nach oben

Journal of Financial Services Research

Erschienen in:

01.02.2013

Canadian Investors and the Discount on Closed-End Funds

verfasst von: Mohamed A. Ayadi, Hatem Ben-Ameur, Skander Lazrak, Yue Wang

Erschienen in: Journal of Financial Services Research | Ausgabe 1/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

We explore the role of the discount on closed-end funds (CEFD) in asset pricing and test its validity as a proxy for investor sentiment in the Canadian stock market. Results show that CEFD is not a priced factor. Both cross-sectional and time-series tests confirm that stocks with different exposures to CEFD do not have significantly different average returns. CEFD does not even provide incremental explanatory power after controlling for firm characteristics and risk factors. Furthermore, CEFD fails to be a proxy for investor sentiment with no correlation to either the consumer confidence index or flows to open-ended funds.

Vorheriger Artikel The Volatility of European Banking Systems: A Two-Decade Study

Nächster Artikel Deconstructing Herding: Evidence from Pension Fund Investment Behavior

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Gemmill and Thomas (2002) derived a similar formula.

The management fees and distribution policy cannot be changed without approval by the shareholders or unitholders.

Similar evidence is produced by Brauer (1993). He showed that only 7% of the variance of a standardized measure of weekly discount and premium changes can be explained by investor sentiment as defined by DeLong et al. (1990).

Other empirical tests rely on the correlation of fund discounts with other sentiment indicators, but evidence from this perspective is still conflicting. Malkiel (1977) and Lee et al. (1991) find positive correlations between open-end fund net redemptions and CEFD in the US market. Gemmill and Thomas (2002) identify a highly significant relationship between retail flow into open-end funds and CEFD in the U.K. They support the sentiment explanation.

Bers and Madura (2000) tested closed-end fund performance persistence using various fund characteristics such as discounts, expense ratios, and size.

Pontiff (1996) measured the unhedged risk of closed-end funds using residual standard deviation from regressing excess NAV returns on the excess returns of ten open-end mutual funds.

A higher dividend yield on the fund makes arbitrage less costly since it is easier to cover the dividend obligation on the short position in the underlying assets.

Dimson and Minio-Kozerski (1999) used Sharpe’s returns-based style analysis to infer the most effective asset mix for hedging underlying assets.

We compiled the list of missing closed-end funds in Fundata by checking the funds against the closed-end fund report in www.globefund.com, which provides an updated list of all extant Canadian closed-end funds. We choose the funds that have disclosed NAV online for more than 1 year and for which the underlying assets value was over $100 million. The sample of missing funds in Fundata may be survivorship-biased since www.globefund.com reports only extant closed-end funds.

Since Fundata doesn’t report funds’ trading identifiers (ticker symbol or CUSIP), we matched the data from Fundata with trading data in TSX-CFMRC via fund name.

Many Canadian funds hold income trusts. Since income trusts are exchange-traded securities similar to common stocks, we consider funds holding them as equity funds. We delete the funds that invest primarily in bonds or preferred stocks and keep equity and balanced funds that contain both equity and fixed-income securities. Discounts on country funds may reflect change in the domestic price of risk or a change in sentiment in foreign countries, even if the sentiment in Canada remains constant.

Canadian closed-end funds retained in our sample take various organizational structures and issue multiple securities. For reasons of brevity, we use the conventional term “common shares” to denote shares for traditional investment corporations, “capital shares” for split-share corporations, “units” for investment trusts, and “L.P. units” for limited partnerships.

The annual growth rate of closed-end funds in Canada since 1998 is over 30% (see the closed-end funds report of Investor Economics, 2006) and, as of May 2008, 239 closed-end funds are traded on the TSX (www.globefund.com).

This process may lead to biases since the NAVs of capital shares are reported as the NAV of the underlying portfolio less the par value, rather than the market value, of preferred shares. In a subsequent statistical analysis, we use a subsample with split-share funds excluded and find similar results.

The results are not tabulated but available from the authors upon request.

We also construct equal-weighted discount indices and indices based on the levels of discounts and find that the results are qualitatively similar.

The results of the FF3 alphas for Canadian closed-end funds are similar to those of FF3 plus momentum alpha and so are not reported.

We thank the referee for suggesting this approach.

All unreported results in this section are readily available from the authors upon request.

See Gompers and Metrick (2001), Pritsker (2002), Nagel (2005), and Agarwal (2009).

Many Canadian companies issue multiple classes of common shares, normally with different voting rights. Our definition of size and book-to-market implies that different classes of common shares of a company have the same size and book-to-market ratio.

This definition implies that different classes of common shares for a company might have different momentums. Furthermore, we use a 1-month lag to measure momentum because the bid-ask bounce can attenuate the continuation effect (Jegadeesh and Titman 1993, 1995; Moskowitz and Grinblatt 1999; Jegadeesh and Titman 2001).

We also construct the three factors by orthogonalizing each term with the others for the purpose of better disentangling the effects of these factors, and we find similar results.

The companies that report their asset values as market values (e.g., ETFs, closed-end funds, etc.) are excluded because their book-to-market ratios are not available or, if available, they do not reflect the same information as those of ordinary companies.

The monthly returns of the ten intersectional portfolios and three mimicking portfolios related to size, book-to-market, and momentum factor in Canada over July 1999 to December 2007 are not presented but are available from the authors.

Agarwal P (2009) Institutional ownership, liquidity, and liquidity risk, PhD dissertation (Cornell University)

Amihud Y (2002) Illiquidity and stock returns: cross-section and time-series effects. J Financ Market 5:31–56CrossRef

Amihud Y, Mendelson H (1986) Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread. J Financ Econ 17:223–249CrossRef

Ben-Rephael A, Kandel S, Wohl A (2010) Measuring investor sentiment with mutual fund flows. J Financ Econ, Forthcoming

Berkowitz MK, Qiu J (2001) Common risk factors in explaining Canadian equity returns, Working paper (University of Toronto)

Bers MK, Madura J (2000) Why does performance persistence vary among closed-end funds? J Financ Serv Res 17:127–147CrossRef

Black F (1986) Noise. J Finance 41:529–543CrossRef

Bodurtha J, Kim E, Lee C (1993) Closed-end country funds and US market sentiment. Rev Financ Stud 8:879–918CrossRef

Brauer GA (1993) Investor sentiment and the closed-end fund puzzle: a 7 percent solution. J Financ Serv Res 7:199–216CrossRef

Brickley JA, Manaster S, Schallheim J (1991) The tax-timing option and the discounts on closed-end investment companies. J Bus 64:287–312CrossRef

Brown SJ, Goetzmann WN, Hiraki T, Shiraishi N, Watanabe M (2005) Investor sentiment in Japanse and U.S. daily mutual fund flows, Working paper (New York University)

Carhart M (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. J Finance 52:57–82CrossRef

Chen N-F, Kan R, Miller M (1993) Are the discounts on closed-end funds a sentiment index? J Finance 48:795–800CrossRef

Chen G-M, Rui O, Xu Y-X (2004) Understanding the closed-end fund puzzle from the Chinese experience. Working paper (University of Texas at Dallas)

Cherkes M, Sagi J, Stanton R (2009) A liquidity-based theory of closed-end funds. Rev Financ Stud 22:257–297CrossRef

Delong JB, Shleifer A, Summers LH, Waldmann RJ (1990) Noise trader risk in financial markets. J Polit Econ 98:703–738CrossRef

Dimson E, Minio-Kozerski C (1999) The closed-end fund discount and performance persistence. Working paper (London Business School)

Doukas JA, Milonas NT (2004) Investor sentiment and the closed-end fund puzzle: out-of-sample evidence. Eur Financ Manag 10:235–266CrossRef

Elton JE, Gruber MJ, Busse JA (1998) Do investors care about sentiment? J Bus 71:477–500CrossRef

Fama EF, French KR (1992) The cross-section of expected stock returns. J Finance 47:427–465CrossRef

Fama EF, French KR (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. J Financ Econ 33:3–56CrossRef

Fama EF, MacBeth JD (1973) Risk, return and equilibrium: empirical tests. J Polit Econ 81:607–636CrossRef

Fisher KL, Statman M (2003) Consumer confidence and stock returns. J Portfolio Manag, Fall

Flynn SM (2005) Noise-trading, costly arbitrage, and asset prices: evidence from US closed-end funds. Working paper (Vassar College)

Frazzini A, Lamont OA (2008) Dumb money: mutual fund flows and the cross-section of stock returns. J Financ Econ 88:299–322CrossRef

Gemmill G, Thomas DC (2002) Noise trading, costly arbitrage, and asset prices: evidence from closed-end funds. J Finance 6:2571–2594CrossRef

Gibbons MR, Ross SA, Shanken J (1989) A test of the efficiency of a given portfolio. Econometrica 57:1121–1152CrossRef

Gompers P, Metrick A (2001) Institutional investors and equity prices. Q J Econ 116:229–259CrossRef

Ho C, Hung C-H (2009) Investor sentiment as conditioning information in asset pricing. J Bank Finance 33:892–903CrossRef

Jegadeesh N, Titman S (1993) Returns to buying winners and selling losers: implications for stock market efficiency. J Finance 48:65–91CrossRef

Jegadeesh N, Titman S (1995) Short horizon return reversals and the bid-ask spread. J Financ Intermed 4:116–132CrossRef

Jegadeesh N, Titman S (2001) Profitability of momentum strategies: an evaluation of alternative explanations. J Finance 56:699–720CrossRef

Kim C-S (1994) Investor tax-trading opportunities and discounts on closed-end mutual funds. J Financ Res 17:65–75

L’Her J-F, Masmoudi T, Suret J-M (2004) Evidence to support the four-factor pricing model from the Canadian stock market. J Int Financ Market Inst Money 14:313–328CrossRef

Lee MC, Shleifer A, Thaler RH (1991) Investment sentiment and the closed-end fund puzzle. J Finance 46:76–110

Lewellen J, Nagel S, Shanken J (2010) A skeptical appraisal of asset-pricing tests. J Financ Econ 96:175–194CrossRef

Liew J, Vassalou M (2000) Can book-to-market, size and momentum be risk factors that predict economic growth? J Financ Econ 57:221–245CrossRef

Malkiel BG (1977) The valuation of closed-end investment company shares. J Finance 32:847–859CrossRef

Malkiel BG (1995) The structure of closed-end fund discounts revisited. J Portf Manag 21:32–38CrossRef

Moskowitz TJ, Grinblatt M (1999) Do industries explain momentum. J Finance 54:1249–1290CrossRef

Nagel S (2005) Short sales, institutional investors and the cross-section of stock returns. J Financ Econ 78:277–309CrossRef

Neal R, Wheatley SM (1998) Do measures of investors’ sentiment predict returns? J Financ Quant Anal 33:523–547CrossRef

Pontiff J (1996) Costly arbitrage: evidence from closed-end funds. Q J Econ 111:1135–1151CrossRef

Pontiff J (1997) Excess volatility and closed-end funds. Am Econ Rev 87:155–169

Pritsker M (2002) Large investors and liquidity: a review of the literature. In: Committee on the Global Financial System (ed) Risk measurement and systematic risk—Proceedings of the Third Joint Central Bank Research Conference. Bank for International Settlements, Basel, Switzerland, (pp 126–139)

Qiu L, Welch I (2006) Investor sentiment measures, Working paper (NBER)

Ross SA (2005) Neoclassical finance. Princeton University Press, Princeton

Schmeling M (2009) Investor sentiment and stock returns: some international evidence. J Empir Finance 16:394–408CrossRef

Seyhun HN, Skinner DJ (1994) How do taxes affect investors’ stock market realizations? Evidence from tax-return panel data. J Bus 67:231–262CrossRef

Shleifer A, Vishny RW (1997) The limits of arbitrage. J Finance 52:35–55CrossRef

Sirri E, Tufano P (1998) Costly search and mutual fund flows. J Finance 53:1589–1622CrossRef

Swaminathan B (1996) Time-varying expected small firm returns and closed-end fund discounts. Rev Financ Stud 9:845–887CrossRef

Zhang T, Li J, Malone P (2004) Closed-end fund discounts in Chinese stock markets. Chin Econ 37:17–38

Titel: Canadian Investors and the Discount on Closed-End Funds
verfasst von: Mohamed A. Ayadi
Hatem Ben-Ameur
Skander Lazrak
Yue Wang
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2013
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Financial Services Research / Ausgabe 1/2013
Print ISSN: 0920-8550
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0735
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10693-011-0125-8