IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v36y2017i3p257-272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two Tales of Return Predictability: The Case of Asia–Pacific Equity Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Andrei Shynkevich

Abstract

If past prices can successfully predict future price movements, it would contradict the notion of weak‐form market efficiency. Return predictability can be assessed via a variety of random walk statistical tests or via the application of mechanical trading rules. Findings of return predictability and state of market efficiency are compared by applying a battery of popular random walk statistical tests and a large set of mechanical trading rules to a family of equity indexes in Asia–Pacific equity markets over a 20‐year period of time. Inferences drawn from different random walk based econometric tests of market efficiency often disagree among themselves and tend to exaggerate the extent of predictability in returns. Testing of return predictability via a set of mechanical trading rules allows one to account for a possible data snooping bias, error measurements due to nonsynchronous trading and market frictions such as trading costs. Persistent predictability of returns that cannot be explained by the combination of data snooping bias, nonsynchronicity bias and moderate level of transaction costs is found in just two emerging equity markets in the region. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrei Shynkevich, 2017. "Two Tales of Return Predictability: The Case of Asia–Pacific Equity Markets," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(3), pages 257-272, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:36:y:2017:i:3:p:257-272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hung, Chiayu & Lai, Hung-Neng, 2022. "Information asymmetry and the profitability of technical analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:36:y:2017:i:3:p:257-272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.