Reexamination of stock liquidity risk with a relative measure
Purpose - Negative relationship between the return of a stock and its liquidity suggests that the illiquid stocks are riskier than liquid stocks. Thus, researchers tend to include the stock liquidity as a variable in asset pricing models, where the stock and market liquidities are usually considered as independent. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the relationship between the return of a stock and its liquidity by using a relative measure that links the individual stock liquidity with market-wide liquidity. Design/methodology/approach - Multivariate regressions are employed to examine the effect of relative market liquidity on the stock return while controlling the effects of other factors. Findings - Negative relationship between the stock return and liquidity is confirmed, but the relationship is not linear. It is found that the relative measure of liquidity is not a substitute, but complement to other liquidity measures used in prior studies. It is also found that fluctuation in relative stock liquidity does not positively affect the return. Research limitations/implications - The study is conducted on New York Stock Exchange and American Stock Exchange exchanges using monthly data. The robustness tests using the daily or weekly data are not conducted. Practical implications - Findings may suggest that investors do not seriously concern about the fluctuations of individual stock liquidity, provided that the stock liquidity is higher than the average market liquidity. Originality/value - For the first time, the liquidity risk is tested using a relative measure instead of an absolute measure. Since fluctuation in stock liquidity does not positively affect the return, a new question arises whether the variability in liquidity can reflect the liquidity risk.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 26 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=sef Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:sefpps:v:26:y:2009:i:1:p:24-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.