IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/apecjn/0011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Internal Efficiency Test of SET50 Index Options Market : Call Options vs. Put Options

Author

Listed:
  • Jongadsayakul, Woradee

    (Faculty of Economics, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. 10900.)

Abstract

This study is aimed to test the internal efficiency of SET50 Index Options market and focus on the difference between SET50 Index Call Options pricing relationship and SET50 Index Put Options pricing relationship using the conditions of Call & Put Spreads and Call & Put Butterfly Spreads. Over the sample period from October 29, 2012 through March 30, 2016, although the mispricing and arbitrage opportunities for SET50 Index Options are observed under the case of no transaction costs, there are not much opportunities, less than 11 percent. Even with modest transaction costs, including exchange fees, brokerage commissions, and opportunity cost of initial margin deposit, the frequency of arbitrage opportunities drops to less than 5 percent. Using bid and ask prices rather than closing prices, the arbitrageurs can earn riskless profit with SET50 Index Put Options trading only. With the existence of arbitrage opportunities, Put Spread generates more profit than Call Spread, but the mean sizes of violations for Call & Put Butterfly Spreads are not statistically different. Taking all transaction costs (exchange fees, brokerage commissions, interest on initial margin deposit, and bid-ask spread) into account, arbitrage opportunities in every case are almost eliminated. The SET50 Index Options market is therefore efficient. The result would boost the investors’ confidence to invest in options market.

Suggested Citation

  • Jongadsayakul, Woradee, 2017. "The Internal Efficiency Test of SET50 Index Options Market : Call Options vs. Put Options," Asian Journal of Applied Economics/ Applied Economics Journal, Kasetsart University, Faculty of Economics, Center for Applied Economic Research, vol. 24(2), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:apecjn:0011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://so01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/AEJ/article/view/103842/87135
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: Asian Journal of Applied Economics/ Applied Economics Journal
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ris:apecjn:0011. 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: Arannee Tongjankaew (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feckuth.html .

    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.