EXCHANGE RATE AND STOCK PRICE INTERACTIONS: AN EVIDENCE FROM TURKISH TRANSPORTATION SECTOR

Year 2020, Issue: 31, 109 - 119, 29.05.2020

Abdullah Açık , İlke Sezin Ayaz Esra Baran Kasapoğlu

https://doi.org/10.20875/makusobed.469158

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between stock values of the companies serving in the transportation sector in Turkey and exchange rate. In addition to being an alternative investment tool for transportation sector share values, it is possible that the effects of exchange rate on the share values will be different with its structure affecting both their costs and their transportation demands. Therefore, it is likely to have a nonlinear relationship between the two variables. XULAS variable formed by transportation companies in the BIST index and TL equivalent of USD which is the basic exchange rate all over the world are used in the analysis. The data consists of 971 observations on a weekly basis covering the period between 2 January 2000 and 16 September 2018. The asymmetric causality test is used to determine the unidirectional causal relationship between the shocks in the variables. The obtained results reveal a situation contrary to the general view of negative relationship. It is also hoped that the findings will be useful in developing investment strategies for existing and potential investors in the market.

Keywords

Transportation Industry, Stock Value, Exchange Rate, Asymmetric Causality

DÖVİZ KURU VE HİSSE SENEDİ FİYATI ARASINDAKİ ETKİLEŞİM: TÜRK ULAŞTIRMA SEKTÖRÜNDEN BİR BULGU

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye’de ulaştırma sektöründe hizmet veren firmaların hisse senedi değerleriyle döviz kurları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesidir. Döviz kurlarının ulaştırma sektöründeki hisse değerlerine etkisi, hisselere alternatif yatırım araçları olmalarının yanında, ulaştırma sektörünün maliyetlerini ve taşımacılık aktivitelerine olan talebi etkilemeleri nedeniyle farklı olabilir. Bu nedenle iki değişken arasında doğrusal olmayan bir ilişki olması muhtemeldir. Analizde BIST endeksindeki ulaştırma şirketlerinin hisse değerlerinden oluşan XULAS ve dünyada temel döviz kurlarından olan doların Türk Lirası olarak karşılığı değişkenler kullanılmışlardır. Veri seti 2 Ocak 2000 ve 16 Eylül 2018 tarihleri arasını kapsayan haftalık bazda 971 gözlemden oluşmaktadır. Değişkenlerdeki şoklar arasındaki tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisini tespit etmek için asimetrik nedensellik testi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlar genel görüş olan negatif ilişki görüşüne ters bir durum ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca bu sonuçların mevcut ve potansiyel yatırımcıların yatırım stratejileri oluşturmalarında faydalı olacakları umulmaktadır.

Keywords

Ulaştırma Sektörü, Hisse Senedi Değeri, Döviz Kuru, Asimetrik Nedensellik

References

• Acaravcı, A., and Öztürk, İ. (2002). Döviz Kurundaki Değişkenliğin Türkiye İhracatı Üzerine Etkisi: Ampirik Bir Çalışma. Review of Social, Economic and Business Studies, 2, 197-206.
• Alexander, S. S. (1952). Effects of Devaluation on a Trade Balance. IMF Staff Paper, 2(2), 263-78.
• Asif, M. (2011). Impact of Devaluation on Trade Balance in Pakistan. Economics of Knowledge, 3(3), 16-25.
• Aydemir, Oguzhan and Demirhan, Erdal. (2009). The Relationship Between Stock Prices Exchange Rate Evidence from Turkey. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 23, 207-215.
• Baharumshah, A. Z. (2001). The Effect of Exchange Rate on Bilateral Trade Balance: New Evidence from Malaysia and Thailand. Asian Economic Journal, 15(3), 291-311.
• Baum, C. F., and Caglayan, M. (2010). On the Sensitivity of the Volume and Volatility of Bilateral Trade Flows to Exchange Rate Uncertainty. Journal of International Money and Finance, 29(1), 79-93.
• Bhuvaneshwari, D., and Ramya, K. (2017). Cointegration and Causality Between Stock Prices and Exchange Rate: Empirical Evidence from India. SDMIMD Journal of Management, 8(1), 39-45.
• Bildirici, M. E., and Turkmen, C. (2015). Nonlinear Causality Between Oil and Precious Metals. Resources Policy, 46, 202-211.
• Chaudhary, G. M., Hashmi, S. H., and Khan, M. A. (2016). Exchange Rate and Foreign Trade: A Comparative Study of Major South Asian and South-East Asian Countries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 85-93.
• Doong, S. C., Yang, S. Y., and Wang, A. T. (2005). The Dynamic Relationship and Pricing of Stocks and Exchange Rates: Empirical Evidence from Asian Emerging Markets. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(1), 118-123.
• Grier, K. B., and Smallwood, A. D. (2007). Uncertainty and Export Performance: Evidence from 18 Countries. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 39(4), 965-979.
• Hatemi-j, A. (2012). Asymmetric Causality Tests with an Application. Empirical Economics, 43(1), 447-456.
• Hatemi-J, A., and Uddin, G. S. (2012). Is the Causal Nexus of Energy Utilization and Economic Growth Asymmetric in the US?. Economic Systems, 36(3), 461-469.
• Investing (2018). BIST Transportation Index, USD/TL Exchange Rate. Accessed: 17.09.2018.
• Isard, P. (1995). Exchange rate economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kemal, A. M., and Qadir, U. (2005). Real Exchange Rate, Exports, and Imports Movements: A Trivariate Analysis. The Pakistan Development Review, 44(2), 177-195.
• Kim, K. (2003). Dollar Exchange Rate and Stock Price: Evidence from Multivariate Cointegration and Error Correction Model. Review of Financial Economics, 12, 301-313.
• Kose Y., Doganya M., and Hakan K. (2010). On the Causality Between Stock Prices and Exchange Rate: Evidence from Turkish Financial Market. Problems and Perspective in Management, 8: 127-135.
• Kvietkauskienė, A., and Plakys, M. (2017). Impact Indicators for Stock Markets Return. Business Excellence, 11(2), 59-84.
• Lal, K. A., and Lowinger, C. T. (2002). Nominal Effective Exchange Rate and Trade Balance Adjustment in South Asia Countries. Journal of Asian Economics, 13, 371-383.
• MacDonald, R. (2012). What do We Really Know about Real Exchange Rates? MacDonald, R., and Stein, J. L (Eds.), in Equilibrium exchange rates (19-66). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
• Nieh, C. C., and Lee, C. F. (2001). Dynamic Relationship Between Stock Prices and Eexchange Rates for G-7 Countries. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 41(4), 477-490.
• Onafowora, O. (2003). Exchange Rate and Trade Balance in East Asia: Is there a J-Curve. Economics Bulletin, 5(18), 1-13.
• Ozair, Amber. (2006). Causality Between Stock prices and Exchange Rates: A Case of The United States Unpublished Master of Science Thesis, Florida Atlantic University.
• Rjoub, M. (2012). Stock Prices and Exchange Rates Dynamics: Evidence from Emerging Markets. African Journal of Business Management, 6, 4728-4733.
• Shahbaz, M., Van Hoang, T. H., Mahalik, M. K., and Roubaud, D. (2017). Energy Consumption, Financial Development and Economic Growth in India: New Evidence from a Nonlinear and Asymmetric Analysis. Energy Economics, 63, 199-212.
• Tabak, B. M. (2006). The Dynamic Relationship Between Stock Prices and Exchange Rates: Evidence for Brazil. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 9(08), 1377-1396.
• Toda, H. Y., and Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical Inference in Vector Autoregressions with Possibly Integrated Processes. Journal of Econometrics, 66(1-2), 225-250.
• Tugcu, C. T., and Topcu, M. (2018). Total, Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Revisiting the Issue with an Asymmetric Point of View. Energy, 152, 64-74.
• Tugcu, C. T., Ozturk, I., and Aslan, A. (2012). Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth Relationship Revisited: Evidence from G7 Countries. Energy Economics, 34(6), 1942-1950.
• Tunçsiper, B., and Öksüzler, O. (2006). Döviz Kuru Riski Türkiyenin İhracatını Azaltır mı? Hata Doğrulama Yöntemi ile Bir Ampirik Değerlendirme. Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(3), 1-13.
• Umar, M., and Dahalan, J. (2016). An Application of Asymmetric Toda-Yamamoto Causality on Exchange Rate-Inflation Differentials in Emerging Economies. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(2), 420-426.