The S&P500 index effect reconsidered: Evidence from overnight and intraday stock price performance and volume
Introduction
Over the last 20 years, index funds have become extremely popular, with total worldwide explicitly indexed assets estimated to exceed $1 trillion. When “trackers” follow a benchmark index, their investment decisions are not based on fundamental analysis. Instead, they make the necessary portfolio adjustments only to reduce tracking error, which ensures that such funds will prefer index member stocks to non-members. Thus the deletion of an existing member-firm from a widely followed benchmark has a significant implication for fund managers. For pure index trackers, the only reason, apart from changing cash flows, for trading stocks will be index composition reviews.
The “index effect” refers to the price pressure that is observed when a stock is added to or deleted from an index. If the index is widely tracked, then profits can be made by buying (selling) the shares of the added (deleted) firm ahead of index funds and selling (buying) them at a later stage, when index fund demand (supply) is satisfied. The more money is tied to the index, the more index portfolio managers will be involved in trading the underlying stocks around index recomposition. Index trackers ensure that demand will increase for added stocks and will reduce for deleted stocks. For many years, “buying additions and selling deletions” has been a lucrative strategy for investors not involved in index tracking.1
This study examines the impact of potential overnight price adjustment after the announcement of an S&P500 index addition as well as the impact on the prices and volumes of the stocks on a tick-by-tick basis. A separate analysis is conducted for additions and deletions and also for NASDAQ listed versus NYSE listed stocks. Previous studies have mainly concentrated on close-to-close abnormal returns and showed that there is a significant price increase between the close on the announcement day and the close on the day after. However, the purchase of the added stock cannot be made at the close of trading on the announcement day because the information is released to the market after the close. The first trading opportunity arises in the morning of the first day after announcement, when the stock usually opens at a considerable price increase, resulting in lower actual trading profits; our study investigates this issue in detail.
The following analysis differs from previous studies in four important areas. First, the results involve not only close-to-close abnormal returns but also overnight and open-to-close returns. Second, the tick-by-tick stock price performances and trading volumes of the added stocks are examined for the first time for the years 1999 and 2000. This analysis enables us to provide a more detailed picture of the objectives and actions of index fund managers and arbitrageurs. Third, NYSE and NASDAQ samples are examined separately to determine the impact of trading venue on the index effect.2 Finally, we make use of a more recent and longer run of data on index additions than was available in previous studies.
The remainder of this study is organized as follows. Section two provides a brief description of the major stock selection criteria and the announcement policies of the Standard and Poor’s Index Committee. Section three presents a brief summary of previous relevant studies associated with S&P500 index changes and the prevailing hypotheses that lie behind the companies’ post-event performance. Section four examines the stock performance after addition by using overnight and open-to close data and section five provides results using tick-by-tick abnormal returns. Section six presents an analysis of the index effect at the intra-day level and section seven examines the intra-day index effect of a deletions sample. Section eight concludes.
Section snippets
Index tracking and the S&P500
The S&P500 is a value-weighted index that reflects the market value of all 500 component US stocks relative to a particular base period. The selection and management of the index is determined by the Standard and Poor’s Index Committee. Changes in index composition are mainly caused by member companies effectively ceasing to exist in their current form through mergers, takeovers, restructuring or bankruptcies. According to a statement by Standard and Poor’s, candidate firms are “monitored
Previous literature
The period during which a change in index composition occurs constitutes a useful laboratory for testing the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH). According to the semi-strong form of the EMH, the market’s historical knowledge of abnormal returns for index additions (deletions) will drive the security’s price up (down) to its expected addition (deletion)-day value on the day after the announcement (Cusick, 2002). The profits from buying the stock on the day after the announcement and selling it on
Data and methodology
Stock opening and closing prices are obtained from Thomson Datastream. There are insufficient data for the benchmark opening prices before the year 1993 and therefore, firms that were added to the S&P500 before that year are not examined; the final sample contains 266 stock additions to the S&P500 for the period 1993–2002. Of these stocks, 188 are traded on the NYSE and 78 on the NASDAQ. The abnormal open-to-close return (OTC) for each firm is obtained by subtracting the benchmark return from
Data and methodology: the trade and quote (TAQ) database
The TAQ database contains intraday transactions data for all securities listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), the NASDAQ National Market System (NMS) as well as the American Stock Exchange (AMEX). This analysis uses the reported trades on each day within the event window for firms added to or deleted from the S&P500, but tick-by-tick data are only employed for the years 1999 and 2000. The final sample consists of 91 added firms (with deletions discussed in Section 7). In estimating
An analysis of the intra-day index effect
This section will determine the profits that are available from trading the added stocks, using the 266 firms added to the S&P500 index over the years 1993–2002, and taking into account close-to-close, open-to-close, overnight and abnormal returns. Table 4 presents a summary of the gross and net profits that can be made during S&P500 index addition events based on the abnormal return levels that were found in Section 4. The timing of buying and selling stocks will be based on the high frequency
The intra-day index effect for deleted stocks
There are relatively few studies regarding the stocks deleted from the S&P500 index because of the difficulty in constructing a pure sample which is unbiased with respect to other events. For example, if a firm is about to declare bankruptcy, it will eventually need to be deleted from the index, but its performance thereafter will be affected by two factors – a deletion effect and a bankruptcy effect. The same applies to takeovers and mergers which are similar firm-specific events.
Conclusions
The first part of this study disaggregates close-to-close abnormal returns into overnight and open-to-close abnormal returns, showing that the close-to-close positive effect observed one day after the announcement of addition cannot be traded. However, profitable trading opportunities occur between the first day after announcement and the date of the actual event. The overnight price change seems to have increased over time, indicating an improvement in the level of market efficiency and a
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to two anonymous referees for useful comments that considerably re-shaped and improved this paper. We would also like to thank S&P Corporation for providing information on the announcement and effective dates of S&P500 inclusions. We are grateful to Carol Alexander, Ron Bird, Peter Corvi, Anca Dimitriu, Alfonso Dufour, Alan Goodacre, Apostolos Katsaris, Salih Neftci, Jacques Pezier, and Paul Woolley for their comments. This work was also improved by helpful comments from the
References (31)
- et al.
Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread
Journal of Financial Economics
(1986) - et al.
The dynamics of quote adjustments
Journal of Banking and Finance
(2008) - et al.
Liquidity shocks and the relative performance of hedge fund strategies
Journal of Banking and Finance
(2009) - et al.
The long-term performance of acquiring firms: a re-examination of an anomaly
Journal of Banking and Finance
(2009) - et al.
Do institutions receive comparable execution in the NYSE and NASDAQ markets? A transaction study of block trades
Journal of Financial Economics
(1997) - et al.
Momentum profits and time-varying unsystematic risk
Journal of Banking and Finance
(2008) An analysis of the intraday patterns in price clustering on the Tokyo Stock Exchange
Journal of Banking and Finance
(2006)- et al.
Market structure and trading volume
Journal of Financial Research
(2005) - et al.
An anatomy of the “S&P game”: the effects of changing the rules
Journal of Finance
(1996) - et al.
A scorecard from the S&P game: can I play?
Journal of Portfolio Management
(1997)
S&P500 index replacements: a new game in town
Journal of Portfolio Management
A comparison of trade execution costs for NYSE and NASDAQ listed stocks
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis
The price response to the S&P 500 additions and deletions: evidence of asymmetry and a new explanation
Journal of Finance
Why do NASDAQ market makers avoid odd-eighth quotes?
Journal of Finance
Cited by (36)
Intraday variation in cross-sectional stock comovement and impact of index-based strategies
2024, Journal of Financial MarketsDoes investors’ valuation of corporate environmental activities vary between developed and emerging market firms?
2022, Finance Research LettersDo investors value environmental sustainability? Evidence from the FTSE Environmental Opportunities 100 index
2022, Finance Research LettersEffects of changes in stock index compositions: A literature survey
2017, International Review of Financial AnalysisCitation Excerpt :Dunham and Simpson (2010) also demonstrate that index funds tracking the S&P 500 are able to reduce their tracking error by adjusting their portfolios very close to the announcement date, and in doing so enhance the performance of their funds. This finding was also echoed in a paper by Kappou, Brooks, and Ward (2010) who show that S&P 500 index funds tend to concentrate their portfolio recomposition trades around the effective change date, and thus are less concerned with profits. In general, as the available evidence (which points to a negative impact on the profitability of index tracking funds) is based solely on data from S&P 500 tracker funds, one wonders whether this evidence is generalizable to funds that track other major non-US indices such as the FTSE 100 and the Nikkei 225.
Liquidity effects and FFA returns in the international shipping derivatives market
2015, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation ReviewCitation Excerpt :More recently, Chordia et al. (2005) use the bid–ask spread to investigate liquidity in stock and bond markets. In the equity market, various studies have been conducted to measure the effect of illiquidity on stock returns (Amihud, 2002) as well as the effect of certain events on stocks’ liquidity measured by bid–ask spreads (Erwin and Miller, 1998) and intraday trading volumes (Kappou et al., 2010), relating the Liquidity Cost Hypothesis to long-term price performance. Pastor and Stambaugh (2003) argue that illiquidity is systematic, as expected stock returns are cross-sectionally related to innovations in aggregate liquidity.