IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2608.12634.html

The Price of Permission: Classification Uncertainty in Constrained Capital Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Abdulrahman Qadi
  • Akash Sharma
  • Francesca Medda

Abstract

Shariah-compliant equity screening provides a transparent setting in which institutional rules determine who may own a stock. A binary label identifies current eligibility but not whether the feasible investor base is fragmented across standards or close to changing. We define this instability as classification uncertainty and formalize its investor-base consequence through permitted investor mass. In a 1999-2024 CRSP-Compustat panel of 13,188 securities classified under seven researcher-emulated Shariah rulebooks, screening-rule disagreement and proximity to active boundaries rank next-month screen-implied transitions. U.S. Fama-MacBeth diagnostics do not support an unconditional equal-weighted permission premium, and a September 2023 DJIM/S&P methodology change produces no robust matched repricing. The central event evidence uses 25 official Securities Commission Malaysia lists. The 410 inclusions already trading before the preceding review have positive but imprecise matched returns. Applying the pre-event turnover floor yields 295 inclusions with 1.76 percentage points over $[0,10]$ trading days ($p_{\mathrm{date}}=0.008$; $p_{\mathrm{wild}}=0.017$) and 2.25 points over $[0,20]$ ($p_{\mathrm{date}}=0.018$; $p_{\mathrm{wild}}=0.035$). Leave-one-date-out, first-inclusion-only, and mid-review placebo checks are supportive, although a joint 20-day pre-event test rejects. Ownership and demand-pressure diagnostics do not identify a unique marginal buyer or clean causal demand shock. The evidence supports treating classification risk as a portfolio-monitoring state. Official Shariah permission is associated with price effects in a recognized local market among sufficiently tradable securities; formal eligibility alone is insufficient.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdulrahman Qadi & Akash Sharma & Francesca Medda, 2026. "The Price of Permission: Classification Uncertainty in Constrained Capital Markets," Papers 2608.12634, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2608.12634
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.12634
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. "The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    2. Steven D. Baker & Burton Hollifield & Emilio Osambela, 2022. "Asset Prices and Portfolios with Externalities [Pricedetermination in the EU ETS market: theory and econometric analysis with market fundamentals]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 26(6), pages 1433-1468.
    3. Kewei Hou & Chen Xue & Lu Zhang, 2015. "Editor's Choice Digesting Anomalies: An Investment Approach," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(3), pages 650-705.
    4. He, Ye & Pan, Yuetong & Shan, Tao & Zhou, Yanyu, 2025. "ESG rating disagreement and the cost of equity financing," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Samuel M. Hartzmark & Abigail B. Sussman, 2019. "Do Investors Value Sustainability? A Natural Experiment Examining Ranking and Fund Flows," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(6), pages 2789-2837, December.
    6. Heinkel, Robert & Kraus, Alan & Zechner, Josef, 2001. "The Effect of Green Investment on Corporate Behavior," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(4), pages 431-449, December.
    7. Rajna Gibson Brandon & Philipp Krueger & Peter Steffen Schmidt, 2021. "ESG Rating Disagreement and Stock Returns," Financial Analysts Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(4), pages 104-127, October.
    8. Marco Ceccarelli & Stefano Ramelli & Alexander F Wagner, 2024. "Low Carbon Mutual Funds," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 28(1), pages 45-74.
    9. Florian Berg & Julian F Kölbel & Roberto Rigobon, 2022. "Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings [Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: theory and empirical evidence]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 26(6), pages 1315-1344.
    10. Merton, Robert C, 1987. "A Simple Model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(3), pages 483-510, July.
    11. Wang, Jianli & Wang, Shaolin & Dong, Minghua & Wang, Hongxia, 2024. "ESG rating disagreement and stock returns: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    12. Pedersen, Lasse Heje & Fitzgibbons, Shaun & Pomorski, Lukasz, 2021. "Responsible investing: The ESG-efficient frontier," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 572-597.
    13. Pástor, Ľuboš & Stambaugh, Robert F. & Taylor, Lucian A., 2021. "Sustainable investing in equilibrium," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 550-571.
    14. Hu, Kexin & Li, Xingyi & Li, Zhongfei, 2024. "Effect of ESG rating disagreement on stock price informativeness: Empirical evidence from China's capital market," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB).
    15. Hong, Harrison & Kacperczyk, Marcin, 2009. "The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 15-36, July.
    16. Ho, Catherine Soke Fun & Abd Rahman, Nurul Afiqah & Yusuf, Noor Hafizha Muhamad & Zamzamin, Zaminor, 2014. "Performance of global Islamic versus conventional share indices: International evidence," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 110-121.
    17. Avramov, Doron & Cheng, Si & Lioui, Abraham & Tarelli, Andrea, 2022. "Sustainable investing with ESG rating uncertainty," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 642-664.
    18. Berk, Jonathan B. & van Binsbergen, Jules H., 2025. "The impact of impact investing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    19. M. H. Khatkhatay & Shariq Nisar, 2007. "Shari[Ah Compliant Equity Investments: An Assessment Of Current Screening Norms," Islamic Economic Studies, The Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI), vol. 15, pages 48-76.
    20. Peter Feldhütter & Lasse Heje Pedersen, 2025. "Is Capital Structure Irrelevant with ESG Investors?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 38(8), pages 2362-2385.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alves, Rómulo & Krüger, Philipp & van Dijk, Mathijs, 2025. "Drawing up the bill: Are ESG ratings related to stock returns around the world?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Rudkin, Wanling & Cai, Charlie X. & Zhou, You, 2025. "Can we enhance investment with ESG?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Berle, Erika & He, Wanwei (Angela) & Ødegaard, Bernt Arne, 2025. "The stock market and corporate consequences of ethical exclusions by the world’s largest fund," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    4. Nakagawa, Kei & Morita, Keisuke & Sakemoto, Ryuta, 2025. "Stochastic ESG scores and nonpecuniary ESG preferences: An extension to CAPM," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Ciciretti, Rocco & Dalò, Ambrogio & Dam, Lammertjan, 2023. "The contributions of betas versus characteristics to the ESG premium," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 104-124.
    6. Dangl, Thomas & Halling, Michael & Yu, Jin & Zechner, Josef, 2025. "Social preferences and corporate investment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Horn, Matthias & Oehler, Andreas, 2024. "Constructing stock portfolios by sorting on ESG ratings: Does the rating provider matter?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PA).
    8. Cheng, Louis T.W. & Cheong, Tsun Se & Wojewodzki, Michal & Chui, David, 2025. "The effect of ESG divergence on the financial performance of Hong Kong-listed firms: An artificial neural network approach," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(PA).
    9. Yin, Libo & Zhu, Xiaoye & Su, Zhi & Guo, Hongliang, 2025. "Is disagreement beneficial for market efficiency? Evidence from ESG ratings," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Alkan, Doga & Ayari, Rayan & Paraschiv, Florentina, 2026. "Green fees: Sustainability impacts on portfolio management," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    11. Roman Kräussl & Tobi Oladiran & Denitsa Stefanova, 2024. "A review on ESG investing: Investors’ expectations, beliefs and perceptions," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 476-502, April.
    12. Luo, Di & Farag, Hisham, 2024. "ESG and aggregate disagreement," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Minxuan Hu & Jiayu Yi & Ziheng Chen & Wenxi Sun & Qishi Zhan, 2026. "Stress Amplified Resilience: ESG and Joint Fragility in Equity Markets," Papers 2606.05631, arXiv.org.
    14. Teng, Huiyang & Zhang, Jiawei & Li, Xiaoshuo & Li, Bin, 2025. "ESG rating divergence and future corporate ESG performance: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 108(PB).
    15. Shu, Xipeng & Guo, Xuepeng, 2026. "Steering through scandals: ESG disagreement and corporate strategies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    16. Ferriani, Fabrizio, 2023. "Issuing bonds during the Covid-19 pandemic: Was there an ESG premium?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    17. Fan, Kwok Yuen & Shen, Jianfu & Hui, Eddie C.M. & Cheng, Louis T.W., 2024. "ESG components and equity returns: Evidence from real estate investment trusts," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB).
    18. Muck, Matthias & Schmidl, Thomas, 2024. "Comparing ESG score weighting approaches and stock performance differentiation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(PB).
    19. Liu, Sining & Huang, Wendi, 2026. "Sustainable regulation, stronger currencies: Evidence from capital flow dynamics," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    20. Tristan Jourde & Arthur Stalla-Bourdillon, 2026. "Environmental preferences and sector valuations," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 162(1), pages 45-85, February.

    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:arx:papers:2608.12634. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.