This thesis examines the validity of the cost of carry model for pricing FTSE100 futures contracts and the relationship between FTSE100 spot and futures markets during two sub-periods characterised by different market trading systems employed by the LSE and LIFFE. The empirical work is carried out using three approaches to econometric modeling: a basic VECM for spot and futures prices, a VECM extended with a DCCTGARCH framework to account for the conditional variance-covariance structure for spot and futures prices and a threshold VECM to capture regime-dependent spot-futures price dynamics. Overall, both the basic VECM and the DCC-TGARCH analysis suggest that there are deviations from the cost of carry relationship in the first sub-sample when transactions costs in both markets are relatively high but that the cost of carry relationship tends to be valid in the second sub-sample when transactions costs are lower. This is further confirmed by the evidence of higher conditional correlations between the two markets in the second sub-sample as compared with the first, using the DCC-TGARCH analysis. This implies that the no-arbitrage cost of carry relationship between spot and futures markets is more effectively maintained by index arbitrageurs in the second period when market conditions are closer to perfect market assumptions, and hence the cost of carry model could be more reasonably used as a benchmark for pricing stock index futures. The threshold VECM analysis depicts regime-dependent price dynamics between FTSE100 spot and futures markets and leads to some interesting and important findings: arbitrage may not be practicable under some market conditions, either because it is difficult to find counterparties for the arbitrage transactions, or because there is significant risk associated with arbitrage; as a result, the cost of carry model may not always be suitable for pricing stock index futures. Furthermore, the threshold values yielded from estimating the threshold VECM reflect the average transaction costs for most arbitrageurs that are more reliable and fair than subjective estimations.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:500391 |
| Date | January 2008 |
| Creators | Tao, Juan |
| Publisher | Loughborough University |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/8071 |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds