Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Alterations in the Liquidity Premium as an Effect of Exchange Traded Funds: A Study Performed on Nasdaq Composite between 1997 and 2016
Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration.
Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration.
2018 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Investors have historically demanded a return premium for taking on the risk of illiquidity both in terms of characteristic and systematic liquidity risk. Recent research have presented results suggesting that the liquidity premium is diminishing. The increasing popularity of passive investments such as Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) have been proposed as a driving force for the declining trend. Despite the popularity of ETFs, there is limited research how they impact the financial markets. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate how the liquidity premium has developed in the United States between 1997 and 2016 and to explore if developments in the liquidity premium can be linked to the capital inflow to the United States ETF market. The thesis uses measures of stocks’ spreads and order book depths as proxies for the characteristic and systematic liquidities. The proxies are used to test if liquidity has influenced stock returns over 1-year, 5-years and the entire 20-year period. The empirical results obtained through Fama-MacBeth regressions show that the liquidity premium can fluctuate by both sign and magnitude year by year. The characteristic risk premium is negative and significant for the entire 20-year period and the 1-year regressions suggests a clear negative trend. The systematic liquidity premium on the other hand is positive and significant for the entire 20-year period but the 1-year regressions do not show a clear trend. The empirical results show no statistical significance that ETFs influence the liquidity premium. However, the graphical interpretation of the 1-year regressions suggests that the characteristic liquidity premium is negatively correlated with the growth of ETFs. The negative characteristic premium implies that investors are not being adequately compensated for the risk of illiquidity and should therefore avoid a liquidity-based investing strategy which has generated excess return in the past.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. , p. 56
Keywords [en]
Liquidity Premium, Characteristic Liquidity, Systematic Liquidity, Indexation, Exchange Traded Funds, Fama-MacBeth Regression
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-39997ISRN: JU-IHH-FÖA-2-20180606OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-39997DiVA, id: diva2:1215595
Subject / course
IHH, Business Administration
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2018-06-18 Created: 2018-06-08 Last updated: 2018-06-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(960 kB)4 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 960 kBChecksum SHA-512
7b8d8ada16cba283cc7d8782d7af74b86d130c774fab16c21fca0d7c6c5a914f8c0f39a680a3b280d5c560304cf94afa301a7a6397c496bf871bcfec70966df9
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
JIBS, Business Administration
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 4 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 11 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf