• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.161-173
• /
• 1994

유상증자의 주가하락에 대하여 유상증자 공시일전 내부자순매수를 종속변수로 설정하여 선형회귀분석한 결과, 이전의 논문결과와는 달리 유상증자규모효와 자본구조변화효과는 보이지 않았으며, 반면에 유상증자의 주가하락이 내부자순매수와 통계적 유의성이 높은 비례관계가 있음을 밝혀 내었다. 이 결과는 유상증자규모효과로 인한 가격 압박가설과 자본구조변화효과로 인한 부의 이전가설을 기각시키고 정보전달가설이 유상증자의 주식 가격 하락현상을 설명하는 설득력 있는 가설임을 시사하고 있다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.49-70
• /
• 2000

본 연구에서는 한국주식시장의 대표적 주가지수인 KOSPI 200 진입기업과 제외기업의 주가 행태에 어떤 변화가 있는지를 분석하였다. 1994년 6월 이후부터 1999년 정기변경때까지의 기간에 KOSPI 200에 새로 진입한 종목과 제외된 종목을 검증표본으로 하고 이와 유사한 특성을 가지는 기업들을 대응표본으로 삼아 두 집단간에 나타나는 비정상수익률 및 누적비정상수익률의 특성과 비정상수익률과 비정상거래량간의 관계를 비교 분석하였다. 사건일의 비정상수익률과 사건기간동안의 누적비정상수익룰에 대한 분석결과는 KOSPI 200에 새로 포함되거나 제외되는 종목의 주가행태에 뚜렷한 변화가 있다는 결과를 보여주지는 못하고 있다. 그러나 일부 표본의 분석결과는 KOSPI 200에 새로 진입하거나 제외되는 정보가 공시일 이전에 시장에 반영되는 모습을 보여주며, 외환위기 이후기간에 발생한 정기변경진입종목에 나타난 주가행태 변화와 주가변동과 거래량 변동간의 관계는 일부 가격압박가설로 설명될 수 있음을 보여준다. 그러나 본 연구의 분석결과는 지수 신규편입 종목들이 펀드에 신규로 편입되는 과정에서 거래량이 증가해 초과수익이 발생한다는 기존의 가격압박가설의 내용을 충분히 지지하지는 못하고 있다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.65-94
• /
• 2009

The event of change in KOSPI 200 Index composition is one of the main subjects for the test of EMH. According to EMH, when a certain event is not related with firm's fundamental value, stock price should not change after the announcement of news. This hypothesis leads us to the conclusion of horizontal demand curve of stock. This logic was questioned by Shleifer(1986) and argued that downward sloping demand curve hypothesis was supported. But Harris and Gruel(1986) found a different empirical evidence that price reversal occurs in the long run, which is called price pressure hypothesis. They argued that short term price effect by large block trading (price pressure) is offset in the long run because these event is unrelated to fundamental value. Therefor, they argued that EMH can not be rejected in the long run. Until now, there are two empirical studies with Korean market data in this area. Using a data with same time period of $1996{\sim}1999$, Kweon and Park(2000) and Ahn and Park(2005) showed that stock price or beta is not significantly affected by change in index composition. This study retested this event expanding sample period from 1996 to 2006, and analyzed why this event was considered an uninformative events in the preceding studies. We analyzed a market impact by separating samples according to firm size and market condition. In case of newly enlisted firm, we found the evidence supporting price pressure hypothesis on average. However, we found the long run price effect in the sample of large firms under bearish markets. At the same time, we know that the number of samples under the category of large firms under bearish markets is relatively small, which drives the same result of supporting the hypothesis that change in index composition is a non-informative event on average. Also, the long run price effect of large size firms under bearish markets was supported by the analyses using trading volumes. On the other hand, in case of delisting from the index, we found the long run price effect but that was not supported by trading volume analyses.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.213-237
• /
• 1993

본 연구는 시간에 따라 정보비대칭의 정도가 변동할 때의 역선택모형을 이용하여 우리나라 주식시장에서 기업의 유상증자의 시기가 주가에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가를 분석하였다. 먼저 재무제표 등의 내부정보가 일반투자자에게 공시된 직후에는 다른 시점에서 보다 많은 유상증자공시를 확인할 수 있었으며, 유상증자공시 직전에는 다른 기간에서 보다 좋은 내부정보가 공시된다는 사실을 확인하였다. 그리고 유상증자공시에 따른 주가반응에 영향을 미치는 요인을 분석하기 위하여 가격압박가설, 레버리지가설, 정보가설 둥에서 제시한 변수를 이용하여 분석한 결과 유상증자공시일에서는 시장상황과 유상증자공시시기 등이 유의적인 영향을 미친다는 점을 확인하였고, 배정기준일에서는 시장상황, 레버리지변동, 기업자산의 가치에 대한 불확실성 등이 유의적인 영향을 미친다는 점을 확인하였다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.35-62
• /
• 2010

This paper examines the existence of the fund performance persistence and the smart money effect in Korean stock market and tests the flow-induced price pressure (FIPP) hypothesis, that is, fund flows affect individual stock returns and mutual fund performance. This paper also tests whether the FIPP effect can cause the performance persistence using the monthly returns and stock holdings data of 2,702 Korean mutual funds from January 2002 to June 2008. The empirical results indicate that the performance persistence exists significantly for a long time but the smart money effect does not. The hedge portfolio constructed by buying funds with the highest past 12 months performance and selling funds with the lowest past 12 months performance earns 0.11%~1.05% monthly abnormal returns, on average, in 3 years from portfolio formation month, but the hedge portfolio constructed by buying funds with the highest past net fund inflows and selling funds with the lowest past net fund inflows cannot earn positive monthly abnormal returns and the size of negative abnormal returns of the portfolio increase as time goes on. We find the evidence that the FIPP hypothesis is significantly supported. We first estimate the FIPP measure for each individual stock using the trading volume resulting from past fund flows and then construct the hedge portfolio by buying stocks with the highest FIPP measure and selling stocks with the lowest FIPP measure. That portfolio earns significantly positive abnormal return, 1.01% at only portfolio formation month and cannot earn significant abnormal returns after formation month. But, the FIPP effect cannot cause the performance persistence because, within the same FIPP measure group, funds with higher past performance still earn higher monthly abnormal returns than those with lower past performance by 0.08%~0.77%, on average, in 2 years. These results imply that the main cause of the performance persistence in Korean stock market is the difference of fund managers' ability rather than the FIPP effect.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.85-107
• /
• 2007

In this study, I analyzed determinant factors of mutual fund return. The samples was distributed into three types according to the ratio of included stocks in funds. The proxies of mutual funds were set up three ways(returns of fund). As a result of the analysis, I found that growth positively affect to fund return, abnormal return and adjusted abnormal return in all samples. While, according to three types of sample, expected and unexpected fund cash flows had differently effect on fund return. Inferentially, it seemed that the ratio of included stocks in fund was the cause of that. But price pressure hypothesis are not supported. In conclusion, it was not found the possibility of stock market disturbance in this analysis.