|
|
|
| Capital Market Liberalization and the Cost of Equity: Empirical Evidence from the Shanghai-Hong Kong and Shenzhen-Hong Kong Stock Connect Programs |
| PANG Jiaren, ZHANG He, ZHANG Mengjie
|
School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University;
Strategic Investment Department, Qingdao City Construction Financial Holding Group Co., Ltd. |
|
|
|
|
Abstract To improve china the connections between the capital markets of mainland China and Hong Kong China, the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect (SH-HKSC) was launched in November 2014 and the Shenzhen-Hong Kong Stock Connect (SZ-HKSC) in December 2016, enabling investors in the mainland and Hong Kong to mutually trade eligible stocks. SH-HKSC and SZ-HKSC attract much attention from investors and scholars. Their effects on spillovers, market risks, the A-H share premium, pricing efficiency, and corporate behavior are investigated. However, few studies examine the impact of SH-HKSC and SZ-HKSC on the cost of equity, which is the focus of this paper. Traditional wisdom suggests that stock market liberalization may reduce the cost of equity in the domestic market because of risk-sharing or increased liquidity. However, this does not consider the impact of information heterogeneity among domestic and foreign investors, which may restrict the application of such liberalization in China. Compared with more developed capital markets, the mainland market has a larger proportion of retail investors, while the Hong Kong market is dominated by institutional investors. Research shows that institutional investors in Hong Kong have information advantages over retail investors in mainland (Chen and Huang, 2019; Lian et al., 2019; Zhong et al., 2018; Zhong and Lu, 2018). Thus, an influx of Hong Kong institutional investors will dramatically change the information structure and intensify the competition between informed and uninformed investors in the mainland market. We draw on these observations to examine the effects of SH-HKSC and SZ-HKSC on the cost of equity, and divide them into a “competition channel” and an “information channel”. The competition channel can reduce the cost of equity in three ways. First, in terms of risk sharing, the potential for diversification will stimulate foreign investors to purchase domestic stocks and reduce the cost of equity. Second, increased capital inflows can increase market liquidity and reduce the liquidity premium. Finally, an increase in competition can enhance price informativeness and reduce the risk of information asymmetry. The information channel can have two opposite effects on the cost of equity. The informed trading of Hong Kong investors helps to transfer private information to the stock price, which on average increases the precision of information possessed by investors and reduces the cost of equity. However, the increased information asymmetry caused by the influx of informed traders may also increase the cost of equity. The degree of this effect depends on the level of investor competition. To empirically test the overall effects of SH-HKSC and SZ-HKSC on the cost of equity, we use residual income models (GLS, CT, OJ, PEG, and MPEG models) to estimate the cost of equity and conduct a difference-in-differences analysis. We find that due to policy risks and the unstable market environment, SH-HKSC has no significant reduction effect on the cost of equity until the second year after its implementation. SZ-HKSC, which draws on the operating experience of SH-HKSC, demonstrates an immediate, strong, and significant reduction effect on the cost of equity. We further analyze subsamples and find evidence of the competition and information channels. We find that SZ-HKSC significantly reduces the cost of equity of stocks with a relatively high degree of investor competition or with relatively high quality public information, but for those with less competition or higher information asymmetry, the cost is not affected. This study makes three main contributions to the literature. First, it fills a research gap by examining how SH-HKSC and SZ-HKSC affect the cost of equity in the mainland market. Second, it extends research on capital market liberalization by systematically analyzing its effects on the cost of equity through the two channels of competition and information. Third, the empirical results provide new evidence of the theoretical relationship between information asymmetry and the cost of equity in markets with imperfect competition.
|
|
Received: 18 December 2019
Published: 30 December 2020
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
陈运森和黄健峤,2019,《股票市场开放与企业投资效率——基于“沪港通”的准自然实验》,《金融研究》第8期,第151～170页。
|
| [2] |
陈运森、黄健峤和韩慧云,2019,《股票市场开放提高现金股利水平了吗？——基于“沪港通”的准自然实验》,《会计研究》第3期,第55～62页。
|
| [3] |
郭阳生、沈烈和汪平平,2018,《沪港通降低了股价崩盘风险吗——基于双重差分模型的实证研究》,《山西财经大学学报》第6期,第30～44页。
|
| [4] |
李江平,2018,《纳入明晟指数究竟会带给A股什么——基于深港通制度的反事实评估方法研究》,《金融经济学研究》第4期,第77～86页。
|
| [5] |
连立帅、朱松和陈关亭,2019,《资本市场开放、非财务信息定价与企业投资——基于沪深港通交易制度的经验证据》,《管理世界》第8期,第136～154页。
|
| [6] |
刘海飞、柏巍、李冬昕和许金涛,2018,《沪港通交易制度能提升中国股票市场稳定性吗？——基于复杂网络的视角》,《管理科学学报》第1期,第97～110页。
|
| [7] |
潘慧峰、刘曦彤和周轩宇,2018,《资本市场对外开放促使价值投资回归了吗？——来自沪港通的证据》,《国际金融研究》第11期,第77～86页。
|
| [8] |
齐荻,2020,《“沪深港通”机制与企业创新研究——基于多期DID的实验证据》,《当代财经》第2期,第76～88页。
|
| [9] |
谭小芬、刘汉翔和曹倩倩,2017,《资本账户开放是否降低了AH股的溢价？——基于沪港通开通前后AH股面板数据的实证研究》,《中国软科学》第11期,第44～58页。
|
| [10] |
王鹏和吴金宴,2018,《基于协高阶矩视角的沪港股市风险传染分析》,《管理科学学报》第6期,第34～47页。
|
| [11] |
许从宝、刘晓星和石广平,2016,《沪港通会降低上证A股价格波动性吗？——基于自然实验的证据》,《金融经济学研究》第6期,第28～39页。
|
| [12] |
徐晓光、廖文欣和郑尊信,2017,《沪港通背景下行业间波动溢出效应及形成机理》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第3期,第113～128页。
|
| [13] |
杨瑞杰和张向丽,2015,《沪港通对大陆、香港股票市场波动溢出的影响研究——基于沪深300指数、恒生指数高频数据》,《金融经济学研究》第6期,第49～59页。
|
| [14] |
于博和吴菡虹,2020a,《政策冲击、注意力分配与投资者情绪——基于“沪港通”与“深港通”政策的分析》,《当代财经》第1期,第136～148页。
|
| [15] |
于博和吴菡虹,2020b,《沪港通的绩效增长与反向选择效应——兼论实现高质量增长的资本市场改革路径》,《财贸经济》第2期,第54～68页。
|
| [16] |
曾颖和陆正飞,2006,《信息披露质量与股权融资成本》,《经济研究》第2期,第69～79页。
|
| [17] |
张立民、彭雯和钟凯,2018,《“沪港通”开通提升了审计独立性吗？——基于持续经营审计意见的分析》,《审计与经济研究》第5期,第35～45页。
|
| [18] |
赵一和傅仁辉,2019,《资本市场对外开放对公司价值的影响——来自“陆港通”的证据》,工作论文。
|
| [19] |
钟凯、孙昌玲、王永妍和王化成,2018,《资本市场对外开放与股价异质性波动——来自“沪港通”的经验证据》,《金融研究》第7期,第174～192页。
|
| [20] |
钟覃琳和陆正飞,2018,《资本市场开放能提高股价信息含量吗？——基于“沪港通”效应的实证检验》,《管理世界》第1期,第169～179页。
|
| [21] |
周冬华、方瑄和黄文德,2018,《境外投资者与高质量审计需求——来自沪港通政策实施的证据》,《审计研究》第6期,第56～64页。
|
| [22] |
邹洋、张瑞君、孟庆斌和侯德帅,2019,《资本市场开放能抑制上市公司违规吗？——来自“沪港通”的经验证据》,《中国软科学》第8期,第120～134页。
|
| [23] |
Akins, Brian K., Jeffrey Ng, and Rodrigo S. Verdi. 2012. “Investor Competition over Information and the Pricing of Information Asymmetry”, The Accounting Review, 87(1):35～58.
|
| [24] |
Amihud, Yakov and Haim Mendelson. 1986. “Asset Pricing and the Bid-Ask Spread”, Journal of Financial Economics, 17(2):223～249.
|
| [25] |
Armstrong, Christopher S., John E. Core, Daniel J. Taylor, and Robert E. Verrecchia. 2011. “When Does Information Asymmetry Affect the Cost of Capital？” Journal of Accounting Research, 49(1):1～40.
|
| [26] |
Balakrishnan, Karthik, Rahul Vashishtha, and Robert E. Verrecchia. 2019. “Foreign Competition for Shares and the Pricing of Information Asymmetry: Evidence from Equity Market Liberalization”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 67(1):80～97.
|
| [27] |
Bekaert, Geert and Campbell R. Harvey. 2000. “Foreign Speculators and Emerging Equity Markets”, The Journal of Finance, 55(2):565～613.
|
| [28] |
Chan, Marc K. and Simon S. Kwok. 2015. “Capital Account Liberalization and Dynamic Price Discovery: Evidence from Chinese Cross-listed Stocks”, Applied Economics, 48(6):1～19.
|
| [29] |
Claus, James and Jacob Thomas. 2010. “Equity Premia as Low as Three Percent？ Evidence from Analysts' Earnings Forecasts for Domestic and International Stock Markets”, The Journal of Finance, 56(5):1629～1666.
|
| [30] |
Dow, James and Gary Gorton. 1995. “Profitable Informed Trading in a Simple General Equilibrium Model of Asset Pricing”, Journal of Economic Theory, 67:327～369.
|
| [31] |
Easley, David and Maureen O’Hara. 2004. “Information and the Cost of Capital”, The Journal of Finance, 59(4):1553～1583.
|
| [32] |
Easton, Peter D.. 2004. “PE ratios, PEG Ratios, and Estimating the Implied Expected Rate of Return on Equity Capital”, The Accounting Review, 79(1):73～95.
|
| [33] |
Fan, Qingliang and Ting Wang. 2017. “The Impact of Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect Policy on A-H Share Price Premium”, Finance Research Letters, 21:222～227.
|
| [34] |
Gebhardt, William R., Charles M. C. Lee, and Bhaskaran Swaminathan. 2001. “Toward an Implied Cost of Capital”, Journal of Accounting Research, 39(1):135～176.
|
| [35] |
Grossman, Sanford J.. 1976. “On the Efficiency of Competitive Stock Market where Trades Have Diverse Information”, The Journal of Finance, 31(2):573～585.
|
| [36] |
Grossman, Sanford J. and Joseph E. Stiglitz. 1980. “On the Impossibility of Informationally Efficient Markets”, The American Economic Review, 70(3):393～408.
|
| [37] |
Henry, Peter B.. 2000a. “Stock Market Liberalization, Economic Reform, and Emerging Market Equity Prices”, The Journal of Finance, 55(2):529～564.
|
| [38] |
Henry, Peter B.. 2000b. “Do Stock Market Liberalizations Cause Investment Booms？” Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1-2):301～334.
|
| [39] |
Huo, Rui and Abdullahi D. Ahmed. 2017. “Return and Volatility Spillovers Effects: Evaluating the Impact of Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect”, Economic Modelling, 61:260～272.
|
| [40] |
Kyle, Albert S.. 1989. “Informed Speculation with Imperfect Competition”, The Review of Economic Studies, 56(3):317～355.
|
| [41] |
Lambert, Richard A., Christian Leuz, and Robert E. Verrecchia. 2012. “Information Asymmetry, Information Precision, and the Cost of Capital”, Review of Finance, 16(1):1～29.
|
| [42] |
Lambert, Richard A. and Robert E. Verrecchia. 2010. “Cost of Capital in Imperfect Competition Settings,” Working paper, University of Pennsylvania.
|
| [43] |
Ohlson, James A. and Beate E. Juettner-Nauroth. 2005. “Expected EPS and EPS Growth as Determinants of Value”, Review of Accounting Studies, 10(2-3):349～365.
|
| [44] |
Wang, Jiang. 1993. “A Model of Intertemporal Asset Prices under Asymmetric Information”, Review of Economic Studies, 60(2):249～282.
|
|
|
|
