پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,230 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,755 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,094,585 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,845,524 |
فراتحلیلی بر کارایی بازار قراردادهای اختیار و استراتژی‌های آربیتراژ | ||
| تحقیقات مالی | ||
| دوره 24، شماره 3، 1401، صفحه 329-352 اصل مقاله (624.57 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/frj.2022.334373.1007265 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| سعید فتحی* 1؛ زینب فاضلیان2 | ||
| 1دانشیار، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران. | ||
| 2کارشناس ارشد، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف: تلاش آربیتراژگران برای بهره‌مندی از فرصت‌های سود آربیتراژی در بازار اختیارات، بازار را به‌سمت کارایی سوق می‌دهد. هدف از انجام این مقاله، کشف استراتژی‌های آربیتراژ است که می‌تواند در این راستا استفاده شود. روش: برای شناسایی استراتژی‌های آربیتراژ و میزان سود حاصل از هر استراتژی، از رویکرد فراتحلیل بر اساس مطالعات منتشر شده در سال‌های 1978 تا 2019 استفاده شد. همچنین، برای رتبه‌بندی و مقایسه استراتژی‌ها، تحلیل واریانس و آزمون t تک نمونه‌ای به‌کار گرفته شد. در مجموع از 54 مقاله با پشتوانه بیش از 7/3 میلیون معامله اختیار، 1315 اندازۀ اثر (نمونه پژوهش) استخراج شد. یافته‌ها: نتایج این پژوهش حکایت دارد از اینکه در کل نمونه پژوهش، بازار معاملات اختیارات ناکاراست. از سوی دیگر، در بازار معاملات در استراتژی‌های ترکیبی که شامل هر دو معامله اختیار خرید و اختیار فروش می‌شود، نسبت به استراتژی‌های ساده، فرصت سود آربیتراژی بیشتری وجود دارد. پایایی آزمون‌های آماری با اِعمال بیست‌وشش شرط تجربی ارزیابی شد. نتیجه‌گیری: در همه شرایط پژوهش، برتری استراتژی‌های ترکیبی تأیید می‌شود. برای مثال، در کشورهای مختلف با فرض هزینه مبادله، در شرایطی که سود تقسیمی وجود دارد. نتایج آزمون فرضیه‌های پژوهش پایا و پایدار باقی مانده است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| فراتحلیل؛ استراتژی آربیتراژ؛ کارایی بازار؛ بازار اختیارات | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Meta-Analysis of the Efficiency of Options Market and the Arbitrage Strategies | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Saeed Fathi1؛ Zeinab Fazelian2 | ||
| 1Associate Prof., Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. | ||
| 2MSc., Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Objective: While inefficiencies in the financial markets are the leading cause of capital misallocation, options market efficiency is a major area of interest within this field of study. Since arbitrage efforts to take advantage of arbitrage profit opportunities in the options market lead the market to efficiency, the current study seeks to explore arbitrage strategies that can be used in this regard. Methods: In the literature, there are two strategies to do the options market efficiency tests. The first strategy is to compare the market price with the implied price derived from theoretical models such as the Black-Scholes model. The second strategy is no-arbitrage options pricing relations violation test based on the hypothesis that there is no arbitrage opportunity in the market (i.e., the selected approach in this research). The advantage of examining no-arbitrage options pricing relations is that they can provide a simple way of testing the efficiency of the options market without imposing restrictions on the preferences of investors or distributional assumptions on the return of the underlying asset. The description of variables measured in empirical studies changes over time and between the different countries and research conditions. The meta-analysis approach (based on studies published from 1978 to 2019) was used to identify arbitrage strategies and the amount of profit from each strategy. In addition, the analysis of variance and a one-sample t-test was used to rank and compare the strategies. In total, 54 empirical studies with the support of more than 3.7 million options transactions and 1,315 effect sizes (research sample) were meta-analyzed. Results: The results showed that in the whole sample, the options market is always efficient. This means that the cumulative effect size for the whole sample (empirical tests performed in different countries and different time periods) is significantly different from zero. In addition, in combined strategies (which include both buy and sell options), there is more arbitrage profit opportunity than in simple strategies. The reliability of the tests was evaluated by applying 26 experimental conditions. Conclusion: In all cases, the superiority of combined strategies was confirmed. On the other hand, the reasons for the divergence of efficiency in the options market were discovered. First, combined strategies in which options are traded simultaneously have made the options market inefficient. Accordingly, it is argued that market efficiency is underestimated in cases where no-arbitrage relations are based on trading strategies including simultaneous trading of put and call. On the other hand, in such strategies, investors earn more arbitrage profit. It was pointed out that the most likely reason for this result is the complexity of these strategies, which requires the simultaneous efficiency of the call market, the put market, and the spot market. For example, in different countries, assuming transaction costs in the presence of dividends and etc., the research results remain robust. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Arbitrage strategy, Market efficiency, Meta-analysis, Options market | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
اسکندری، مهدی؛ سعیدی، علی و فلاح شمس، میرفیض (1400). مقایسه کارایی اطلاعاتی بین بازارهای نقد و آتی سکه طلا. تحقیقات مالی، 23(2)، 196- 221.
پورحیدری، امید (1378). الگوی قیمت‌گذاری برگ‌های اختیار معامله اوراق بهادار. تحقیقات مالی، 4(13)، 97-124.
فتحی، سعید؛ سیدیان هاشمی، سیده حوریه (1399). تأثیر متغیرهای منتخب کلان بر کارایی بازار اختیارات؛ رویکرد فراتحلیل نقض محدودیت‌های آربیتراژ قیمت‌گذاری اختیارات. چشم‌انداز مدیریت مالی، 10(30)، 81-98.
References Ackert, L. F., & Tian, Y. S. (2001). Efficiency in index options markets and trading in stock baskets. Journal of banking & finance, 25(9), 1607-1634. Aggarwal, N., & Gupta, M. (2009). Empirical Evidence on the Efficiency of Index Options Market in India. Asia Pacific Business Review, 5(3), 106-116. Alpert, K. (2009). The effects of taxation on put‐call parity. Accounting & Finance, 49(3), 445-464. Bailey, W. (1987). An empirical investigation of the market for Comex gold futures options. The Journal of Finance, 42(5), 1187-1194. Ball, C. A., Torous, W. N., & Tschoegl, A. E. (1985). An empirical investigation of the EOE gold options market. Journal of Banking & Finance, 9(1), 101-113. Beckers, S. (1984). On the efficiency of the gold options market. Journal of Banking & Finance, 8(3), 459-470. Berg, E., Brevik, T., & Saettem, F. (1996). An examination of the Oslo Stock Exchange options market. Applied financial economics, 6(2), 103-113. Bharadwaj, A., & Wiggins, J. B. (2001). Box spread and put-call parity tests for the S&P 500 index LEAPS market. The Journal of Derivatives, 8(4), 62-71. Bhattacharya, M. (1983). Transactions data tests of efficiency of the Chicago Board Options Exchange. Journal of Financial Economics, 12(2), 161-185. Billingsley, R. S., & Chance, D. M. (1985). Options market efficiency and the box spread strategy. Financial Review, 20(4), 287-301. Blomeyer, E. C., & Boyd, J. C. (1988). Empirical tests of boundary conditions for options on treasury bond futures contracts. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 8(2), 185. Bodurtha Jr, J. N., & Courtadon, G. R. (1986). Efficiency tests of the foreign currency options market. The Journal of Finance, 41(1), 151-162. Brunetti, M., & Torricelli, C. (2005). Put–call parity and cross-markets efficiency in the index options markets: Evidence from the Italian market. International Review of Financial Analysis, 14(5), 508-532. Brunetti, M., & Torricelli, C. (2007). The internal and cross market efficiency in index option markets: an investigation of the Italian market. Applied Financial Economics, 17(1), 25-33. Byoun, S., & Young Park, H. (2009). Arbitrage opportunities and efficiency of an option market at its initial stage: The case of KOSPI 200 options in Korea. In Research in Finance (pp. 269-301). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Capelle-Blancard, G., & Chaudhury, M. (2001). Efficiency tests of the French index (CAC 40) options market. In EFMA 2002 London Meetings. Capon, N., Farley, J. U., & Hoenig, S. (1990). Determinants of financial performance: A Meta-Analysis. Management Science, 36(10), 1143-1159. Cavallo, L., & Mammola, P. (2000). Empirical tests of efficiency of the Italian index options market. Journal of Empirical Finance, 7(2), 173-193. Chance, D. M. (1988). Boundary condition tests of bid and ask prices of index call options. Journal of Financial Research, 11(1), 21-31. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: Academic Press. Cox, J.C., Rubistein, Mark. (1985). Options Markets. Englewood Claiffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Cremers, M., & Weinbaum, D. (2010). Deviations from put-call parity and stock return predictability. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45(2), 335-367. DeRosa, D. F. (2000). Option on foreign exchange, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Dixit, A., Yadav, S. S., & Jain, P. K. (2009). Violation of lower boundary condition and market efficiency: An investigation into the Indian options market. Journal of Derivatives & Hedge Funds, 15(1), 3-14. Dubofsky, D. A. (1992). Options and financial futures, INC: McGraw-Hill. Egger, M. Smith, G.D. & Altman, D.G. (2001). Systematic Reviews in Health Care-Meta-analysis in context. BMJ publishing Group Elmar, S.L, Ernst, J. F., & Jiali, D. (2022). Empirical Analysis of Potential Put-Call Parity Arbitrage Opportunities with Particular Focus on the Shanghai Stock Exchange 50 Index, Journal of Financial Risk Management, 11(1). Eskandari, M., Saeedi, A. & Fallah Shams, M. (2021). Comparison of Efficiency In Cash And Future Market Of Gold Coin, Financial Research Journal, 23(2), 196-221. (in Persian) Evnine, J., & Rudd, A. (1985). Index options: The early evidence. The Journal of Finance, 40(3), 743-756. Fathi, S., Hashemi S. H. S. (2020). The effect of selected macro economic variables on the options market efficiency; Meta-analysis of the violation of options arbitrage restrictions, Journal of Financial Management Perspective, 30, 81-98. (in Persian) Fidrmuc, J., & Lind, R. (2018). Macroeconomic impact of Basel III: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 105359. Followill, R. A., & Helms, B. P. (1990). Put-call-futures parity and arbitrage opportunity in the market for options on gold futures contracts. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 10(4), 339. Fung, J. K., Cheng, L. T., & Chan, K. C. (1997). The intraday pricing efficiency of Hong Kong Hang Seng Index options and futures markets. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 17(7), 797. Fung, J. K., Mok, H. M., & Wong, K. C. (2004). Pricing efficiency in a thin market with competitive market makers: box spread strategies in the Hang Seng index options market. Financial Review, 39(3), 435-454. Galai, D. (1978). Empirical tests of boundary conditions for CBOE options. Journal of Financial Economics, 6(2-3), 187-211. Gould, J. P., & Galai, D. (1974). Transactions costs and the relationship between put and call prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 1(2), 105-129. Gray, S. F. (1989). Put call parity: An extension of boundary conditions. Australian Journal of Management, 14(2), 151-169. Gupta, R., & Jithendranathan, T. (2010). Short-sales Restrictions and Efficiency of Emerging Option Market: A Study of Indian Stock Index Options. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 46, 99-109. Hall, J. C. (2012). Options, Futures and other Derivatives, Prentice Hall. Halpern, P. J., & Turnbull, S. M. (1985). Empirical tests of boundary conditions for Toronto Stock Exchange options. The Journal of Finance, 40(2), 481-500. Hedges, L. V. (1982). Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 490–499. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Hemler, M. L., & Miller, T. W. (1997). Box spread arbitrage profits following the 1987 market crash: real or illusory? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 32(1), 71-90. Higgings, J.P., Thompson, SG., Deeks, J.J. & Altman DG (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ., 3(27), 557-560. Hilliard, J. E., & Hilliard, J. (2021). The GameStop Short Squeeze: Put-Call Parity and the Effect of Frictions Before, During and After the Squeeze. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3911491 Hoque, A., Chan, F., & Manzur, M. (2008). Efficiency of the foreign currency options market. Global Finance Journal, 19(2), 157-170. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jongadsayakul, W. (2016). A Box Spread Test of the SET50 Index Options Market Efficiency: Evidence from the Thailand Futures Exchange. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(4), 1744-1749. Kamara, A. & Miller, T. W. (1995). Daily and intradaily tests of European put-call parity. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 30(4), 519-539 Klemkosky, R. C., & Resnick, B. G. (1979). Put-call parity and market efficiency. The Journal of Finance, 34(5), 1141-1155. Klemkosky, R. C., & Resnick, B. G. (1980). An ex ante analysis of put-call parity. Journal of Financial Economics, 8(4), 363-378. Lee, J. H., & Nayar, N. (1993). A transactions data analysis of arbitrage between index options and index futures. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 13(8), 889. Li, D., Nishimura, Y., & Men, M. (2016). Why the long-term auto-correlation has not been eliminated by arbitragers: Evidences from NYMEX. Energy Economics, 59, 167-178. Li, S., & Alfay, E. (2006). Evidence on the arbitrage efficiency of SPI index futures and options markets. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 13(1), 71-93. Lipsey, M. W., Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical Meta-Analysis, Sage Publications. Matus, M. (2021). Quantile LASSO in arbitrage-free option markets. Econometrics and Statistics, 18, 106-116. McKenzie, M. M., Michael, R. T., Mechael, K. A. (2022). Characterizing implied volatility functions from agricultural options markets. American Journal of agricultural economics, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12288 Merton, R. C. (1973). Theory of rational option pricing. The Bell Journal of economics and management science, 141-183. Mittnik, S., & Rieken, S. (2000). Put-call parity and the informational efficiency of the German DAX-index options market. International Review of Financial Analysis, 9(3), 259-279. Mohammadi, P., Fathi, S., & Kazemi, A. (2019). Differentiation and financial performance: A Meta-Analysis. Competitiveness Review, 29(5): 573-591. Mohanti, D., & Priyan, P. K. (2015). An Empirical Test of Cross-Market Efficieny of Indian Index Options Market Using Put-Call Parity Condition. Drishtikon: A Management Journal, 6(2). Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002). Combining effect size estimates in meta-analysis with repeated measures and independent-groups designs. Psychological methods, 7(1), 105. Nisbet, M. (1992). Put-call parity theory and an empirical test of the efficiency of the London traded options market. Journal of Banking & Finance, 16(2), 381-403. Ogden, J. P., & Tucker, A. L. (1987). Empirical tests of the efficiency of the currency futures options. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 19(4), 695. Poorheidari, O. (1999). Option contracts pricing models, Financial Research Journal, 4(13). 97-124. (in Persian) Roar, A., Lars, E. A. & Bjarte A. (2021) Statistical arbitrage in the freight options market, Maritime Policy & Management, DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2021.1975055 Ronn, A. G., & Ronn, E. I. (1989). The box spread arbitrage conditions: theory, tests, and investment strategies. Review of Financial Studies, 2(1), 91-108. Shastri, K., & Tandon, K. (1985). Arbitrage tests of the efficiency of the foreign currency options market. Journal of International Money and Finance, 4(4), 455-468. Shelby, L. B., & Vaske, J. J. (2008). Understanding meta-analysis: A review of the methodological literature. Leisure Sciences, 30(2), 96-110. Stoll, H. R. (1969). The relationship between put and call option prices. The Journal of Finance, 24(5), 801-824. Thakoor, N. (2021). Localized radial basis functions for no-arbitrage pricing of options under stochastic alpha–beta–rho dynamics. The ANZIAM Journal, 63(2), 203-227. doi:10.1017/S1446181121000237. Vipul, V. (2008). Cross-market efficiency in the Indian derivatives market: A test of put-call parity. Journal of Futures Markets, 28(9), 889-910. Wang, C., Zhang, W., & Tan, W. K. (2008). American futures options arbitrage: evidence from the Nikkei 225 options market. Quantitative Finance, 8(3), 313-320. Wilson, W. W., & Fung, H. G. (1991). Put-call parity and arbitrage bound for options on grain futures. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(1), 55-65. Yang, L. & Brooks, R. (2022). Evidence of arbitrage trading activity: The case of Chinese metal futures contracts. Emerging Markets Review, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2022.100885. Zhang, H., & Watada, J. (2019). An analysis of the arbitrage efficiency of the Chinese SSE 50ETF options market. International Review of Economics & Finance, 59, 474-489. Zhang, Z., & Lai, R. N. (2006). Pricing efficiency and arbitrage: Hong Kong derivatives markets revisited. Applied Financial Economics, 16(16), 1185-1198. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 692 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 697 |
||