IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/amerfa/v3y2014i2-3-4p217-233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are major global stock markets efficient? An application of the martingale difference hypothesis with wild bootstrap

Author

Listed:
  • Dilip Kumar
  • Srinivasan Maheswaran

Abstract

This paper tests the finite sample properties of the Kuan and Lee's (KL) test to study market efficiency by mean of extensive Monte Carlo experiments using different data generating processes. We apply the KL test with and without wild bootstrap on the six global stock indices covering major US, European and Asian stock markets to test the martingale difference hypothesis. In addition, we apply a moving sub-sample approach to examine the evolution of market efficiency over time and to obtain inferential findings that are robust to the presence of influential outliers. We find a significant improvement in the small sample properties of the KL test under conditional heteroskedasticity when applied with the wild bootstrap procedure. On the empirical side, we find that, except for the German stock market, all the other markets under study have become more efficient after the sub-prime crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Dilip Kumar & Srinivasan Maheswaran, 2014. "Are major global stock markets efficient? An application of the martingale difference hypothesis with wild bootstrap," American Journal of Finance and Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2/3/4), pages 217-233.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:amerfa:v:3:y:2014:i:2/3/4:p:217-233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=60818
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cdl:ucsbec:13-89 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:fth:calaec:13-89 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:ids:amerfa:v:3:y:2014:i:2/3/4:p:217-233. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=229 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.