, ( ) * 1) *** *** ,.. (i). (ii).. (iii) (effective spread).,.. I. Debondt and Thaler(1985) (-), (loser) (winner) *.. ** ( ) **

Similar documents
34, 40 34, Blume, Easley and O Hara(1994)..,. (random walk),. Easley and O Hara(1987). Karpoff(1987) (1987) (+). (private information) (public informa

에너지경제연구제 16 권제 1 호 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 16, Number 1, March 2017 : pp. 35~55 학술 전력시장가격에대한역사적요인분해 * 35

, ( ) * 1) *** *** (KCGS) 2003, 2004 (CGI),. (+),.,,,.,. (endogeneity) (reverse causality),.,,,. I ( ) *. ** ***

歯표지_최종H_.PDF

공휴일 전력 수요에 관한 산업별 분석

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 11, Number 2, September 2012 : pp. 1~26 실물옵션을이용한해상풍력실증단지 사업의경제성평가 1

Microsoft PowerPoint - Freebairn, John_ppt

노동경제논집 38권 4호 (전체).hwp

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

20, 41..,..,.,.,....,.,, (relevant).,.,..??.,

에너지경제연구 제13권 제2호

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

歯목차.PDF

歯목차.PDF


<303420C6EDC1FD2D B3E220C1A63135C8A32DBCF6C1A42E687770>

ps

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 9, Number 2, September 2010 : pp. 1~18 가격비대칭성검정모형민감도분석 1

제 출 문 국방부 장관 귀하 본 보고서를 국방부 군인연금과에서 당연구원에 의뢰한 군인연금기금 체 계적 관리방안 연구용역의 최종보고서로 제출합니다 (주)한국채권연구원 대표이사 오 규 철

大学4年生の正社員内定要因に関する実証分析

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 11, Number 2, September 2012 : pp. 57~83 발전용유연탄가격과여타상품가격의 동조화현상에대한실증분석 57

Vol.259 C O N T E N T S M O N T H L Y P U B L I C F I N A N C E F O R U M

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 17, Number 2, September 2018 : pp. 1~29 정책 용도별특성을고려한도시가스수요함수의 추정 :, ARDL,,, C4, Q4-1 -

06_À̼º»ó_0929

#Ȳ¿ë¼®

2


DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

......(N)


±³º¸¸®¾óÄÚ

에너지경제연구 제13권 제2호

, 41 ( ) * 1) ***.,. I.,..., ( ) ( ).,. ( ) *. ** 1


untitled

에너지경제연구 제13권 제1호

untitled

<3136C1FD31C8A35FC3D6BCBAC8A3BFDC5F706466BAAFC8AFBFE4C3BB2E687770>

09김정식.PDF

08_¹Úö¼øöKš

, ( ) 1) *.. I. (batch). (production planning). (downstream stage) (stockout).... (endangered). (utilization). *

02김헌수(51-72.hwp

한국개발연구 표지_.hwp

에너지경제연구 제13권 제1호

노동경제논집 38권 3호 (전체).hwp


Vol.257 C O N T E N T S M O N T H L Y P U B L I C F I N A N C E F O R U M

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 17, Number 1, March 2018 : pp. 37~65 가정부문전기수요의결정요인분석 : 동태적패널 FD GMM 기법을중심으로 37

untitled

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

歯김미성원고.PDF


03¼ºÅ°æ_2


< FC1A4BAB8B9FDC7D D325FC3D6C1BEBABB2E687770>

연구 hwp


03±èÀçÈÖ¾ÈÁ¤ÅÂ

FSB-6¿ù-³»Áö

<28BCF6BDC D B0E6B1E2B5B520C1F6BFAABAB020BFA9BCBAC0CFC0DAB8AE20C1A4C3A520C3DFC1F8C0FCB7AB5FC3D6C1BE E E687770>

조사연구 using odds ratio. The result of analysis for 58 election polls registered in National Election Survey Deliberation Commission revealed that progr

<3132B1C732C8A328C0DBBEF7292E687770>

에너지경제연구 제12권 제2호

05_±è½Ã¿Ł¿Ü_1130

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

歯14.양돈규.hwp

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 18, Number 1, March 2019 : pp 에너지전환정책및고령화가국민경제에미치는영향 : 확률적중첩세대일반균형모형 (Stochastic Overlapping Genera

저작자표시 - 비영리 - 변경금지 2.0 대한민국 이용자는아래의조건을따르는경우에한하여자유롭게 이저작물을복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연및방송할수있습니다. 다음과같은조건을따라야합니다 : 저작자표시. 귀하는원저작자를표시하여야합니다. 비영리. 귀하는이저작물을영리목적으로이용할

< F D20C0C7B7E1B9E8BBF3B0F8C1A6C1B6C7D520C3DFC1F820B0FCB7C320BFACB1B85FBCF6C1A42E687770>

hwp

<3036C0CCBCB1BFEC2E687770>

지능정보연구제 16 권제 1 호 2010 년 3 월 (pp.71~92),.,.,., Support Vector Machines,,., KOSPI200.,. * 지능정보연구제 16 권제 1 호 2010 년 3 월

THOMSON REUTERS PRESENTATION TEMPLATE

분석결과 Special Edition 녹색건물의 가치산정 및 탄소배출 평가 이슈 서 민간분야의 적극적인 참여 방안의 마련이 필요하다. 또한 우리나라는 녹색건축의 경제성에 대한 검증에 대 한 연구가 미흡한 실정이다. 반면, 미국, 영국, 호주 등은 민간 주도로 녹색건축물

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 9, Number 2, September 2010 : pp. 19~41 석유제품브랜드의자산가치측정 : 휘발유를 중심으로 19

부문별 에너지원 수요의 변동특성 및 공통변동에 미치는 거시적 요인들의 영향력 분석

환율지식.PDF

데이터베이스-4부0816

<C7A5C1F620BEE7BDC4>

......CF0_16..c01....

IASB( ) IASB (IASB ),, ( ) [] IASB( ), IASB 1


<2D3828C8AE29B9DAC3B5B1D42E687770>

232 도시행정학보 제25집 제4호 I. 서 론 1. 연구의 배경 및 목적 사회가 다원화될수록 다양성과 복합성의 요소는 증가하게 된다. 도시의 발달은 사회의 다원 화와 밀접하게 관련되어 있기 때문에 현대화된 도시는 경제, 사회, 정치 등이 복합적으로 연 계되어 있어 특

10 이지훈KICS hwp

164

슬라이드 1

①국문지리학회지-주성재-OK


whitepaper6-KR

< B0B3C0CEC1A4BAB8BAD0C0EFC1B6C1A4BBE7B7CAC1FD2E687770>

효학연구 제 호 목 차 인성교육의 위기와 가족문화 정범모 기독교위임체계에 의한 대리의 효 연구 박철호 성경적 효사상 연구 김시우 삼국유사 를 통해본 삼국시대의 효문화 김덕균 글로벌 시대 효학의 방향과 역할 서은숙 고령화 사회와 출산장려정책에 관한 고찰 노인의 재혼과정

유한차분법을 이용한 다중 기초자산 주가연계증권 가격결정

±èÇö¿í Ãâ·Â

제목

<30362E20C6EDC1FD2DB0EDBFB5B4EBB4D420BCF6C1A42E687770>

<3136C1FD31C8A320C5EBC7D52E687770>

<C5EBC0CFB0FA20C6F2C8AD2E687770>

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

, ( ) 1) *,,,,. OECD ,. OECD.. I. OECD, 1) GDP,,.,,,.,., *,. 1) (state owned enterprises),.

Transcription:

, 40 3 4 (2006 12 ) * 1) *** *** 1995 2005,.. (i). (ii).. (iii) (effective spread).,.. I. Debondt and Thaler(1985) (-), (loser) (winner) *.. ** ( ) ***

62, 40 3 4.. Jegadeesh(1990), 2.5%, ehmann(1990) 1.7%. Ball, Kothari, and asley(1995) Conrad, Gultekin, and Kaul(1997) (bid-ask spread)., (2002),, (2003) (+). (Debondt and Thaler, 1985), 1 (Zarowin, 1990), - (o and Mankinlay, 1990), (Conrad and Kaul, 1998),,. Campbell, Grossman, and ang(1993: CG ),... Conrad, ameed, and Niden(1994) NASDAQ, Cooper(1999) NYSE-AMEX., (1997)

63., (-)., (1998),. (2003) 1980 2000 12 15,.,.. Amihud and Mendelson(1986) (+), Chalmers and Kadlec(1998) (amortized effective spread) (+). Brennan and Subrahmanyam(1996) (signed order flow) (price impact) (+). CG. ( ),.

64, 40 3 4.,. Avramov, Chordia, and Goyal(2005) CG. 1, 1 (-)., CG. 1995 2005, ehmann (1990) Jegadeesh(1990) CG Avramov, Chordia, and Goyal(2005).,,.. (effective spread),., Jensen(1978) Rubinstein(2001),.. II, III,

65. IV, V. II. 1995 1 2005 10 (KSE: Korea Stock Exchange) 974 1,000.,. 1,000. (survivorship bias).,, FnGuide DataGuidePro 974,,,,,, /. 1980 / 1995 1995 1 2005 10 525, 129., (Korea Exchange) KSE Database 2002 1 2005 6.

66, 40 3 4 (turnover).. 거래주식수( Number of Shares Traded ) 거래회전율 ( Turnover) = (1) 총발행주식수( Number of Shares Outstanding) ( ). Turnover it = 1 D it D it å d = 1 Number of Number of Shares Traded itd Shares Outstanding itd (2) D it : (t) i Number of Shares Traded itd : d i Number of Shares Outstanding itd : d i (liquidity). Amihud and Mendelson(1980) (order flow), (market order). Kraus and Stoll(1972) Keim and Madhavan(1996) (bid-ask spread)

67. Easley, vidkjaer, and O ara(1999),.,. (illiquidity) Amihud(2002). IIQ it 1 = D D it å it d = 1 R itd DVO itd * 10 6 (3) D it : (t) i R itd : d i DVO itd : d i Kyle(1985). arris and Raviv(1993).., 10. 1,000

68, 40 3 4. (3), -0.08. (3). CG,. CG,.,,..,. CG,.,,. (t-1) - (+) (-). ( -8.88%), ( -2.50%), ( 2.32%), ( 9.79%) 4. 4 Return 1, Return 2, Return 3, Return 4

69. - - ehmann(1990) Jagadeesh(1990) (bid-ask bounce) (-). 4. 8 64. (+) (-), 4. 4. 64. 1995 2005,.

70, 40 3 4 III. 2., ( ) ( ) (t - 1)., ( ) ( )., ( 4) ( 1) (-),. (+).,. CG. t-1 t., 1 2 Panel B. 1 t-1,, t. (Return 1) 16,.

71 Panel A: (t - 1) Panel B: (t) (Return), (Turnover), (Illiqudity) 1. ( 4) ( 1) 0.27% 0.80%. (Turnover 4) (Turnover 1) 0.10% 0.60%. 0.20%

72, 40 3 4,, 1. 90%, 95%, 99%. Turnover 1 2 3 4 4-1 Turnover 1 2 3 4 4-1 Return Portfolio 1 Return Portfolio 2 1 2 3 4 4-1 1 2 3 4 4-1 0.04 8.30 0.06 6.97 0.24 6.40 0.20 6.84 0.10 7.74 0.07* 8.67* 0.11* 7.23* 0.30* 6.90* 0.36* 7.39* 0.24* 6.99* 0.22 9.54 0.76*** 6.91 0.63** 6.73 0.42** 6.15 0.19 7.62 0.41 14.12 0.58** 8.27 0.85*** 6.71 0.94*** 5.33 0.63* 11.12 0.27 12.09 0.47** 6.82 0.60*** 5.64 0.80*** 5.67 0.90*** 6.37-0.75*** 7.46 0.00 6.44 0.18 5.73 0.25* 5.45 0.95*** 6.92-0.59** 7.74 0.09 6.36 0.14 5.83-0.17 5.30 0.41* 6.37 0.17 8.49 0.26 6.52 0.41** 6.00 0.16 4.82 0.00 6.80 Return Portfolio 3 Return Portfolio 4-0.30 9.48 0.63** 8.26 0.48** 6.08 0.41** 4.76 0.57** 7.18 0.57** 8.24 0.55** 7.52 0.30* 5.03 0.19* 4.47 1.14*** 1 2 3 4 4-1 1 2 3 4 4-1 0.01 4.57 0.30* 6.19 0.85*** 7.65 0.13 10.10 0.07 7.25 0.22* 4.84 0.03 5.97 0.26 6.31-0.11 9.62-0.31 8.46-0.03 5.12 0.41** 5.63 0.08 6.17-0.87*** -1.02*** -1.09*** 7.35-0.83*** -1.00*** -1.02*** 6.14-0.02 5.27-0.16 5.37-0.29* 6.04 7.15 6.55-0.02 4.98-0.45** 5.83-1.03*** 6.61 8.51 5.84-0.27* 5.55 0.55** 7.33-0.13 8.56-0.45 13.51-0.15 12.18 0.15 6.97 0.23 6.60-0.39* 7.33-0.73** 8.54-0.84** 8.67-0.45* 7.16-0.31* 6.48-0.36* 6.23 6.09-0.79*** -1.63*** -1.21*** 7.46-0.44* 7.93-0.25 7.24-0.20 5.81-0.51** 6.17 6.89-1.47*** -1.36*** 7.27 0.11 6.84-0.70*** 7.07-0.37* 7.92 11.93 6.44 0.94%, 0.74%. (Return 4) 2 Panel B 16 13,,

73.,.,,.,. 1 2 t-1 t.. t-1 ( ) t ( ).,. Jegadeesh(1990)., : R it = a + b R -1 + e (4) t t it it,, ( : b). 2. Panel A

74, 40 3 4 R a + b R + e (b), t it = t t it-1 it. Panel A, Panel B, Panel C, Panel D. Panel A: All -0.055 (-8.34) Panel B: Turnover Panel C: 1 2 3 4 0.010 (0.91) -0.050 (-5.30) -0.077 (-9.32) -0.086 (-8.88) 1 2 3 4-0.024 (-2.24) -0.042 (-4.79) -0.072 (-8.80) -0.101 (-10.26) Panel D: Turnover and Turnover 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 0.020 (1.33) -0.055 (-3.39) -0.080 (-4.12) -0.090 (-1.35) 0.013 (0.85) -0.030 (-2.23) -0.081 (-5.82) -0.076 (-4.67) -0.027 (-1.27) -0.072 (-4.65) -0.081 (-7.08) -0.081 (-6.27) 0.307 (1.46) -0.081 (-4.22) -0.094 (-7.28) -0.127 (-11.37) -0.055 t-1 ( ) t ( ). Panel B, Panel C..

75. Panel D. -0.090-0.127. 0.307-0.127. t-1 t,. (-),. ehman(1990), o and MacKinlay(1990) Conrad, ameed, and Niden(1994).,, Conrad, ameed, and Niden(1994).,, 3 i t 8. w pit = R T it-1 it-1 it-1 N å p i = Rit- Tit- 1 1 1 it-1 (4) p =,,,,,,, T it-1 : t-1 i

76, 40 3 4 it-1 : t - 1 i N p :. 3 t.,., () 0.73% 1.68% () -1.21% -2.18%. () () -0.24-0.30%. 3 (zero-investment portfolio).,, (,, -) t 1.40%(,, - 1.35%), (, -, ) 2.32%(, -, 2.27%).

77,, (4). 90%, 95%, 99%. Sorting Criterion Return Turnover Return - - - - - - - - - - - - -1.21*** 6.62-1.25*** 8.33-0.41*** 4.96-0.24*** 5.44 0.04 5.92-0.17*** 4.38-0.80*** 4.88-1.00*** 6.66 0.73 5.49 0.32 5.77 0.17 7.95-0.63*** 6.77 0.41 3.59 0.81 5.83 0.56 5.54 0.95*** 4.20 1.93*** 5.00 1.56*** 7.38 0.58 6.71-0.39*** 5.59 Return Turnover -1.96*** 9.31-1.82*** 11.15-0.37*** 4.85-0.30*** 5.20-0.15*** 10.14-0.06*** 4.47-1.59*** 8.47-1.51*** 10.02 0.72*** 5.21 0.25*** 5.72-0.47*** 10.77-1.95*** 8.35 0.48*** 3.70 1.48*** 10.05 1.19*** 9.19 2.20*** 6.72 2.69*** 8.23 2.06*** 10.39-0.10*** 9.91-1.65*** 7.47 eighting Criterion Return -1.35** 6.57-0.94 11.91-0.42 4.88-0.27 8.54-0.41 10.38-0.15 8.48-0.93 4.76-0.67 12.61 1.62*** 6.60 0.34*** 5.76 0.01* 9.60-0.67 6.76 1.29*** 6.37 0.68*** 8.31 1.62*** 9.31 1.00*** 4.44 2.97*** 7.15 1.27*** 11.59 0.43*** 8.84-0.40 9.45 Return Turnover -2.18 9.19-1.53* 14.10-0.37*** 4.80-0.30*** 8.52-0.66*** 13.13-0.07*** 8.50-1.81** 8.30-1.22** 14.66 1.68*** 6.57 0.28*** 5.66-0.63*** 12.06-1.99* 8.61 1.40*** 6.49 1.35*** 12.08 2.32*** 12.02 2.27*** 7.24 3.86*** 9.50 1.80*** 13.80-0.26*** 11.48-1.68** 10.85 Equal eight -0.86*** 5.92-0.26 6.67-0.10 4.56 0.08 4.56-0.60*** 3.39-0.18 2.92-0.76*** 3.30-0.34 3.88 0.59*** 5.03 0.23 5.18 0.38 6.89-0.34 6.26 0.36*** 2.59 0.72*** 3.98 0.21* 3.74 0.57*** 3.11 1.44*** 3.31 0.49** 5.02 0.48** 5.15-0.42** 3.71

78, 40 3 4 3.,, (4) 3.86%. 3 : (i). (ii). (iii).,,,.. (,, -,, -), (,, -,, -), (, -,, -, ), (, -,, -, ).,.. (zero-investment portfolio).

79,, (4). 90%, 95%, 99%. Sorting Criterion Return Turnover Return - - - - - - - - - - - - -2.56** 16.03-3.34*** 13.56-0.38 10.17-0.18 11.62 0.77 11.97-0.20 7.56-2.18** 12.41-3.16*** 10.21 1.44 16.52-1.04 14.59 1.93* 10.96 0.74 11.36 2.47** 10.05 1.18 7.23-0.49 10.22-1.78*** 8.62 4.00*** 13.36 2.30** 11.33 2.31** 8.72 0.92 9.18 Return Turnover -4.34 22.53-5.82 17.25-0.23*** 9.63 0.39*** 11.27 1.47*** 20.79-0.62*** 8.29-4.11 20.98-6.20 14.90-0.42*** 21.31-2.73** 17.93 1.78*** 10.61 0.58*** 10.61 2.31*** 16.53 1.20*** 7.62-2.20** 17.72-3.31** 13.63 3.92*** 24.45 3.08*** 17.08 2.01*** 8.60 0.19*** 9.67 eighting Criterion Return -2.78*** 20.88-3.23*** 13.23-1.32*** 15.41 0.16*** 11.19 0.45 17.73-1.48*** 16.18-1.46** 23.24-3.39*** 10.24 1.87 19.42-1.40*** 14.62 4.77 15.49 0.77** 11.12 3.27 15.76 4.00 14.56-2.90*** 18.88-2.17*** 8.94 4.65 21.91 1.83 10.87 6.09* 20.37 0.61*** 9.22 Return Turnover -4.12*** 25.68-5.75*** 16.83-1.05*** 15.14 0.69*** 10.79 1.63*** 24.30-1.74*** 16.62-3.07*** 27.96-6.44*** 14.76 0.07*** 24.01-3.52*** 17.85 4.52*** 15.34 0.51*** 10.29 3.59*** 20.85 4.00*** 14.98-4.44*** 23.26-4.03*** 13.78 4.19* 30.04 2.23*** 15.87 5.56** 20.41-0.18*** 9.65 Equal eight -0.19 13.47-1.93** 12.02 0.83 9.17 0.09 10.71 1.74** 7.55 0.74 5.58-1.01* 8.27-2.02*** 6.42 1.51 14.16-0.80 13.69 1.75 10.26 0.64 11.01 2.31*** 7.95 1.11 6.16-0.24 7.49-1.45*** 7.35 1.69** 7.16 1.13 6.52 0.92 5.16 0.55 6.69

80, 40 3 4 (, -, ) -1.46% -4.11%. (,, -). (,, ) (,, ).. (,, -) 2.31% 3.27%. (, -,, -, ). IV. 1. 0.94%,.,.,. (effective spread)

81, 1). 5 Panel A 1. 638.637, 47.981. 0.00003, 0.00101 30.., 3.84, 1.29.. 5 Panel B 2002 2005., (proportional effective spread) 0.858% 1.886% 1 0.94%.. 6 (4). < 5>,,,.. < 3>, 3.86%, 5.14%. 1) (1996), (2000).

82, 40 3 4 Panel A 1.. Sz Rank ( 1, 5), (volume). Panel B 2002 2005, (PQSPR: proportional quoted spread) (PESPR: proportional effective spread). Panel A: KSE Sample for 1995 to 2005 1 2 3 4 Turnover Sz Rank Turnover Volume Sz Rank Turnover Volume Sz Rank Turnover Volume Sz Rank Turnover Volume Return Portfolio 1 Return Portfolio 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 4.99 0.0033 507.009 0.00002 4.92 0.0064 598.708 0.00002 4.62 0.0119 422.847 0.00003 3.69 0.0570 522.747 0.00003 4.64 0.0033 52.212 0.00009 3.95 0.0069 48.982 0.00007 3.27 0.0130 52.914 0.00012 2.23 0.0413 67.944 0.00010 Panel B: KSE Sample for 2002 to 2005 1 2 3 4 Turnover PQSPR PESPR PQSPR PESPR PQSPR PESPR PQSPR PESPR 3.76 0.0030 16.728 0.00033 2.74 0.0068 17.567 0.00026 1.98 0.0124 19.616 0.00029 1.36 0.0321 28.799 0.00031 2.33 0.0027 5.679 0.00558 1.56 0.0072 8.197 0.00190 1.21 0.0122 9.373 0.00142 1.19 0.0435 54.371 0.00175 4.99 0.0033 947.851 0.00002 4.94 0.0061 822.370 0.00002 4.70 0.0121 523.462 0.00003 3.84 0.0593 638.637 0.00003 4.70 0.0034 68.577 0.00010 4.14 0.0067 62.921 0.00009 3.49 0.0139 69.312 0.00016 2.48 0.0532 116.124 0.00007 3.85 0.0033 24.092 0.00042 2.99 0.0075 24.522 0.00023 2.28 0.0139 28.802 0.00033 1.65 0.0499 62.635 0.00017 Return Portfolio 1 Return Portfolio 4 2.48 0.0035 9.985 0.00761 1.77 0.0084 11.995 0.00186 1.42 0.0169 17.356 0.00273 1.29 0.0520 47.981 0.00101 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 0.208 1.215 0.233 1.250 0.239 1.291 0.858 1.879 0.615 1.268 0.590 1.217 0.556 1.277 0.962 1.822 0.600 1.026 0.609 1.126 0.788 1.345 1.131 1.755 1.056 1.225 1.007 1.274 1.215 1.420 1.886 1.987 0.199 1.284 0.282 1.225 0.247 1.280 0.832 1.822 0.921 1.270 0.597 1.255 0.532 1.296 0.974 1.907 0.726 1.032 0.721 1.125 0.797 1.400 1.262 2.018 1.254 1.264 1.138 1.392 1.367 1.604 1.842 2.106

83 Panel A (4).. Sz Rank ( 1, 5), (volume). Panel B 2002 2005, (PQSPR: proportional quoted spread) (PESPR: proportional effective spread). Panel A : KSE Sample for 1995 to 2005 Sorting Criterion Descriptives Return Turnover Sz Rank Turnover Volume - - - - Panel B: KSE Sample for 2002 to 2005 Sorting Criterion 1.49 2.49 1.74 4.19 1.39 2.33 1.62 4.06 1.63 3.44 2.03 4.34 0.0769 0.1114 0.0073 0.0063 0.0596 0.0808 0.0056 0.0065 0.1426 0.2089 0.0140 0.0216 Descriptives 86.531 252.419 10.528 100.173 87.843 146.184 7.515 69.784 206.673 536.772 24.237 195.114 Return Turnover PQSPR PESPR - - - - 2.102 1.491 1.478 0.552 1.721 1.416 1.242 0.529 6.010 4.170 1.993 0.779 2.464 2.406 1.543 1.189 1.975 2.276 1.421 1.176 5.141 3.743 1.869 1.412 0.00233 0.00009 0.01369 0.00011 0.00162 0.00009 0.01374 0.00010 0.00435 0.00017 0.03670 0.00023 5 6, Jesen(1978) Rubinstein(2001).

84, 40 3 4 V.. CG. CG,,. CG,. CG. : 1, 1. (-).., (-),..,.

85, (-),.. (2003),, 14, 63-81., (2000),, 18 2, 215-244., (1997),, 3 2, 1-34., (1998),, 22, 73-109.,, (2003),, 2003 4, 419-445., (2002),, 19 2, 49-75. (1996), -, 2 1, 29-46. Amihud, Y. and Mendelson,. (1986), Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread, Journal of Financial Economics 17, 223-249. Amihud, Y. (2002), and stock returns: cross-section and time series effects, Journal of Financial Markets 5, 31-56. Avramov, D., Chordia, T, and Goyal, A. (2005), iquidity and Autocorrelations in Individual Stock Returns, forthcoming in Journal of Finance

86, 40 3 4 Ball, R.B. and C. asley (1995), Can e Implement Research on Stock Trading Rules, Journal of Portfolio Management, 54-63. Brennan, M.J. and Subrahmanyam, A. (1996), Market microstructure and asset pricing: on the compensation for illiquidity in stock returns, Journal of Financial Economics 41, 441-464. Campbell, J.Y., S.J. Grossman, and J. ang (1993), Trading volume and serial correlation in stock return, Quarterly Journal of economics 108. Chalmers, J.M.R. and G.B. Kadlec (1998), An empirical examination of the amortized spread, Journal of Financial Economics 48, 159-188. Conrad, J.S., A. ameed, and C. Niden (1994), Volume and auto-covariances in short-horizon individual security returns, Journal of Finance 49, 1305-1329. Conrad, J.S., M. Gultekin, and G. Kaul (1997), Profitability of short-term contrarian strategies: Implications for market efficiency, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 15, 379-386. Cooper, M. (1999), Filter rules based on price and volume in individual security overreaction, Review of Financial Studies 12, 901-935. Debondt, F.M. and R.. Thaler (1985), Does the stock market overreact? Journal of Finance 40, 793-805. Easley, D., S. vidkjaer, and M. O ara (1999), Is information risk a determinant of asset returns? orking Paper, Cornell University. Fama, E.F. and J.D. Macbeth (1973), Risk, return and equilibrium: Empirical tests, Journal of Political Economy 81, 607-636. arris, M. and Raviv, A. (1993), Differences of opinion make a horse race, Review of Financial Studies 6, 473-506. Jegadeesh, N. (1990), Evidence of predictable behavior of security returns, Journal of Finance 45, 881-898. Jensen, M. (1978), Some anomalous evidence regarding market efficiency, Journal of Financial Economics 6, 95-101. Keim, D.B. and A. Madhavan (1996), The upstairs market for large-block

87 transactions: analysis and measurement of price effects, Review of Financial Studies 9, 1-36. Kraus, A. and.r. Stoll (1972), Price impacts of block trading on the New York Stock Exchange, Journal of Finance 27, 569-588. Kyle, A. (1985), Continuous auctions and insider trading, Econometrica 53, 1315-1335. ehmann, B. (1990), Fads, martingales, and market efficiency, Quarterly Journal of Economics 105, 1-28. o, A.. and A.C. MacKinlay (1990), hen Are Contrarian Profits Due to Stock Market Overreaction, Review of Financial Studies, 175-205. Roll, R. (1984), A Simple Implicit Measure of the Bid Ask Spread in an Efficient Market, Journal of Fiance 39, 1127-1159. Rubinstein, M. (2001), Rational markets: Yes or no? The affirmative case, Financial Analysts Journal 57, 15-28. Zarowin, P. (1989), Short-run Market Overreaction: Size and Seasonality Effects, Journal of Portfolio Management, 26-29.

88, 40 3 4, Transaction Costs, and Abnormal Returns on Contrarian Strategies using Short-term Reversals in the Korean Stock Market 2)o-Joong Yun** Jaeho Cho** Using stocks listed in Korea Stock Exchange from 1995 to 2005, we examine whether short-term reversals exist in the Korean stock market, and explore the relationship between short-term reversals and stock illiquidity after controlling volume of trades. e find that stocks with higher turnover and higher illiquidity show stronger reversals, and that contrarian strategies using stronger reversals generate larger abnormal returns. These abnormal returns can be interpreted as compensations paid to liquidity-providers for accommodating liquidity pressures caused by non-informational demands for immediacy. e also find that abnormal profits disappear when transaction costs incurred in implementing contrarian strategies, measured by effective spreads, are taken into account. This result implies that the short-term reversal phenomenon cannot be considered as an evidence against market efficiency in the sense of Jensen (1978) and Rubinstein (2001). Keywords: Reversal, Contrarian Strategy, Turnover,, Effective Spread *Samsung Electronics **College of Business Administration, Seoul National University