LONG-RANGE DEPENDENCE IN SECTORAL INDICES.
Over the last three decades, India has emerged as an important player in the global economy. Concomitantly, the country has attracted increasing capital inflows, and the question of informational efficiency in the pricing of assets in this emerging economy has assumed greater significance (Dicle et al, 2010). Not surprisingly, recent studies have sought to assess the informational efficiency of the country's capital markets. The results of these studies are not in perfect agreement, but on balance the evidence appears to suggest some degree of dependence in market returns (see, for example, Poshakwale, 2002; Sarkar & Mukhopadhyay 2005; and Mishra et al, 2011).
The present work extends the literature on market efficiency within the Indian context by analyzing the behavior of a total of thirty returns series for sectoral equity indices on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE). This contrasts with existing studies, which concern themselves primarily with broader market indices. A recent study by Palamalai & Kalaivani (2015) does conduct tests of weak-form efficiency for Indian sectoral indices, but in contrast to the aforementioned study, which tests for serial correlation and any departures from a random walk using autocorrelation, unit root, variance ratio, and the runs tests, the present work employs fractional integration models to check for the presence of long-range dependence or memory in the series. Further, in contrast to the prior study's focus on a 5 1/2-year period beginning in 2009, we analyze returns behavior over the full window for which data are available, which amounts to between 11 to 18 years for the BSE indices and roughly 3 to 20 years for the NSE indices; the vast majority of the indices span a period of 11 to 20 years, or roughly two to three times that of the previous work cited. Further, we seek to ascertain whether each of the returns series studies can be classified as "persistent" or "antipersistent", based on its estimated Hurst exponent. The study by Hiremath & Kumari (2015) represents another recent assessment of pricing efficiency in the Indian context, and it tests for long memory in both sectoral and broader indices. However, that study also constrains itself to a relatively narrow window, focusing on the 9 years between 2003 and 2012. Further, it considers only about half of the sectoral indices (16 out of a total of 30 available indices) on the BSE and the NSE. In the absence of any compelling a priori reason to either exclude any available sectoral indices or any available price information on those indices, the present study applies three fractal analysis techniques, viz., the Classical Rescaled Range (R/S), Wavelets, and Roughness-Length relationship methods, to the complete range of price information available for all sectoral indices on the BSE and NSE, ending on August 31, 2017. A later section details the contrasting results of this approach. In summary, our results show that returns for 15 of the 30 series studied behave in a manner that is inconsistent with efficient pricing, a finding that agrees with some recent studies of broader market indices (e.g. Mishra et al, 2011). Our results have significant practical implications. The existence of temporal dependencies suggests that traders who can exploit inefficiencies to generate excess returns through technical trading rules. These rules can be more effective if the precise nature of returns behavior (such as "persistence" or "antipersistence") can be identified.
The remainder of this study is organized as follows. The section below provides a brief review of the literature on market efficiency within the Indian context, with a focus on long memory. This is followed by a description of the data, a discussion of the methodology employed to study long-range dependence in returns, and a presentation of the empirical results. The concluding section discusses the results and implications of the study.
INFORMATIONAL EFFICIENCY OF INDIAN CAPITAL MARKETS
The evidence on market efficiency within the Indian context is mixed, though the balance of it appears to lie in favor of some predictability of returns. In an early study of Indian stock market efficiency, Poshakwale (2002) tests for linear and nonlinear dependence using an equally weighted portfolio of 100 stocks, and 38 of the most actively traded individual securities listed on the BSE for the period 1990-1998. The results reject the random walk hypothesis and are consistent with the presence of non-linear dependence and volatility persistence.
While Poshakwale (2002) tests for structural breaks in volatility due to regulatory changes in the sample period 1990-1997, a later study of the BRIC countries (for the period 1990-2007) by Kasman (2009) suggests that incorporating sudden variance shifts due to domestic and global economic and political events into the model reduces the estimated volatility persistence by as much as 34% for the Indian stock market. Using a similar sample period of 1990-2007, Badhani (2008) studies the CNX Nifty Index for the presence of long memory in returns and returns volatility. The study suggests that the volatility of returns (but not the returns themselves), are characterized by persistence. Such volatility persistence was not observed for the 2001-2007 subperiod, however, and the author concludes that the results are more consistent with structural breaks in the volatility process.
Sarkar & Mukhopadhyay (2006) analyze four broader market indices for a period between six and fifteen years (depending upon the index) ending in the year 2000. Using daily returns, they find nonlinear dependencies in the returns series and dynamics beyond the second moment that contribute to inefficiency in these markets. Mishra et al (2011) study two sectoral (Banking and IT, both from the NSE), and four non-sectoral indices roughly over the period 1991-2010. Their findings are similar to those of Sarkar & Mukhopadhyay (2006). Variance Ratio tests lead them to reject the random walk hypothesis in the case of all the six indices they consider. They also find evidence of nonlinear dependence in returns, and the results of a rescaled range (R/S) analysis suggest some persistence (long memory) in returns.
A recent work by Bhat & Nain (2014) also tests for persistence, though its focus is on the volatility of returns on four sectoral indices--the BSE Bankex, Information Technology (IT), Metal, and Public Sector Undertakings (PSU) indices. That study finds evidence of volatility persistence in the BSE Bankex and IT indices. Similarly, Mukherjee et al (2011) find evidence of persistence in return volatility (but not returns) for the BSE Sensex index over the period 1997-2009.
Mishra & Mishra (2011) test the random walk hypothesis in the presence of nonlinearities for two market indices belonging to the National Stock Exchange (NSE) and ten individual stocks. Their findings suggest that the series of returns for both indices and most of the individual stocks studied follow a random walk, a finding that stands in contrast to those from some of the studies mentioned above (e.g., Poshakwale, 2002; Sarkar & Mukhopadhyay, 2006; and Mishra et al, 2011).
The question of persistence has also been addressed for returns on individual securities, as against equity indices. For example, Rajagopal (2011) employs classical R/S analysis to study returns on 25 infrastructure stocks. He finds evidence of antipersistence in most of the series; in these returns series, the dependency between two sets of returns is such that an up-trend in one set is more likely to be followed by a down- trend in the next set of the same length. Another study of weak-form efficiency in the Indian markets is that by Hiremath & Kamaiah (2012). They use a non-parametric variance ratio test and analyze the behavior of several non-sectoral BSE indices, among others, for a period roughly covering 1998-2009 (the data for some of the indices originate later than 1998). They find evidence consistent with weak-from inefficiency, especially in the case of mid-and small-cap equities. In an earlier study, Hiremath & Kamaiah (2010), the authors document a mean-reverting tendency among India stock returns.
Studies have addressed the issue of long memory in returns and volatility in the context of markets other than equities as well. For example, Kumar (2014) is a recent study that documents the existence of long-range dependence in returns and volatility in the market for foreign exchange, specifically the Indian Rupee-USD market. The results are inconsistent with weak-form efficiency in this market, and suggest that models incorporating long-range dependencies will likely possess greater forecast accuracy than would short-memory models.
Palamalai & Kalaivani (2015) and Hiremath & Kumari (2015) are the two studies of which we are aware that assess informational efficiency in Indian sectoral indices. The first of these studies uses a sample of daily returns for about 5 1/2 years beginning in 2009 and 2010, and tests for efficiency based on autocorrelation, unit roots, the variance ratio, and runs in return signs. The results suggest significant autocorrelation in returns (reported for lags of up to 12 days), and the existence of unit root, pointing to weak-form inefficiency. Taking a different approach to the question of market efficiency, the present work assesses whether there is long memory/long-range dependence in the returns series. The Hiremath & Kumari (2015) study focuses on a window of nine years ending in March 2012, and tests for long memory in 16 sectoral and 13 broader indices traded on the BSE and the NSE. In contrast, the present study uses self-affine fractal analysis methods to estimate the Hurst exponent, seeking to identify each series as exhibiting persistent/trend-reinforcing behavior, antipersistent/mean-reverting behavior, or Brownian motion. The existence of such patterns would contradict efficient pricing and suggest the possibility of establishing profitable trading strategies based on historical market information.
DATA, METHODOLOGY, & EMPIRICAL RESULTS
We consider the returns on a total of 30 sectoral equity indices on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE), employing the entire price series available for each index on the BSE and NSE sites (bseindia.com; nse.com), ending on August 31, 2017. Some additional information (that for the NIFTY Pharma index) has been collected from Investing.com. Table 1 below shows the time period over which each of the 19 BSE sectoral index price series is available. The data for the BSE indices span a period of roughly 11 to 18 years.
Table 2 below provides some descriptive statistics for the daily returns on the BSE indices. The returns data are non-normal, and, except for the Auto index, Metal index and, to some extent, the Telecom index, return distributions are quite significantly leptokurtic. Also, virtually all return series are negatively skewed to some degree.
Tables 3 and 4 below list the corresponding information for the sectoral indices on the NSE. Some price series, such as those for the Realty, PSU Banks, Metal, and Pharma indices are relatively short, especially in relation to what is available for BSE indices. A total of 11 sectoral indices are available on the NSE, and the data for these span a period of roughly 3 to 21 years. In general, the returns are characterized by varying degrees of negative skewness and are leptokurtic (with the exception of Pharma and PSU Banks).
To test for persistence, we estimate the self-affinity index (or Hurst exponent, H) for the index returns series using Mandelbrot's (1972) rescaled-range (R/S) analysis methodology, which has its origins in Hurst's (1951) study of the Nile river. We begin by defining a time series Y with n consecutive values Y = Y1, Y2,..., Yn. The mean and standard deviation, Ym and Sn, are defined as usual:
[Y.sub.m] = [[SIGMA].sup.n.sub.i=1] [Y.sub.i]/n (1)
[S.sub.n] = [square root of ([[SIGMA].sup.n.sub.i=1][([Y.sub.i] - [Y.sub.m]).sup.2]/n)] (2)
The range, R, is defined here as the difference between the highest and lowest cumulative deviation values of Y over the n observations:
R = Max[ [[SIGMA].sup.n.sub.i=1] ([Y.sub.i] - [Y.sub.m])] - Min[[[SIGMA].sup.n.sub.i=1] ([Y.sub.i] - [Y.sub.m])] (3)
That is, successive deviations from the mean are cumulated through the series of Y values, the minimum and maximum cumulated values are identified, and the difference is taken between those two values. As Y has been redefined to a mean of 0, the maximum cumulated deviation would be at least 0, and the minimum at most zero. Hence, R will be non-negative. Now, the range can be viewed as the distance traveled by the series in time n. For systems following Brownian motion, distance covered is proportional to the square root of time, so that for R = [T.sup.0.5] for such systems. A general form of this rule for systems with dependence rather than Brownian motion would be (Hurst, 1951):
R/[S.sub.n] = k x [n.sup.H] (4)
In the equation above, k is a constant, and H is the "Hurst exponent". The left hand side of the equation shows the rescaled range, R/S ("range scaled by standard deviation"), and the relationship captures how the range of cumulated deviations scales over the time increment, n. For random series, we would expect the exponent (H) to be 0.5. Taking the log of each side, we get:
log(R/[s.sub.n]) = log k + H x log n (5)
As such, we can estimate the Hurst exponent, H, as the slope of the plot of log (R/[S.sub.n]) against log (n). In practice, the Y series is divided into contiguous sub-periods and H is estimated by OLS (see Peters, 1994, pages 61-63). Consider, for example, a series consisting of 680 logarithmic returns. This series is divided successively into periods of length n, with n assuming values of whole integer factors of 680 (i.e. 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 17, etc.). In the case of each n, an average range and standard deviation can be calculated. For instance, for n of 2, there will 340 windows, for n of 4 there will be 170 windows, and so on). The logarithm of the average R/S value obtained for the window length is regressed on the logarithm of the window length, n. The coefficient of log n is the estimated Hurst exponent, or scaling exponent, H. The value of H is 0.50 for a random series, or independent process; if 0.50 < H [less than or equal to] 1, the elements in the series influence other elements in the series, and the series is "persistent". The series is "anti-persistent" if 0 [less than or equal to] H < 0.50; in this case, the process reverses itself more frequently than a random process would.
A second method we use to estimate the Hurst exponent is that of the Roughness-Length relationship (R/L), which is similar to the R/S method described above, except that the vertical range is replaced with the root-mean-square roughness of the data. Thus, where the average range and standard deviation were calculated in the R/S approach, the root-mean-square roughness is calculated (after adjusting for local linear trend) under the R/L approach. This yields the average root-mean-square roughness for each interval length, denoted say, by s (w). If the trace is self-affine, the roughness measure, s(w) is related to the Hurst exponent, H, as s(w) = [w.sup.H], and the Hurst exponent is estimated as in the case of the R/S approach through a regression.
Third, we employ the Wavelets method to estimate the Hurst exponents. This approach exploits the fact that transforms of self-affine traces are themselves self-affine. We decompose the series to be analyzed in time frequency space and assess variations in power. Should the wavelet power spectrum be related to frequency by a power law function, we would infer the existence of fractal properties. As noted by Mulligan (2004), the method is applicable in the case of nonstationary series. The application of this method is briefly described below (1).
T wavelet transforms are taken, each with a distinct scaling coefficient, [K.sub.i]. Let [S.sub.i] denote the standard deviations from 0 of those scaling coefficients. Now, let [R.sub.i] be the T-1 ratios of the standard deviations. So, [R.sub.1] = [S.sub.1]/[S.sub.2], [R.sub.2] = [S.sub.2]/[S.sub.3], etc. Next, estimate the average of the [R.sub.i] as:
[R.sub.AVG] = [[SIGMA].sup.T-1.sub.i=1][R.sub.i]/T - 1 (6)
Finally, estimate the Hurst exponent as H = [PHI] ([R.sub.AVG]); where [PHI] is a heuristic function that approximates H by [R.sub.AVG] for stochastic self-affine series. In the present estimation process, T is varied up to a value of 4, and i takes the values of 0, 1, 2, and 3 for the scaling coefficients. As such, we estimate H using the first three dominant wavelet functions, a process also followed in Mulligan (2004). The wavelet method does not yield a standard error for hypothesis testing.
Table 5 below presents the results of the R/S analysis, the Wavelets method, and the R/L method for all thirty sectoral indices included in the study. The results for the BSE indices may be summarized as follows (summary results for both sets of indices under all three methods are tabulated in Table 6 below).
* There is agreement between all three methods that persistence appears to characterize the returns in 11 sectoral indices: Auto, Basic Materials, Capital Goods, Consumer Discretionary, Consumer Durables, Healthcare, Industrials, IT, Metal, Realty, and Utilities.
* There are 3 sectors in which the R/L method suggests the presence of anti-persistence, and for which the R/S approach does not return an exponent significantly different from 0.50. These sectors are Energy, Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG), and Telecom.
* There are 2 sectors, Oil & Gas, and Power, for which the R/S method does not lead to the rejection of the null, but for which the R/L and Wavelets methods suggests the existence of returns persistence. There is 1 sector, Finance, for which the R/S method suggests persistence, but the R/L method fails to reject the null.
* For 1 sector, TECK, the R/S and Wavelets methods on the one hand, and the R/L method on the other, suggest opposite returns behavior; the first two indicate returns persistence, while the third suggests the antipersistent behavior.
* Finally, under neither the R/S method nor the R/L approach is the null rejected for 1 sector, Bankex.
For the eleven sectoral indices on the NSE, the results are as follows:
* The 4 sectors, IT, Media, Metal, and PSU Banks are shown to have persistence in returns based on all three methods.
* For the 3 sectors, Bank, Energy, and FMCG, persistence is indicated by the Wavelets and R/L methods, but the null is not rejected under the R/S method.
* Under neither the R/S method nor the R/L approach is the null rejected for 1 sector, Financial Services.
* For 2 sectors, Pharma and Realty, the R/L method suggests antipersistent behavior, but the null is not rejected under the R/S method.
* Finally for 1 sector, Auto, the R/S and Wavelets methods suggest persistence in returns, but the null is not rejected under the R/L method.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS & IMPLICATIONS OF STUDY
Our analysis of long memory in Indian sectoral equity indices includes estimating the Hurst exponent for the 30 returns series associated with the BSE and NSE sectoral indices using the rescaled range (R/S), Wavelets, and Roughness-Length relationship (R/L) methods. As the results in Table 5 and Table 6 above indicate, as many as 15 of the 30 series are characterized by persistence, or long-range dependence. For every sector, the Wavelets method yields estimates that are greater than 0.50, in many cases quite close to 0.60, and in roughly a third of the cases even higher than 0.60. The R/S analysis confirms significant persistence in the case of 17 of these returns series. Among the indices for which significant persistence is observed, the estimated Hurst exponents range between a low of 0.529 and a high of 0.583 (based on R/S), between a low of 0.556 and a high of 0.632 (based on Wavelets), and between a low of 0.513 and a high of 0.581 (based on the R/L method). Only for the BSE Bankex and NSE Financial Services sectoral indices is there no evidence of pricing inefficiency based on the R/S and R/L methods.
These results are qualitatively similar to those reported by Mishra et al (2011) for broader market indices in India. They find persistence in the case of the BSE 100, BSE 200, BSE Sensex, and CNX Nifty indices, with estimated Hurst exponents (for raw returns) ranging between 0.575 and 0.619. The estimated exponents are significantly different from the benchmark of 0.50 for a series consistent with a random walk. For the banking sector, however, our results are mixed; we find only mixed evidence of persistence in the BSE Bankex series as persistence is suggested by the Wavelets method but not the R/S and R/L approaches. Our finding in the case of Bankex is confirmed by Hiremath & Kumari (2015). Mishra et al (2011) find strong persistence (relative to the broader indices that they study) for the Nifty Bank index, and the Wavelets and R/L methods in our study confirm this finding. As noted above, we do find evidence of persistence in the NSE PSU Bank index as well, which is in contrast to Hiremath & Kumari (2015). Further, the existence of long memory in the IT and Realty sectors had been documented previously by Rajagopal & Hays (2012a; 2012b), inter alia; updated data in our study confirm their findings. Hiremath & Kumari (2015) find evidence of long memory in the BSE Realty index, but not in the case of the IT sector. Our results confirm, at least qualitatively, the findings of Palamalai & Kalaivani (2015), who document weak form inefficiency in the sectoral indices that they examine. While they find evidence that all the 23 sectoral indices in their study exhibit behavior inconsistent with weak form efficiency, our analysis of long-range dependence suggests that the behavior of half of the sectoral indices diverges from what would be expected of series that follow a Brownian motion, but that that divergence in not true for all the sectors.
The consistent evidence that Hiremath & Kumari (2015) find of long memory in the BSE Auto, Capital Goods, Consumer Durables, Health Care, Metal, and Realty sectors is confirmed here using a significantly wider time frame. Their finding of long memory in the NSE Auto and FMCG indices, however, does not receive the same degree of confirmation in our study, in that not all three of our methods support that conclusion.
Interestingly, there are 6 returns series--those for BSE Energy, FMCG, TECK, and Telecom; and NSE Pharma and Realty--that appear to be antipersistent. This is the only evidence of antipersistence observed in the study, and is suggested by the R/L method; the finding is not supported by either the Wavelets or the R/S methods. Chamoli et al (2007), who test for the relative effectiveness of the Wavelets, R/S, and R/L techniques (in addition to the Power Spectrum and Variogram methods) in estimating the Hurst exponent, demonstrate that the Wavelets and R/S methods provide superior estimates of H across varying lengths of synthetically generated fractional Brownian motion data with a given Hurst exponent (2). In relation to other methods, including the R/L approach, the Wavelets and R/S methods are found to be more robust in the estimation of the Hurst exponent for time series of both long as well as short length. In light of this, and as there is a large variation in the data length across the 30 series considered here (from 764 to 5397), we are inclined to discount the finding of antipersistence which is suggested solely by the R/L method.
Further, there is some inconsistency in the results for the BSE and NSE Realty indices; R/S analysis suggests that the NSE Realty index does not exhibit long-range dependence, but that the BSE Realty index does. This discrepancy is likely due to the fact that the BSE Realty series covers a period of time that is roughly three times the period covered by the corresponding NSE series. It includes the period of the real estate crash of 2008, while the NSE series begins only in 2014, rendering the two series quite different qualitatively.
In summary, the conclusion of long-memory is consistently supported by all three methods for as many as 15 of the 30 sectoral indices on the BSE and NSE. In addition, some evidence of antipersistence is found for 6 returns series, though this finding is not supported by the Wavelets and R/S methods. The results of this study point to the existence of significant pockets of pricing inefficiency in the Indian market; there is evidence of exploitable opportunities in several sectors in addition to the IT and Realty sectors considered by previous studies of long memory in the Indian context. Trading strategies aimed at extracting excess returns may be effective in as many as half of the sectors studied.
Badhani, K.N. (2008). Long memory in stock returns and volatility in India: A nonparametric analysis. The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, 14:12, 34-53.
Bhat, S. A & M. Z. Nain (2014). Modeling conditional heteroscedasticity and leverage effect in the BSE sector indices. The IUP Journal of Financial Risk Management, 11:2, 49-61.
Beylkin, G. (1992). On the representation of operators in bases of compactly supported wavelets. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 29:6, 1716-1740.
Chamoli, A., A. R. Bansal & V. P. Dimri (2007). Wavelet and rescaled range approach for the Hurst coefficient for short and long time series. Computers and Geosciences, 33, 83-93.
Coifman, R., M. B. Ruskai, G. Beylkin, I. Daubechies, S. Mallat, Y. Meyer, and L. Raphael (Ed.) (1992). Wavelets and their applications. Jones & Bartlett, Sudbury, MA.
Daubechies, I. (1990). The wavelet transform, time-frequency localization and signal analysis. IEEE Transactions on information theory, 36, 961-1005.
Dicle, M. F., A. Beyhan, & L. J. Yao (2010). Market efficiency and international diversification: Evidence from India. International Review of Economics & Finance, 19, 313-339.
Hiremath, G.S., & B. Kamaiah (2010). Do stock returns in India exhibit a mean-reverting tendency? Evidence from multiple structural breaks test. Banking and Finance Letters, 2, 4, 371-390.
Hiremath, G.S., & B. Kamaiah (2012). Variance ratios, structural breaks and non-random walk behavior in the Indian stock returns. Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 18, 62-81.
Hiremath, G.S., & J. Kumari (2015). Is there long memory in Indian stock market returns? An empirical search. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 16, 128-145.
Hurst, H.E. (1951). Long-term storage capacity of reservoirs. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers,116, 770-799.
Kasman, Adnan (2009). The impact of sudden changes on the persistence of volatility: Evidence from the BRIC countries. Applied Economics Letters, 16, 759-764.
Kumar, A.S. (2014). Testing for long memory in volatility in the Indian forex market. Economic Annals, 59, 203, 75-90.
Lo, A. W. (1991). Long-term memory in stock market prices. Econometrica, 59, 5, 1279-1313.
Mandelbrot, B. (1972). Analysis of non-periodic long-run dependence using the robust statistic R/S. Proceedings of the 1971 Princeton Conference on Information Sciences and Systems, 155-159.
Mishra, A., & V. Mishra (2011). Is the Indian stock market efficient? Evidence from a TAR model with an autoregressive unit root. Applied Economics Letters, 18, 467-472.
Mishra, R.K., S. Sehgal, & N.R. Bhanumurthy (2011). A search for long range dependence and chaotic structure in Indian stock market. Review of Financial Economics, 20, 96-104.
Mukherjee, I., C. Sen, & A. Sarkar (2011). Long memory in stock returns: Insights from the Indian market. The International Journal of Applied Economics & Finance, 5, 1, 62-74.
Mulligan, R. F. (2004). Fractal analysis of highly volatile markets: An application to technology equities. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 44, 155-179.
Newey, W. & K. West (1987). A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix. Econometrica, 55(3), 703-708.
Palamalai, S.& M. Kalaivani (2015). Are Indian stock markets weak-form efficient?--Evidence from NSE and BSE sectoral indices. The IUP Journal of Financial Risk Management, 12, 4, 7--34.
Peters, E. (1994). Fractal market analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York.
Poshakwale, S. (2002). The random walk hypothesis in the emerging Indian stock market. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 29, 9/10, 1275-1299.
Rajagopal, S. (2011). Pricing of infrastructure equities: A test of efficiency in an emerging market. Asia Pacific Journal of Finance & Banking Research, 5, 5, 47-61.
Rajagopal, S. & Patrick Hays (2012a). Returns persistence in the Indian real estate market. International Real Estate Review, 15, 3, 283-305.
Rajagopal, S. & Patrick Hays (2012b). Long range dependence in stock returns: A study of US and Indian IT sectors. International Research Journal of Applied Finance, 3, 11, 1606-1623.
Sarkar, N. & D. Mukhopadhyay (2005). Testing predictability and nonlinear dependence in the Indian stock market. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 41, 6, 7-44.
Sanjay Rajagopal, Western Carolina University
(1) The Wavelets method derives from the work of Beylkin (1992), Coifman et al (1992), and Daubechies (1990).
(2) We are grateful to an anonymous referee for bringing the Chamoli et al (2007) study to our attention.
Table 1 BSE Sectoral Index Date Range ending August 31, 2017 Index Data Start Date N Auto 01/02/1999 4628 Bankex 01/01/2002 3901 Basic Materials 16/09/2005 2962 Capital Goods 01/02/1999 4628 Consumer Discretionary 16/09/2005 2962 Consumer Durables 01/02/1999 4628 Energy 16/09/2005 2962 FMCG 01/02/1999 4628 Finance 16/09/2005 2962 Healthcare 01/02/1999 4628 Industrials 16/09/2005 2962 IT 01/02/1999 4628 Metal 01/02/1999 4628 Oil and Gas 01/02/1999 4628 Power 03/01/2005 3142 Realty 02/01/2006 2891 Teck 31/01/2000 4380 Telecom 16/09/2005 2962 Utilities 16/09/2005 2962 Table 2 BSE Sectoral Index Returns Descriptive Statistics Index N Mean St Dev Skewness Kurtosis % Auto 4628 0.068 0.016 -0.299 3.36 Bankex 3901 0.085 0.019 -0.066 6.25 Basic Materials 2962 0.039 0.018 -0.397 5.17 Capital Goods 4628 0.062 0.018 -0.029 6.42 Consumer Discretionary 2962 0.045 0.014 -0.671 7.20 Consumer Durables 4628 0.062 0.019 -0.294 4.06 Energy 2962 0.045 0.017 -0.264 9.67 FMCG 4628 0.050 0.014 -0.045 5.03 Finance 2962 0.058 0.018 0.017 6.35 Healthcare 4628 0.056 0.014 -0.100 7.43 Industrials 2962 0.041 0.017 -0.083 6.16 IT 4628 0.050 0.023 -0.398 8.11 Metal 4628 0.056 0.022 -0.255 4.03 Oil & Gas 4628 0.059 0.018 -0.304 7.70 Power 3142 0.026 0.017 -0.095 8.00 Realty 2891 0.017 0.028 -0.464 7.08 Teck 4380 0.014 0.020 -0.544 7.60 Telecom 2962 0.012 0.020 -0.077 4.28 Utilities 2962 0.024 0.017 -0.438 10.90 Table 3 NSE Sectoral Index Date Range, ending August 31, 2017 Index Data Start Date N Auto 01/01/2004 3396 Bank 04/01/2000 4399 Energy 01/01/2001 4149 Financial Services 01/01/2004 3396 FMCG 01/01/1996 5397 IT 01/01/1996 5397 Media 30/12/2005 2892 Metal 13/07/2011 1518 Pharma 01/02/2011 1630 PSU Banks 02/08/2012 1255 Realty 23/07/2014 764 Table 4 NSE Sectoral Index Returns Descriptive Statistics Index N Mean St Dev Skewness Kurtosis % Auto 3396 0.070 0.015 -0.247 5.25 Bank 4399 0.071 0.019 -0.156 5.62 Energy 4149 0.062 0.017 -0.451 8.85 Financial Services 3396 0.068 0.019 -0.092 7.06 FMCG 5397 0.060 0.015 -0.142 4.59 IT 5397 0.087 0.023 -0.331 6.65 Media 2892 0.038 0.017 -0.198 4.80 Metal 1518 -0.065 0.017 0.052 1.58 Pharma 1630 0.040 0.011 -0.491 2.96 PSU Banks 1255 0.076 0.020 0.193 2.14 Realty 764 0.014 0.020 -0.650 4.80 Table 5 Estimated H for BSE & NSE Sectoral Indices R/S Analysis BSE Sectoral Indices # In Trace Est. H p-value Auto 4620 0.582 0.0000 Bankex 3780 0.528 0.4987 Basic Materials 2520 0.568 0.0009 Capital Goods 4620 0.571 0.0069 Consumer Discretionary 2520 0.572 0.0008 Consumer Durables 4620 0.583 0.0000 Energy 2520 0.503 0.9118 FMCG 4620 0.503 0.9602 Finance 2520 0.548 0.0044 Healthcare 4620 0.555 0.0469 Industrials 2520 0.571 0.0000 IT 4620 0.558 0.0001 Metal 4620 0.564 0.1018 Oil & Gas 4620 0.521 0.5295 Power 2520 0.547 0.1603 Realty 2520 0.569 0.0248 Teck 4320 0.529 0.0024 Telecom 2520 0.496 0.9003 Utilities 2520 0.548 0.0926 NSE Sectoral Indices # In Trace Est. H p-value Auto 3360 0.531 0.0744 Bank 4320 0.53 0.4825 Energy 3960 0.526 0.4452 Financial Services 3360 0.526 0.2775 FMCG 5040 0.497 0.952 IT 5040 0.579 0.0000 Media 2520 0.575 0.0000 Metal 1440 0.531 0.0257 Pharma 1440 0.462 0.4895 PSU Banks 1080 0.549 0.0013 Realty 720 0.503 0.5552 Wavelets R/L Analysis BSE Sectoral Indices Est. H Est. H p-value Auto 0.589 0.566 0.0060 Bankex 0.571 0.507 0.1966 Basic Materials 0.613 0.559 0.0000 Capital Goods 0.608 0.580 0.0000 Consumer Discretionary 0.632 0.548 0.0000 Consumer Durables 0.610 0.574 0.0000 Energy 0.575 0.484 0.0254 FMCG 0.583 0.473 0.0000 Finance 0.581 0.503 0.4700 Healthcare 0.597 0.546 0.0000 Industrials 0.629 0.556 0.0000 IT 0.588 0.530 0.0394 Metal 0.596 0.581 0.0000 Oil & Gas 0.582 0.523 0.0014 Power 0.578 0.542 0.0000 Realty 0.614 0.559 0.0000 Teck 0.585 0.479 0.0613 Telecom 0.581 0.464 0.0019 Utilities 0.604 0.533 0.0000 NSE Sectoral Indices Est. H Est. H p-value Auto 0.576 0.508 0.2274 Bank 0.572 0.513 0.0000 Energy 0.545 0.519 0.0000 Financial Services 0.569 0.505 0.5782 FMCG 0.563 0.461 0.0000 IT 0.588 0.558 0.0000 Media 0.576 0.531 0.0000 Metal 0.556 0.480 0.0036 Pharma 0.625 0.460 0.0000 PSU Banks 0.568 0.518 0.0054 Realty 0.621 0.431 0.0000 Table 6 Summary of Results R/S Wavelets BSE Sectoral Anti- .Anti- Indices Persist. Pers. Persist. Pers. Auto   Bankex  Basic Materials   Capital Goods   Cons. Discretionary   Consumer Durables   Energy  FMCG  Finance   Healthcare   Industrials   IT   Metal   Oil & Gas  Power  Realty   Teck  Telecom  Utilities   NSE Sectoral Indices Auto   Bank  Energy  Financial Services  FMCG  IT   Media   Metal   Pharma  PSU Banks   Realty  R/L BSE Sectoral Anti- Indices Persist. Pers. Auto  Bankex Basic Materials  Capital Goods  Cons. Discretionary  Consumer Durables  Energy  FMCG  Finance Healthcare  Industrials  IT  Metal  Oil & Gas  Power  Realty  Teck  Telecom  Utilities  NSE Sectoral Indices Auto Bank  Energy  Financial Services FMCG  IT  Media  Metal  Pharma  PSU Banks  Realty 
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Global Journal of Accounting and Finance|
|Date:||Jun 22, 2018|
|Previous Article:||THE DEMISE OF THE U.S. TREASURY'S myRA RETIREMENT PROGRAM: WHY IT FAILED.|
|Next Article:||A STUDY OF THE DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTION AMONG GENDERS REGARDING THE EFFECT OF NARCISSISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION IN THE ACCOUNTING...|