IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedbne/y1999isepp3-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are stock returns different over weekends? a jump diffusion analysis of the "weekend effect"

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Fortune

Abstract

The distribution of returns on common stocks is, arguably, one of the most widely studied financial market characteristics. The performance of stock prices during breaks in trading has received considerable attention in recent years, especially since the advent of "circuit breakers" designed to create stability when markets are chaotic. This study examines the distribution of daily returns on five popular stock price indices, with a special emphasis on the difference between returns over weekends and returns over adjacent intraweek trading days. The author revisits the "weekend effect" in common stock returns, focusing on two characteristics of differential returns over intraweek trading days and over weekends: the "drift" and the "volatility." He finds that the volatility of stock returns over weekends is much smaller than could be predicted from intraweek volatility. This is true of stock returns over weekends both before and after October 1987. He also finds that the difference between intraweek drift and weekend drift is smaller after October 1987 than before. Indeed, it disappears for large companies, suggesting that the poor performance of common stocks over weekends in the 1980s was a financial anomaly that was mitigated over time, as investors incorporated it into the timing of their transactions. The sharp decrease in volatility over weekends is consistent with the view that active trading actually increases volatility, so that a close in trading will be consistent with a reduction in volatility. However, a weekend is a scheduled event, which might simply reduce the rate of new information flow, while a sudden halt in trading might eliminate all information flow from price discovery, creating an environment that elicits the volatility it is designed to mitigate.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Fortune, 1999. "Are stock returns different over weekends? a jump diffusion analysis of the "weekend effect"," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Sep, pages 3-19.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedbne:y:1999:i:sep:p:3-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bostonfed.org/economic/neer/neer1999/neer599a.htm
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.bostonfed.org/economic/neer/neer1999/neer599a.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. James Press, 1967. "A Compound Events Model for Security Prices," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40, pages 317-317.
    2. Peter Fortune, 1998. "Primer on U.S. stock price indices," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Nov, pages 25-40.
    3. Merton, Robert C., 1976. "Option pricing when underlying stock returns are discontinuous," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1-2), pages 125-144.
    4. Beckers, Stan, 1981. "A Note on Estimating the Parameters of the Diffusion-Jump Model of Stock Returns," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(01), pages 127-140, March.
    5. Abraham, Abraham & Ikenberry, David L., 1994. "The Individual Investor and the Weekend Effect," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(02), pages 263-277, June.
    6. Cox, John C. & Ross, Stephen A., 1976. "The valuation of options for alternative stochastic processes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1-2), pages 145-166.
    7. Johnson, Gordon & Schneeweis, Thomas, 1994. "Jump-Diffusion Processes in the Foreign Exchange Markets and the Release of Macroeconomic News," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 7(4), pages 309-329.
    8. Kim, Myung-Jig & Oh, Young-Ho & Brooks, Robert, 1994. "Are Jumps in Stock Returns Diversifiable? Evidence and Implications for Option Pricing," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(04), pages 609-631, December.
    9. Harris, Lawrence, 1986. "A transaction data study of weekly and intradaily patterns in stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 99-117, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Fortune, 2003. "Margin requirements across equity-related instruments: how level is the playing field?," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, pages 31-50.
    2. Ralph C. Kimball, 2000. "Failures in risk management," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Jan, pages 3-12.
    3. Guglielmo Maria Caporale & Luis Gil-Alana & Alex Plastun, 2016. "The weekend effect: an exploitable anomaly in the Ukrainian stock market?," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 43(6), pages 954-965, November.
    4. Guglielmo Maria Caporale & Luis Gil-Alana & Alex Plastun & Inna Makarenko, 2014. "The Weekend Effect: A Trading Robot and Fractional Integration Analysis," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1386, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Lundgren, Jens & Hellström, Jörgen & Rudholm, Niklas, 2008. "Multinational Electricity Market Integration and Electricity Price Dynamics," HUI Working Papers 16, HUI Research.
    6. Anthony Gu, 2004. "The Reversing Weekend Effect: Evidence from the U.S. Equity Markets," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 5-14, January.
    7. Peter Fortune, 2001. "Margin lending and stock market volatility," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, pages 3-25.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Stock - Prices ; Stocks;

    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:fip:fedbne:y:1999:i:sep:p:3-19. 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: (Catherine Spozio). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/frbbous.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.