Author
Abstract
The article highlights the factors of the classification of issuers and their securities (forms of circulation and admission to trading, listing, publicity, type of offering, liquidity, objectivity of pricing) in the context of determining the reasons for the limited number of instruments in Ukraine's regulated market and signs of its unattractiveness for issuers and investors. The author defines peculiarities of the formation and structure of investment portfolios of financial institutions and other investors (in comparison with international indicators) and difficulties of the valuation and diversification of assets. It has been revealed that a sharp reduction in the number of issuers and financial intermediaries (through variable legislation, increased regulatory requirements and controversial enforcement) led to a reduction in liquidity and competition, an increase in transaction costs, and did not contribute to market development, its infrastructure, and the objectivity of pricing. The emphasis is on the conventionalities of market benchmarks (stock indexes of shares, total capitalization) in Ukraine due to the limited financial instruments, lack of public companies, scanty liquidity, high volatility and artificiality of pricing. Indicated various signs of illiquidity of Ukraine's regulated stock market in comparison with world trading platforms (first of all, in relation to shares), as well as reasons of irregularity of the trades, mainly the purpose oriented conclusion of agreements, absence of active market and actual prices (in particular, due to unsatisfactory regulation of exchange pricing). However, it is worth emphasizing the significant role of government bonds that differ from other securities in Ukraine in that they have increased liquidity, strong investor demand, more predictability and price adequacy, which is a sufficiently anticipated factor for an underdeveloped stock market. The author highlights peculiarities and problems of pricing in the underdeveloped stock market, which considerably complicate the task of counteracting market abuse, in particular due to total illiquidity, the absence of contradiction in the implementation of international practice, and subjectivity of the existing regulatory criteria for the detection of manipulation.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eip:journl:y:2019:i:2:p:19-65. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iryna Bazhal (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://eip.org.ua/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.