IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are there Monday effects in stock returns: a stochastic dominance approach


  • Cho, Young-Hyun
  • Linton, Oliver
  • Whang, Yoon-Jae


We provide a test of the Monday effect in daily stock index returns. Unlike previous studies we define the Monday effect based on the stochastic dominance criterion. This is a stronger criterion than those based on comparing means used in previous work and has a well defined economic meaning. We apply our test to a number of stock indexes including large caps and small caps as well as UK and Japanese indexes. We find strong evidence of a Monday effect in many cases under this stronger criterion. The effect has reversed or weakened in the Dow Jones and S&P 500 indexes post 1987, but is still strong in more broadly based indexes like the NASDAQ, the Russell 2000 and the CRSP.

Suggested Citation

  • Cho, Young-Hyun & Linton, Oliver & Whang, Yoon-Jae, 2006. "Are there Monday effects in stock returns: a stochastic dominance approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24520, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:24520

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Keim, Donald B & Stambaugh, Robert F, 1984. " A Further Investigation of the Weekend Effect in Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(3), pages 819-835, July.
    2. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Whang, 2005. "Consistent Testing for Stochastic Dominance under General Sampling Schemes," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 735-765.
    3. Wang, Ko & Li, Yuming & Erickson, John, 1997. " A New Look at the Monday Effect," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(5), pages 2171-2186, December.
    4. Kamara, Avraham, 1997. "New Evidence on the Monday Seasonal in Stock Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(1), pages 63-84, January.
    5. Sullivan, Ryan & Timmermann, Allan & White, Halbert, 2001. "Dangers of data mining: The case of calendar effects in stock returns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 249-286, November.
    6. Thierry Post, 2003. "Empirical Tests for Stochastic Dominance Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 1905-1932, October.
    7. Seyhun, H. Nejat, 1993. "Can Omitted Risk Factors Explain the January Effect? A Stochastic Dominance Approach," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(02), pages 195-212, June.
    8. G. Hanoch & H. Levy, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 335-346.
    9. Jorge Brusa & Pu Liu & Craig Schulman, 2003. "The Weekend and 'Reverse' Weekend Effects: An Analysis by Month of the Year, Week of the Month, and Industry," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5-6), pages 863-890.
    10. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    11. French, Kenneth R., 1980. "Stock returns and the weekend effect," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 55-69, March.
    12. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    13. Barberis, Nicholas & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert, 1998. "A model of investor sentiment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 307-343, September.
    14. Peter Hansen & Asger Lunde, 2003. "Testing the Significance of Calendar Effects," Working Papers 2003-03, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    15. Fama, Eugene F, 1991. " Efficient Capital Markets: II," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(5), pages 1575-1617, December.
    16. Lakonishok, Josef & Levi, Maurice, 1982. " Weekend Effects on Stock Returns: A Note," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 37(3), pages 883-889, June.
    17. J. Andrew Coutts & Peter Hayes, 1999. "The weekend effect, the Stock Exchange Account and the Financial Times Industrial Ordinary Shares Index: 1987-1994," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 67-71.
    18. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    19. repec:hrv:faseco:30747159 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Steeley, James M., 2001. "A note on information seasonality and the disappearance of the weekend effect in the UK stock market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(10), pages 1941-1956, October.
    21. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
    22. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    23. Gibbons, Michael R & Hess, Patrick, 1981. "Day of the Week Effects and Asset Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 579-596, October.
    24. Peter Fortune, 1998. "Weekends can be rough: revisiting the weekend effect in stock prices," Working Papers 98-6, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Chuan-Hao Hsu & Hung-Gay Fung & Yi-Ping Chang, 2016. "The performance of Taiwanese firms after a share repurchase announcement," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1251-1269, November.
    2. repec:eee:intfin:v:51:y:2017:i:c:p:190-208 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kim Chang Sik, 2009. "Test for Spatial Dominances in the Distribution of Stock Returns: Evidence from the Korean Stock Market Before and After the East Asian Financial Crisis," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Kaplanski, Guy & Levy, Haim, 2010. "Sentiment and stock prices: The case of aviation disasters," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 174-201, February.
    5. Cohen, Gil, 2014. "Why don’t you trade only four days a year? An empirical study into the abnormal returns of quarters first trading day," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(3), pages 335-337.
    6. Charles, Amélie, 2010. "The day-of-the-week effects on the volatility: The role of the asymmetry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 143-152, April.
    7. Linton, O. & Wu, J., 2016. "A coupled component GARCH model for intraday and overnight volatility," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1671, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    8. Eunhee Lee & Chang Kim & In-Moo Kim, 2015. "Equity premium over different investment horizons," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1169-1187, May.
    9. Sungro Lee, Chang Sik Kim, In-Moo Kim & Chang Sik Kim & In-Moo Kim, 2012. "Testing the Monday Effect using High-frequency Intraday Returns: A Spatial Dominance Approach," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 28, pages 69-90.
    10. Kumar, Satish, 2016. "Revisiting calendar anomalies: Three decades of multicurrency evidence," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 16-32.
    11. Robert Elliott & Ying Zhou, 2013. "State-owned Enterprises, Exporting and Productivity in China: A Stochastic Dominance Approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(8), pages 1000-1028, August.
    12. McSweeney, Brendan, 2009. "The roles of financial asset market failure denial and the economic crisis: Reflections on accounting and financial theories and practices," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 835-848, August.
    13. Oliver Linton & Jianbin Wu, 2017. "A coupled component GARCH model for intraday and overnight volatility," CeMMAP working papers CWP05/17, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    14. Jeffrey E. Jarrett, 2008. "Predicting Daily Stock Returns: A Lengthy Study of the Hong Kong and Tokyo Stock Exchanges," International Journal of Business and Economics, College of Business and College of Finance, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 7(1), pages 37-51, April.
    15. Annaert, Jan & Osselaer, Sofieke Van & Verstraete, Bert, 2009. "Performance evaluation of portfolio insurance strategies using stochastic dominance criteria," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 272-280, February.
    16. Al-Khazali, Osamah & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Samet, Anis, 2014. "Do Islamic stock indexes outperform conventional stock indexes? A stochastic dominance approach," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 29-46.
    17. Levy, Tamir & Yagil, Joseph, 2012. "The week-of-the-year effect: Evidence from around the globe," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1963-1974.
    18. Jorge Brusa & Rodrigo Hernandez & Pu Liu, 2011. "Reverse weekend effect, trading volume, and illiquidity," Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 37(9), pages 817-839, August.
    19. Al-Khazali, Osamah, 2014. "Revisiting fast profit investor sentiment and stock returns during Ramadan," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 158-170.

    More about this item


    Efficient markets; Stock market anomalies; Subsampling;

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing


    Access and download statistics


    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:ehl:lserod:24520. 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: (LSERO Manager). General contact details of provider: .

    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.