SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis / 2020 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

Dynamic Effects of Macroeconomic Fundamentals on Stock Market Movements: Evidence from BIST100

Mortaza OJAGHLOU
Pages
17–36
Publication Date
2020-12-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results suggest that the Istanbul stock market return (BIST-100) has consistent with the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study we examine whether the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) is valued in Turkey (BIST1001) or not and we also examine the ability of essential macroeconomic variables to predict the volatility of Istanbul stock market returns.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The relationship is examined through the analysis of the quarterly data concerning the Istanbul stock market index (BIST-100 ) and selected essential macroeconomic indicates in Turkey over the period of 2003Q01 until 2019Q01.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results suggest that the Istanbul stock market return (BIST-100) has consistent with the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH).
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:BIST-100 · Stock Return Volatility · NLARDL

Abstract

In this study we examine whether the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) is valued in Turkey (BIST1001) or not and we also examine the ability of essential macroeconomic variables to predict the volatility of Istanbul stock market returns. The relationship is examined through the analysis of the quarterly data concerning the Istanbul stock market index (BIST-100 ) and selected essential macroeconomic indicates in Turkey over the period of 2003Q01 until 2019Q01. In order to investigate the relationship between the variables and BIST-100, Phillips-Ouliaris Cointegration, Asymmetric Cointegration and Dynamic Multipliers in a Nonlinear ARDL (NLARDL) models and also Bayesian Vector Autoregression (Litterman-Minnesota Bayesian VAR) are employed. The findings of the NLARDL test indicates that variables are cointegrated and there is positive and statistically significant asymmetric long run relationship from inflation to Istanbul stock market and also GDP, nominal exchange rate, S&P500 have significant and positive long run effect on Istanbul stock market return. These results suggest that the Istanbul stock market return (BIST-100) has consistent with the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH).

🔖

Cite This Article

OJAGHLOU, M. (2020). Dynamic Effects of Macroeconomic Fundamentals on Stock Market Movements: Evidence from BIST100. Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 17–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/745622

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Acikalin, Sezgin, Rafet Aktas, and Seyfettin Unal. 2008. “Relationships between Stock Markets and Macroeconomic Variables: An Empirical Analysis of the Istanbul Stock Exchange.” Investment Management and Financial Innovations 5(1): 10. Alshogeathri, Ali Mofleh. 2011. “Macroeconomic Determinants Of The Stock Market Movements: Empirical Evidence From The Saudi Stock Market,.” PHD Thesis Department of Economics, Kansas State University. Ashley, Richard A., and Randal J. Verbrugge. 2009. “To Difference or Not to Difference: A Monte Carlo Investigation of Inference in Vector Autoregression Models.” International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies 1(3): 242. Asprem, Mads. 1989. “Stock Prices, Asset Portfolios and Macroeconomic Variables in Ten European Countries.” Journal of Banking & Finance 13(4–5): 589–612.
  2. Awokuse, Titus O., Aviral Chopra, and David A. Bessler. 2009. “Structural Change and International Stock Market Interdependence: Evidence from Asian Emerging Markets.” Economic Modelling 26(3): 549–59.
  3. Beine, Michel, Antonio Cosma, and Robert Vermeulen. 2010. “The Dark Side of Global Integration: Increasing Tail Dependence.” Journal of Banking & Finance 34(1): 184–92.
  4. Bernanke, Ben S. et al. 1997. “Systematic Monetary Policy and the Effects of Oil Price Shocks.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1997(1): 91. Bernanke, Ben S., and Alan S. Blinder. 1992. “The Federal Funds Rate and the Channels of Monetary Transmission.” The American Economic Review 82(2): 901–21. Bjørnland, Hilde C., and Kai Leitemo. 2005. Identifying the Interdependence between US Monetary Policy and the Stock Market. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. SSRN Scholarly Paper. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1018594 (February 10, 2020).
  5. Brooks, Robin, and Marco Del Negro. 2004. “The Rise in Comovement across National Stock Markets: Market Integration or IT Bubble?” Journal of Empirical Finance 11(5): 659–80.
  6. Carriero, Andrea. “Separately, Each of the Two Equations Constitutes a Restricted ADL Model: Same #lags for Both Y1,t and Y2,t in Both Equations. Current Value of Additional Explanatory Variable ("Xt ") Is Ruled Out.”: 69. Chaudhuri, K., and S. Smiles. 2004. “Stock Market and Aggregate Economic Activity: Evidence from Australia.” Applied Financial Economics 14(2): 121–29.
  7. Chen, Nai-Fu, Richard Roll, and Stephen Ross. 1986. “Economic Forces and the Stock Market.” The Journal of Business 59(3): 383–403.
  8. Click, Reid W., and Michael G. Plummer. 2005. “Stock