421-433
Author(s):  
Mouna Aloui ◽  
Anis Jarboui
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Investors ◽  
Stock Markets ◽  
Stock Price ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Price Volatility ◽  
Return Volatility ◽  
Stock Price Volatility ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
Empirical Results

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of domestic ownership on the stock return volatility. The authors use a detailed panel data set of 89 French companies listed on the SBF 120 over the period 2006-2013. The empirical results show that the domestic institutional investors have low stock price volatility in the French stock market. This result implies the stabilizing factor of domestic investors in France stock markets, which can be considered as one of the potential favor of growing the exhibition of domestic stock markets to institutional investors. This study employs a variety of econometric models, including feedbacks, to test the robustness of our empirical results. Design/methodology/approach To explain the relation between stock return volatility and domestic institutional investors (DIIs), the authors used two complementary methods: two-step generalized method of moments analysis as well as panel vector autoregressive framework and two-stage least squares (2SLS) method. Findings The authors’ empirical results show that the proportion of DIIs with advanced local degrees stabilizes the stock price volatility. However, firm’s size and the turnover have a positive effect on the volatility of the stock returns. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that the firm’s size and the turnover will increase price volatility during a financial crisis as a result of the deterioration of the monitoring mechanism and the reduction of the investors’ confidence in firms. Originality/value This result also indicates that the variables (the firm’s size, total sales and debt ratio) are poor corporate governance and have a role in the increased the stock return volatility.

Impact of board structure, board activities and institutional investors on the firm risk: evidence from India

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pankaj Chaudhary
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Investors ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Independent Directors ◽  
Board Structure ◽  
Return Volatility ◽  
Method Of Moment ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
The Impact

PurposeStock return volatility is an important aspect of financial markets which requires specific attention of researchers. This study examines the impact of board structure, board activities and institutional investors on the stock return volatility of the Indian firms.Design/methodology/approachThe author had selected the non-financial companies of the National Stock Exchange (NSE), which form the part of the NSE 500 index. Regression models had been estimated using the system generalised method of moment (GMM) framework designed by Arellano and Bover (1995) and Blundell and Bond (1998) to deal with endogeneity concerns.FindingsThe author found that the stock return volatility was affected by the institutional investors, particularly pressure-insensitive (PI) investors. Moreover, this study supported the non-linear relationship between stock return volatility and institutional investors. Unlike developed world, the author found that the independent directors were positively associated with the stock return volatility.Research limitations/implicationsIt is important for the investors and regulators to understand that the behaviour of the institutional investors depends on its class and having more independent directors will not ensure containment of the stock return volatility as suggested in previous literature reviews.Originality/valueMost of the prior studies have used simple standard deviation (SD) to compute stock return volatility. In this study, besides SD, the author used the generalised autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) model to compute the stock return volatility of the firms.

scholarly journals The effectiveness of risk disclosure practices in the European insurance industry

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-147
Author(s):  
Irma Malafronte ◽  
Maria Grazia Starita ◽  
John Pereira
Keyword(s):  
Firm Value ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Insurance Industry ◽  
Return Volatility ◽  
Risk Disclosure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
Embedded Value ◽  
European Insurance ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose This paper aims to examine whether risk disclosure practices affect stock return volatility and company value in the European insurance industry. Design/methodology/approach Using a self-constructed “risk disclosure index for insurers” (RDII) to measure the extent of information disclosed on risks and using panel data regression on a sample of European insurers for 2005-2010, it tests the relationship between RDII and stock return volatility; whether this relationship is affected by financial crisis; and whether RDII affects insurance companies’ embedded value. Findings The main results indicate that higher RDII contributes to higher volatility, suggesting that “less is more” rather than “more is good”. However, higher RDII leads to lower volatility when the insurer has a positive net income, thus “more is good when all is good” and “less is good when all is bad”. Furthermore, the relationship between RDII and stock return volatility is not affected by financial crisis, raising concerns regarding the effectiveness of insurers’ risk disclosure to reassure the market. Moreover, higher RDII is found to impact positively on embedded value, thus contributing toward higher firm value. Practical implications The findings could drive insurers’ choices on communication and transparency, alongside regulators’ decisions about market discipline. They also suggest that risk disclosure could be used to strengthen market discipline and should be added to the other variables traditionally used in stock return volatility and firm value estimation models in the insurance industry. Originality/value This paper offers new insights in the debate on the bright and dark sides of risk disclosure in the insurance industry and provides interesting implications for insurers and their stakeholders.

Stock liquidity and stock return: an asymmetric impact of institutional ownership approach

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbas Ali Daryaei ◽  
Yasin Fattahi
Keyword(s):  
Stock Return ◽  
Market Value ◽  
Institutional Ownership ◽  
Threshold Level ◽  
Stock Liquidity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Asymmetric Impact ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Total Market

Purpose This study is primarily aimed at investigating the asymmetric impact of institutional ownership on the relationship between stock liquidity and stock return. It was conducted by testing the hypotheses regarding efficient monitoring and adverse selection from Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). Design/methodology/approach Using a panel smooth transition regression model and selecting 183 firms for the period from 2009 to 2019 from TSE, this study examined the data to explore the asymmetric impact of institutional ownership on the relationship between stock liquidity and stock return. Findings The results show a positive impact by institutional ownership on the relationship between stock liquidity and stock return in the first regime (threshold level 39%), whereas in the second regime, there is a negative impact by institutional ownership on the relationship between stock liquidity and stock return. Furthermore, the firms were divided into two groups based on the market value. The first group includes those with a market share less than the mean total market value of the sample. The second group includes firms with a market share higher than the mean total market value of the sample (large firms). The results illustrate that the threshold level is 32% and 44% for the first and second groups, respectively. Originality/value The findings of this study suggest that institutional ownership theories require closer inquiry.

scholarly journals Corporate risk and the humpback of CEO narcissism

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Aabo ◽  
Nicklas Bang Eriksen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Taking ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Return Volatility ◽  
Moderate Degree ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
Unobtrusive Measure ◽  
Ceo Narcissism ◽  
High Level ◽  
Corporate Risk

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the association between CEO narcissism and corporate risk taking. Design/methodology/approach The authors provide a novel and unobtrusive measure of CEO narcissism based on LinkedIn profiling. The authors investigate the relationship between CEO narcissism and corporate risk taking (stock return volatility) for a sample of 475 US manufacturing firms in the period 2010-2014. Findings The authors find an inverse U-shape relationship between CEO narcissism and stock return volatility. The inverse U-shape relationship (the “humpback”) is caused by the paradoxical nature of the narcissistic personality in which the self-esteem is high but at the same time fragile with a combination of self-admiration and a constant need of having this positive self-view confirmed. The results are robust to alternative specifications of CEO narcissism and corporate risk taking. The results are economically meaningful. Thus, a moderate degree of CEO narcissism – as compared to a very low or a very high level of CEO narcissism – is associated with an increase in corporate risk taking of approximately 12 percent. Originality/value Previous literature provides multiple analyses on the association between managerial overconfidence and corporate decisions. As opposed to overconfidence, narcissism is a personality trait having both cognitive and behavioral dimensions. This paper provides a novel contribution to the growing literature on the association between managerial biases/traits and corporate decision-making.

Ownership structure, stock volatility and analyst independence

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaobao Song ◽  
Wenjia Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Cash Flow ◽  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Institutional Investors ◽  
Stock Return ◽  
Significant Negative Correlation ◽  
Control Rights ◽  
Analyst Following ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Cash Flow Rights ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine securities analyst independence in China's capital market and the effect on analyst independence of institutional investors’ shareholding and separation between control rights and cash flow rights of ultimate controller. Design/methodology/approach – Using data of China's listed companies from 2006 to 2012, the authors empirically tested the relationship between analyst following and volatility of stock return. And based on the test, the authors investigated the role played by institutional investors’ ownership and separation between control rights and cash flow rights of ultimate controller. Findings – According to the empirical results, there is a significant negative correlation between analyst following and volatility of stock return. Also, shareholding of institutional investors and the separation between control rights and cash flow rights of ultimate controllers will have an impact on the relationship between analyst following and volatility of stock return. When institutional investors hold higher proportion or the separation between control rights and cash flow rights of ultimate controllers keeps at a high level, the negative correlation between analyst following and volatility of stock return will weaken. Originality/value – First, based on the theory of market intermediation, the paper examined analyst independence by investigating and analyzing the relationship between analyst following and volatility of stock return. Second, it analyzed the factors affecting analyst independence by integrating enterprise characteristic variable and market characteristic variable on the basis of introducing two variables – shareholding of institutional investors and the separation between control rights and cash flow rights of ultimate controllers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document