Asymmetric Mispricing and Regime‐dependent Dynamics in Futures and Options Markets
Author | Jaeram Lee,Doojin Ryu |
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/asej.12084 |
Date | 01 March 2016 |
Published date | 01 March 2016 |
Asymmetric Mispricing and Regime-dependent
Dynamics in Futures and Options Markets*
Jaeram Lee and Doojin Ryu
Received 9 May 2014; accepted 26 November 2015
We examine regime-dependent price dynamics and mispricing adjustments within the
KOSPI200spot, futures andoptions markets throughan analysis of data from January
2000 to December 2014. Investors exploit mispricing between derivatives and spot
markets only if mispricing is sufficiently large. The futures traders take long, rather
than short, positions to adjust for mispricing. Mispricing between spot and options
markets is adjusted by trading options and not by trading spots. We find the
bidirectional information flows between spot and futures markets when the futures-
implied index is sufficiently larger than the spot index. In contrast, no significant
lead–lag relationshipbetween spot andoptions markets exists.Significant asymmetric
transactioncosts exist in the spot marketand this asymmetry has decreasedover time.
Keywords: KOSPI200 futures and options, limited dependent variable model,
mispricing, threshold vector error-correction model, transaction costs.
JEL classification codes: G13, G14, G32.
doi: 10.1111/asej.12084
I. Introduction
Mispricing in derivatives markets can be defined as the difference between the
theoretical underlying asset price under no-arbitrage conditions, such as the
cost-of-carry hypothesis (in the case of futures) or put-call parity (in the case of
options), and its market price. Many studies examine the dynamics of mispricing
in relation to market conditions from this perspective. For example, MacKinlay
and Ramaswamy (1988) argue that the difference between the futures price and
its theoretical price in the spot market is limited due to transaction costs; however,
it increases with time-to-maturity. Ofek et al. (2004) find that the extent of the put-
call parity violations in the US individual options market is significantly related to
the cost of short-selling. Cremers and Weinbaum (2010) claim that mispricing,
represented by the deviation from put-call parity, predicts underlying returns.
In order to examine the mispricing issue within derivatives and commodities
markets, certain innovative studies adopt a threshold vector error-correction model
* Lee: Collegeof Business, KAIST,85 Hoegiro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul,Korea. Ryu (corresponding
author): College of Economics, Sungkyunkwan University, 25-2, Sungkyunkwan-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul
03063,Korea. Email: sharpjin@skku.edu. Weare grateful forthe helpful comments and suggestions from
Jangkoo Kang,Baeho Kim, Bum Suk Kim, Heejin Yang and allthe participants of the SKKU financial
economicsseminar. This workwas supported by a NationalResearch Foundation ofKorea Grant funded
by the KoreanGovernment (NRF-2014S1A5B8060964).
© 2016 East Asian Economic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
Asian Economic Journal 2016, Vol.30 No. 1, 47–65 47
bs_bs_banner
(TVECM) framework,because it effectively captures the nonlinear dynamicsof as-
set prices. Dwyer et al. (1996) claim that, in comparison to alternative linear
models, a three-regime TVECM can explain the mispricing adjustments and price
dynamics of the S&P500 spot index and its futures prices more effectively. Kim
et al. (2010) confirm that the prices of S&P500 futures lead the nonlinear mean-
reverting dynamics of the underlying asset using a three-regime TVECM. Certain
studies employing the TVECM analyze commodities markets. Peri and Baldi
(2010) examine the asymmetric dynamic adjusting processes between commodity
oil prices using the two-regime TVECM. Their findings show that among the oil
commodities, only the price of rapeseed oil adjusts asymmetrically to its long-
run equilibrium level, which is determined by diesel prices; this has policy impli-
cations for the remodeling of energy portfolios.
As demonstrated by these studies, TVECM is a powerful tool to examine the non-
linear price dynamics and relationships among related financial markets; however, the
majority of previous studies examine the price dynamics of US and European mar-
kets. The lack of research on relatively immature emerging and/or Asian markets,
where nonlinear relationship and mispricing issues are more frequently observed
and may have a more significant impact, is surprising. Furthermore, most of the re-
search on derivatives markets using TVECM analyzes the relationship between index
futures only; these have simpler payoff structures in comparis on to oth er deriva-
tives. Because options have nonlinear payoff structures and highly complicated
price dynamics in comparison to futures, an empirical analysis of option price
dynamics using TVECM is also meaningful.
1
In addition, it should be consid-
ered that the price dynamics among the underlying spot, futures and options are
closely related and the information flows between them are highly significant
(Schlag and Stoll, 2005; Ryu, 2011; Chang et al., 2013) as investors usually
maintain positions in both futures and options markets. However, most of the
previous studies analyze only a part of these markets.
2
The aforem entioned lim itations of p revious studi es motivate us to exa mine
the mispricing and regime-dependent price dynamics issues within the
KOSPI200 futures and options markets together using the TVECM frame-
work. KOSPI200 futures and options, the two most representative index
derivatives on th e Korea Exchange ( KRX), are fam ous for thei r tremendous
trading volumes and are of great interest to both global and local investors.
In addition to their ample market liquidity, the futures and options markets
facilitate an ideal setting to investigate issues due to various other factors.
Previous stu dies on the KOSPI20 0 index derivatives ma rkets consis tently
1 Although some recent studies, such as Lee and Ryu (2014) and Lu et al. (2012), indirectly examine
option price dynamics by analyzing implied volatilities derived from options markets under the
TVECM framework, these studies fail to cover mispricing andtransaction cost issues.
2 Exceptionally, Lee etal. (2015) employ the TVECM to investigate the nonlinear relationships
among these three markets. However,they focus on the common information, instead of the mispricing
adjustments, in the markets.
ASIAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL 48
© 2016 East Asian Economic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial