No abstract

This paper examines the absence of the book-to-market equity (BM) effect in the Taiwan stock market, applying the BM decomposition proposed by Daniel and Titman (2006). First, we do not observe a significantly negative correlation between future stock return and intangible return on research-and-development-intensive firms in Taiwan, which is inconsistent with the US evidence documented by Daniel and Titman. Second, undervaluation of research-and-development-intensive firms possibly leads to the absence of the BM effect. Those firms, most of which have low BM, perform well not only in the past, but also in the future, thereby obscuring the BM effect.j ere_485 289..299 JEL Classification Numbers: G12, G14.

This study classifies jumps into idiosyncratic jumps and co-jumps to quantitatively identify systematic risk and idiosyncratic risk by utilizing high-frequency data. We found that systematic risk occurs more frequently and has larger magnitudes than the idiosyncratic risk in an individual asset, which indicates that volatilities from one sector are largely derived from the contagious effect of other sectors. We further investigated the importance of idiosyncratic jumps and co-jumps to predict the sector-level S&P500 exchange-traded fund (ETF) volatility. It was found that the predictive content of co-jumps is higher than that of idiosyncratic jumps, suggesting that systematic risk is more informative than idiosyncratic risk in volatility forecasting. Additionally, we carried out Monte Carlo experiments designed to examine the relative performances of the four co-jump tests. The findings indicate that the BLT test and the co-exceedance rule of the LM test outperform other tests, while the co-exceedance rule of the LM test has larger power and a smaller empirical size than that of the BLT test.

No abstract

No abstract