Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:09:41.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Efficiency of Least Squares Regression with Security Abnormal Returns as the Dependent Variable

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Imre Karafiath
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Monte Carlo procedures are used to compare the finite sample performance of several estimators that may be used in cross-sectional regressions with security abnormal returns as the dependent variable. Alternative models of event-induced increases in stock return variance are examined for the “event-clustering” scenario. Event clustering implies crosssectional correlation and heteroskedasticity in market model prediction errors, violating one of the fundamental ordinary least squares (OLS) assumptions (i.i.d. disturbances). Nonetheless, provided that the conditions for asymptotic validity derived by Greenwald (1983) are met, the OLS estimator is well specified in finite samples. Further, for sufficiently large cross sections there is no advantage to several other more complex estimators.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , June 1994 , pp. 279 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernard, V. L. “Cross-Sectional Dependence and Problems in Inference in Market-Based Accounting Research.” Journal of Accounting Research, 25 (Spring 1987), 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binder, J. “Measuring the Effects of Regulation with Stock Price Data.” Rand Journal of Economics, 16 (Summer 1985a), 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binder, J. “On the Use of the Multivariate Regression Model in Event Studies.” Journal of Accounting Research, 23 (Spring 1985b), 370–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. J., and Warner, J. B.. “Using Daily Stock Returns: The Case of Event Studies.” Journal of Financial Economics, 14 (03 1985), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, R., and Simms, J. M.. “The International Debt Crisis and Bank Security Returns in 1982.” Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 19 (02 1987), 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandra, R., and Balachandran, B. V.. “More Powerful Portfolio Approaches to Regressing Abnormal Returns on Firm-Specific Variables for Cross-Sectional Studies.” Journal of Finance, 47 (12 1992), 2055–2070.Google Scholar
Collins, D. W., and Dent, W. T.. “A Comparison of Alternative Methodologies used in Capital Market Research.” Journal of Accounting Research, 24 (Spring 1984), 48–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fields, J. A.; Ghosh, C.; Kidwell, D. S.; and Klein, L. S.. “Wealth Effects of Regulatory Reform: The Reaction to California's Proposition 103.” Journal of Financial Economics, 28 (11/12 1990), 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grammatikos, T., and Saunders, A.. “Additions to Loan-Loss Reserves: Good News or Bad News?” Journal of Monetary Economics, 25 (03 1990), 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, W. H.Econometric Analysis. New York, NY: MacMillan (1990).Google Scholar
Greenwald, B. C. “A General Analysis of Bias in the Estimated Standard Errors of Least Squares Coefficients.” Journal of Econometrics, 22 (08 1983) 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karafiath, I.; Mynatt, R.; and Smith, K. L.. “The Brazilian Default Announcement and the Contagion Effect Hypothesis.” Journal of Banking and Finance, 15 (06 1991), 699–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanen, W. N., and Thompson, R.. “Stock Price Reactions as Surrogates for Net Cash Flow Effects of Corporate Policy Decisions.” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 10 (12 1988), 311–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkelson, W. H. and Partch, M.. “Withdrawn Security Offerings.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 23 (06 1988), 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salinger, M. “Standard Errors in Event Studies,” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 27 (03 1992), 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, R. W., and Robins, R. P.. “Discriminating between Wealth and Information Effects in Event Studies in Accounting and Finance Research.” Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 1 (07 1991), 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sefcik, S. E., and Thompson, R.. “An Approach to Statistical Inference in Cross-Sectional Models with Security Abnormal Returns as Dependent Variable.” Journal of Accounting Research, 24 (Autumn 1986), 316–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinkey, J. F., and Musumeci, J. J.. “The International Debt Crisis, Investor Contagion, and Bank Security Returns in 1987: The Brazilian Experience.” Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 22 (05 1990a), 209–220.Google Scholar
Sinkey, J. F., and Musumeci, J. J.. “The International Debt Crisis and Bank Loan-Loss-Reserve Decisions: The Signalling Content of Partially Anticipated Events.” Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 22 (08 1990b) 370–387.Google Scholar
White, H. H. “A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity.” Econometrica, 48 (05 1980), 817–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar