The Firm Value Effect: Evidence from Egypt

Omar Gharaibeh

Authors

Omar Gharaibeh

Keywords:

value effect, contrarian, three-factor model, egyptian stock market (EGX)

Abstract

This paper investigates for a value effect in Egyptian firm returns using three different ways to determine value by sorting firms based on their past long-term returns (long-term contrarian), the book-to-market ratios (BE/ME), and the percentage changes in their BE/ME ratios (change). These three strategies are approaches commonly used to measure for value effect. Using sample period from January 1997 to April 2014, this study provides a strong evidence of an inter-firm value effect with three measures. The long-term return contrarian and BE/ME, produce significant abnormal raw returns of 2.18% and 2.01%, respectively. On the other hand, the percentage changes in their BE/ME provides weakly significant profits of 1.08% per month. This paper also shows that the value profits generated by all three alternative value strategies in Egyptian stock market can be explained by three-factor model.

Downloads

How to Cite

The Firm Value Effect: Evidence from Egypt. (2016). Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 16(C7), 1-9. https://journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/view/2038

Download Citation

References

Clifford Asness (1997) The Interaction of Value and Momentum Strategies. 53(2), 29-36.

Clifford Asness, Tobias Moskowitz, Lasse Pedersen (2013) Value and Momentum Everywhere. 68(3), 929-985.

N Cakici, Y Tang, A Yan (2016) Do the Size, Value, and Momentum Factors Drive Stock Returns in Emerging Markets? Value, and Momentum Factors Drive Stock Returns in Emerging Markets.

Huafeng Chen (2011) Firm life expectancy and the heterogeneity of the book-to-market effect☆. 100(2), 402-423.

P Chou, P Ho, K Ko (2012) Do industries matter in explaining stock returns and asset-pricing anomalies. 36(2), 355-370.

W Debondt, R Thaler (1985) Does the stock market overreact. 40(3), 793-805.

M Dempsey (2010) The book-to-market equity ratio as a proxy for risk: evidence from Australian markets. 35(1), 7-21.

E Fama, K French (1992) The crosssection of expected stock returns. 427-465.

E Fama, K French (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. 33(1), 3-56.

E Fama, K French (1996) Multifactor explanations of asset pricing anomalies. 51(1), 55-84.

I Figelman (2007) Stock return momentum and reversal. 34(1), 51-67.

O Gharaibeh (2016) The Inter-Firm Value Effect in the Qatar Stock Market: 2005-2014. 11(1).

M Grinblatt, T Moskowitz (2004) Predicting stock price movements from past returns: The role of consistency and tax-loss selling. 71(3), 514-579.

Md. Hasan, Md. Alam, Md. Amin, Md. Rahaman (2015) The Size and Value Effect to Explain Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns in Dhaka Stock Exchange. 7(1), 14.

J Lakonishok, A Shleifer, R Vishny (1994) Contrarian investment, extrapolation, and risk. 49(5), 1541-1578.

M Malin, G Bornholt (2013) Long-term return reversal: Evidence from international market indices. 25, 1-17.

W Newey, K West (1987) A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix. 703-708.

R Peterkort, J Nielsen (2005) Is the bookto-market ratio a measure of risk. 28(4), 487-502.

Pradosh Simlai (2009) Stock returns, size, and book‐to‐market equity. 26(3), 198-212.

H White (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. 48, 817-838.