• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.27-41
• /
• 2019

Following the methodology of Ben-Rephael, Kadan and Wohl (2015), this paper examines whether firm-level liquidity premium exists and whether the premium exhibits a long-term trend in the Korean stock market. The results show that over the whole sample period (1998-2018), a liquidity premium of 0.083% exists in the cross-section of stocks. Interestingly, the pricing of liquidity declines significantly over the sample period. Sub-period analysis indicates that liquidity is priced mainly in the first sub-period (1998-2004) with a significant monthly premium of 0.304%, while the pricing of liquidity becomes weaker or insignificant in the second (2005-2011) and the third (2012-2018) period. I also find that the significance of the liquidity premium in the first period is attributed to small stocks. To explore underlying reasons that might affect the decline in the liquidity premium, I decompose liquidity premium into the product of firm-level liquidity and the sensitivity of expected stock returns on liquidity. The results reveal that the long-term decline is explained by both an increase in firm-level liquidity and a decrease in the sensitivity of expected returns on liquidity.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Studies
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.127-144
• /
• 1995

Previous literature in financial economics documents the existence of a liquidity premium in expected returns, measured by the bid-ask spread. This study provides a more comprehensive test of the egect of liquidity on common stock returns by including trading volume as an additional liquidity measure. we find that trading volume is a relevant measure of liquidity, and affects expected returns even aher controlling for the effects of systematic risk, firm size, and the relative bid-ask spread. We also find that trading volume complements the bid-ask spread as a liquidity measure, and provides additional information about the liquidity premium. The liquidity effect emerges in non-January months as a volume effect, in addition to the spread effect in January documented by Eleswarapu and Reinganum(1993).

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.103-140
• /
• 2009

This paper investigates various channels through which liquidity can affect stock returns and examines whether behavioral explanation for liquidity risk is reasonable. First, we examine whether liquidity level (average liquidity) plays a significant role in determining asset returns. The result is consistent with the hypothesis that a stock with higher average illiquidity will have a higher expected return. Second, we focus on the argument that liquidity has a non-diversifiable systematic component. If systemic liquidity has a different impact across individual securities, a stock that is more sensitive to systematic liquidity will have a higher expected return. The results of various tests are inconsistent with each other, not completely supporting the argument. Finally, the intra-market tests in Korea support the behavioral explanation for the liquidity premium, and the effect is stronger in the liquidity level than in the liquidity beta related to systematic liquidity.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.121-134
• /
• 2021

Purpose - This study examines whether flight-to-liquidity (FTL) explains the dynamic liquidity risk on stock returns, and whether it has a significant influence on determinants the cross-section of stock returns. Design/methodology/approach - This study suggests a new risk factor, dynamic liquidity hedge portfolio (DLP), to reflect the dynamic impact of liquidity risk on stock returns and the Fama-MacBeth 2 stage regression analysis is employed in order to analyze the data. Findings - First, the DLP factor shows more positive and significant beta for the small or illiquidity stocks. Second, the DLP shows a different influence than SMB (size risk factor), HML (value risk factor), NMP (liquidity risk factor), FTVOL (total volatility factor) in determining the cross-section of stock returns. In addition, the DLP has a statistically significant risk premium of around 5%, which is relatively larger than other risk factors. Research implications or Originality - This study has academic value in terms of newly confirming that the DLP factor has a more significant impact on cross-sectional determination of stock returns than other risk factors by proposing a conditional liquidity factor that can explain the FTL phenomenon.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.43-78
• /
• 2022

The arena of strategic competition between the US and China is expandable from international politics, trade and commerce to finance. What would happen if financial sanctions against China are imposed by the US? Would US financial sanctions lead to a sudden outflow of foreign capital and a liquidity crisis in China? We try to address these questions by estimating China's capital flows-at-risk with the CDS premium on Chinese sovereign funds. We follow Gelos et al. (2019) in setting up a quantile regression model from which China's foreign capital flow-at-risks are estimated. Based on our analysis of China's monthly capital flow data, we find that a rise in the CDS premium has statistically significant negative impacts on China's foreign capital flows-at-risk, mainly in banking flows. However, the analysis also found that due to favorable global conditions, an increase in the CDS premium is unlikely to trigger a shift to a sudden outflow of foreign capital at the moment. Meanwhile, this study found no statistically significant correlation between Korea's capital flows-at-risk and the CDS premium, suggesting that the negative impact of US financial sanctions on China would not increase the probability of capital flight from Korea in a significant manner.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.21-46
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to find impacts of financial activities-financing and investment of Venture Firms during pre-listing periods on the firms' Venture Firm's listing(delisting). The several ratios financial variables relevant to the financing and investment were examined whether there are difference or not between two venture firms groups. The results of study can be summarized as follows. First, the firms of successful group have fewer numbers of equity financing and higher times of premium in issuing stocks than those of failed firms but there is no significant difference in the required time from startup to listing the KOSDAQ. Second, there is no significant difference in the ratio of capital increase in IPO between two groups but additional survey reveals that the successful firms financed equity in IPO by higher numbers of premium than failed firms, which can makes the major shareholder of the successful firms maintain high rayios share of stock. Third, the ratio of working capital investment of the successful firms is significantly higher than that of failed firms, on the other hand the failed firms' ratios of equipment and repayment investment are higher than those of successful firms. Finally, the ratio of R&D investment has no difference between two groups, this result is against the expectation, which is to be further analyzed.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.21 no.11
• /
• pp.320-332
• /
• 2021

This paper investigates the influence of stock-level left-tail risk, which is defined using Value-at-Risk(VaR) estimates of past one-year daily stock returns, in the expected stock returns in the Korean stock market. Our results are summarized as follows: First, monthly-constructed zero-cost portfolios that buy (shortsell) the highest (lowest) left-tail risk decile in the previous month exhibit an average monthly return (called left-tail risk premium) of -2.29%. Second, Fama-MacBeth cross-sectional regressions suggest that left-tail risk in the previous month shows significant and negative explanatory power over return in this month, after controlling for various firm characteristics such as firm size, B/M, market beta, liquidity, maximum daily return, idiosyncratic volatility, and skewness. Third, the stocks with larger recent month loss have lower returns in the next month. Fourth, the magnitude of left-tail risk premium is negatively related with lagged market-level volatility. These results support the hypothesis from a perspective of behavioral finance that the overpricing of stocks with left-tail risk is attributed to the investors' underreaction to it.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.75-106
• /
• 2007

In this study, it is analyzed whether oil price plays a major role in the pricing return on Koran stock market and examined why the covariance risk between oil and return on stock is different in each industry. Firstly, this study explores whether the expected rate of return on stock is pricing due to global oil price factors as a function of risk premium by using a two-factor APT. Also, it is examined whether spill-over effects of oil price volatility affect the beta risk to oil price. Considering the asymmetry of oil price volatility, we use the GJR model. As a result, it shows that oil price is an independent pricing factor and oil price volatility transmits to stock return in only electricity and electrical equipment. Secondly, the two step-analyzing process is introduced to find why the covariance between oil price factor and stock return is different in each industry. The first step is to study whether beta risk exists in each industry by using two proxy variables like size and liquidity as control variables. The second step is to grasp the systematic relationship between the difference of liquidity and size and beta to oil price factor by using the panel-data model which can be analyzed efficiently using the cross-sectional data formed with time series. Through the analysis, we can argue that oil price factor is an independent pricing factor in only electricity and electrical equipment having the greatest market capitalization, and know that beta risk to oil price factor is a proxy of size in the other industries. According to the result of panel-data model, it is argued that the beta to oil price factor augments when market capitalization increases and this fact supports the first assertion. In conclusion, the expected rate of return of electricity and electrical equipment works as a function of risk premium to market portfolio and oil price, and the reason to make beta risk power differentiated in each industry attributes to the size.