• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.169-204
• /
• 2010

This paper examines the dynamic relationship between fund flow and market risk at the aggregate level and explores whether sudden sharp changes in fund flow (fund run) can cause a systemic risk in the Korean financial markets. We use daily and weekly data and regression and VAR analysis. Main results of the paper are as follows: First, in the stock market, a concurrent and a lagged unexpected fund flows have a positive relationship with market volatility. A positive shock in fund flow predicts an increase in stock market volatility. In the bond market, an unexpected fund flow has a negative relationship with the default risk premium, but a positive relationship with the term premium. And an unexpected fund flow of the money market fund has a negative relationship with the liquidy risk, but the explanatory power is very low. Second, for examining whether changes in fund flow induce a systemic risk, we construct a spillover index based on the forecast error variance decomposition of VAR model. A spillover index represents that how much the shock in fund flow can explain the change of market risk in a market. In general, explanatory powers from spillover indexes are so fluctuant and low. In the stock market, the impact of shocks in fund flow on market risk is relatively high and persistent during the period from the end of 2007 to 2008, which is the subprime-mortgage crisis period. In bond market, since the end of 2008, the impact of shocks in fund flow spreads to default risk continually, while in the money market, such a systematic effect doesn't take place. The persistent patterns of spillover effect appearing around a certain period in the stock market and the bond market suggest that the shock to the unexpected fund flow may increase the market risk and can be a cause of systemic risk in the financial markets. However, summarizing the results of regression and VAR model analysis, and considering the very low explanatory power of spillover index analysis, we can conclude that changes in fund flow have a very limited power in explaining changes in market risk and it is not very likely to induce the systemic risk by a fund run in the Korean financial markets.

• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.41-63
• /
• 2017

FDI can either be absorbed in the production cycle with domestic investment and create an inducement effect or it can remain as an exogenous factor and increase the volatility of GDP. The purpose of this paper is to research these different impacts that FDI could have. For that, the endogenous growth theory was employed. The statistic method used are the panel model for sectoral analysis, and GARCH model and VAR for time series analysis. Myanmar was selected as this paper's research subject because it is one of countries which had a colossal amount of FDI inflow recently. The panel analysis did not confirm the causality between sectoral FDI and sectoral GDP. The reason for this could be in the lack of data, since sectoral data exists yearly only during 2006-2016. Therefore this study conducted the times series analysis. According to the results, during 2006 until 2010, it showed signs of GARCH but the effect of FDI on GDP was nonexistent, which means FDI was not integrated into the domestic production cycle but stayed in residual terms. During 2011 to 2016, FDI seemed to affect the growth of Myanmar's GDP. The estimation confirmed the existence of GARCH and the Granzer causality test confirmed that FDI influenced the GARCH, which signified FDI increased the volatility of GDP. The VAR analysis showed responses of GDP to FDI was small(about 0.0007). This research assumes that FDI can be divided in two parts: one part which can be assimilated in the domestic production cycle and the other where it stays outside of the production cycle. The former creates production inducement effect and the latter only increases the volatility of GDP. According to this study, the latter outweighs the former impact in Myanmar.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.38 no.4
• /
• pp.87-106
• /
• 2022

Uncertainties in the energy market are increasing due to technology developments (shale revolution), trade wars, COVID-19, and the Russia-Ukraine war. Especially, since 2020, the risk of international trade in the energy market has increased significantly due to changes in the supply chain of transportation and due to prolonged demand reduction because of COVID-19 and the Russian-Ukraine war. Considering these points, this study analyzed connectedness between energy price, tanker index, and uncertainty to understand the connectedness between international trade in the energy market. Main results are summarized as follows. First, as a result of analyzing stable period and unstable period of the energy price model using the MS-VAR model, it was confirmed that both the crude oil market model and the natural gas market model had a higher probability of maintaining stable period than unstable period, increasing volatility by specific events. Second, looking at the results of the analysis of the connectedness between stable period and unstable period of the energy market, it was confirmed that in the case of total connectedness, connectedness between variables was increased in the unstable period compared to the stable period. In the case of the energy market stable period, considering the degree of connectedness, it was confirmed that the effect of the tanker freight index, which represents the demand-side factor, was significant. Third, unstable period of the natural gas market model increases rapidly compared to the crude oil market model, indicating that the volatility spillover effect of the natural gas market is greater when uncertainties affecting energy prices increase compared to the crude oil market.

• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.3-18
• /
• 2018

In this study, I examined capital market shock reaction effects of 29 OECD countries with the past 24 years sample period consisting of daily stock market return using T-GARCH model focused on volatility feedback hypothesis. US daily stock market return is used as a unique independent variable in this model in consideration of its characteristics of biggest market share and as an origin country of Global Financial Crisis. As a result, France, Finland, and Mexico in order are shown to be the strongest countries in the aspect of return spillovers from US. Canada, Mexico, and France are shown to be the highest countries in the aspect of explanatory power of model. The degrees of shock reaction are proved to be higher in order in Germany, Chile, Switzerland, and Denmark and those of downside shock reaction are seen higher in order in Greece, Great Britain, Australia, and Japan. Canada and Mexico belonging to NAFTA are shown to be higher in the return spillover from US and in the model explanatory power, but they are shown to be lower in the impact of shock reaction, suggesting that regional distance effect or gravity theory cannot be applied to financial spillovers any longer. In the analysis of subsample period of Global Financial Crisis, north American three countries do not show any consistent results as in the full sample period but shock reaction in the European countries are shown to record stronger, suggesting that shocks from US in the Crisis Times are transferred mainly to European region.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.125-151
• /
• 2004

This study tests the price discovery from US Treasury bond markets to Korean bond markets using the daily returns of Korean bond data (CD, 3-year T-note, 5-year T-note, 5-year corporate note) and US treasury bond markets (3-month T-bill, 5-year T-note 10-year T-bond) from July 1, 1998 to December 31, 2003. For further research, we divide full data into two sub-samples on the basis of the start-up of bond valuation system in Korean bond market July 1, 2000, employing uni-variate AR(1)-GARCH(1,1)-M model. The main results are as follows. First the volatility spillover effects from US Treasury bond markets (3-month T-bill, 5-year T-note, 10-year T-bond) to Korean Treasury and Corporate bond markets (CD, 3-year T-note, 5-year T-note, 5-year corporate note) are significantly found at 1% confidence level. Second, the price discovery function from US bond markets to Korean bond markets in the sub-data of the pre-bond valuation system exists much stronger and more persistent than those of the post-bond valuation system. In particular, the role of 10-year T-bond compared with 3-month T-bill and 5-year T-note is outstanding. We imply these findings result from the international capital market integration which is accelerated by the broad opening of Korean capital market after 1997 Korean currency crisis and the development of telecommunication skill. In addition, these results are meaningful for bond investors who are in charge of capital asset pricing valuation, risk management, and international portfolio management.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.41-64
• /
• 2011

This article investigates the interrelationships in daily returns using fractionally integrated error correction term and volatilities using constant conditional correlation and dynamic conditional correlation GARCH with asymmetries between Capesize and Panamax markets. Our findings are as follows. First, for the fractionally cointegrated error correction model, there is a unidirectional relationship in returns from the Panamax market to the Capesize market, but a bidirectional causal relationship prevails for the traditional error correction models. Second, the coefficients for the error correction term are all statistically significant. Of particular interest are the signs of the estimates for the error correction term, which are all negative for the Capesize return equation and all positive for the Panamax return. Third, there are bidirectional volatility spillovers between both markets and the direction of the information flow seems to be stronger from Panamax to Capesize. Fourth, the coefficients for the asymmetric term are all significantly positive in the Capesize market, but the Panamax market does not have a significant effect. However, the coefficients for the asymmetric term are all significant, implying that the leverage effect does exist in the Capesize and Panamax markets.