2004
DOI: 10.1080/096031042000187397
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monthly and semi-annual seasonality in the Irish equity market 1934–2000

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Jaffe and Westerfield (1989) extend Ariel's (1987) work for four other countries and report a weak evidence for his results. Lucey and Whelan (2004) investigate the Irish equity market over 1934-2004 and report a strong and constant January effect. Rendon and Ziemba (2007) find that the January effect is still alive in the futures markets from 1982 to 2004 period.…”
Section: Indian Currency Marketmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jaffe and Westerfield (1989) extend Ariel's (1987) work for four other countries and report a weak evidence for his results. Lucey and Whelan (2004) investigate the Irish equity market over 1934-2004 and report a strong and constant January effect. Rendon and Ziemba (2007) find that the January effect is still alive in the futures markets from 1982 to 2004 period.…”
Section: Indian Currency Marketmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The F-statistic is generally in favour of overall seasonality, being a joint test of equality of the coefficients to each other and zero and this being rejected at the 10% level in all cases and in four out of five at the 1% level. 2 It is instructive however to note that the Kruskal-Wallis H-statistic is not in agreement with the F-stat., a feature that is common to later Irish studies, such as Lucey (2004) and Lucey and Whelan (2004). The day with the largest return is in all cases significant, whereas this is not the case for the lowest returns.…”
Section: Shown Inmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…This may tilt results in favour of better performing entities, because underperforming funds are more likely to exit the market (Lai & Wang, 2016) and the merging of funds may be connected with unsatisfactory perfromance (Wang & Huang, 2013). Finally, given that the NAVs of the funds depend on the prices of the underlying holdings such as stocks, the former are prone to unaccounted-for factors such as stock price seasonality (Camilleri, 2008;Lucey& Whelan, 2004), and non-synchronous trading effects (Day & Wang, 2002;Camilleri & Green, 2014).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%