Calendar Effects and Real Estate Securities

  • E. C. M. Hui
  • J. A. WrightEmail author
  • S. C. P. Yam


This paper examines twenty-seven international real estate securities indices from twenty countries and regions for calendar effects. Two methodologies are employed. The first is the standard approach which detects statistically significant anomalies via linear regression of returns. The second, new to the real estate securities literature, tests for economically significant effects through two tests specifically designed to compare multiple forecasts to a benchmark, White’s (Econometrica, 1097–1126, 2000) Reality Check and Hansen’s (J Bus Econ Stat 23(4):365–380, 2005) Superior Predictive Ability test. The standard approach tells us that while some effects have disappeared over time, statistically significant calendar anomalies persist. However, the tests of White and Hansen strongly suggest that they are not economically significant and thus should not be the basis of an investor’s trading strategy nor be considered as a challenge to market efficiency, as has been claimed previously.


Calendar effects Real estate securities index Reality Check test Superior Predictive Ability test Market efficiency 



This study receives financial support from The Hong Kong Polytechnic Universitys Internal Funding (Project #: G-YH86, G-YH96, and 4-ZZC8). The second author, John Wright would like to thank the The Hong Kong Polytechnic University for their support, as much of his work for this paper was completed there. The third author, Phillip Yam, acknowledges financial support from The Hong Kong RGC GRF 502909, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Direct Grant 2010/2011 Project ID: 2060422, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Direct Grant 2011/2012 Project ID: 2060444. Phillip Yam also expresses his sincere gratitude to the hospitality of Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach (MFO) in the German Black Forest during the preparation of the present work.


  1. Almudhaf, F., & Hansz, J. (2011). Systematic equity return patterns in listed European property companies. International Real Estate Review, 14(1), 61–84.Google Scholar
  2. Brounen, D., & Ben-Hamo, Y. (2009). Calendar anomalies: the case of international property shares. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 38(2), 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan, S., Leung, W., Wang, K. (2005). Changes in REIT structure and stock performance: evidence from the monday stock anomaly. Real Estate Economics, 33(1), 89–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Colwell, P., & Park, H. (1990). Seasonality and size effects: the case of real-estate-related investment. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 3(3), 251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Connors, D., Jackman, M., Lamb, R., Rosenberg, S. (2002). Calendar anomalies in the stock returns of real estate investment trusts. Briefings in Real Estate Finance, 2(1), 61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fama, E. (1970). Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fama, E. (1991). Efficient capital markets: II. Journal of Finance, 46(5), 1575–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Friday, H., & Higgins, E. (2000). The day of the week effect in real estate investment trusts. Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, 6(3), 273–282.Google Scholar
  9. Friday, H., & Peterson, D. (1997). January return seasonality in real estate investment trusts: information vs. tax-loss selling effects. Journal of Financial Research, 20(1), 33–51.Google Scholar
  10. Hansen, P. (2005). A test for superior predictive ability. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 23(4), 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardin III, W., Liano, K., Huang, G. (2005). Real estate investment trusts and calendar anomalies: revisited. International Real Estate Review, 8(1), 83–94.Google Scholar
  12. Jensen, M. (1978). Some anomalous evidence regarding market efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics, 6(2/3), 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee, M., & Lee, M. (2003). Institutional involvement and the REIT January effect over time. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 21(6), 435–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lenkkeri, V., Marquering, W., Strunkmann-Meister, B. (2006). The Friday effect in European securitized real estate index returns. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 33(1), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Redman, A., Manakyan, H., Liano, K. (1997). Real estate investment trusts and calendar anomalies. Journal of Real Estate Research, 14(1), 19–28.Google Scholar
  16. Serrano, C., & Hoesli, M. (2009). Global securitized real estate benchmarks and performance. Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, 15(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  17. Sullivan, R., Timmermann, A., White, H. (1999). Data-snooping, technical trading rule performance, and the bootstrap. The Journal of Finance, 54(5), 1647–1691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sullivan, R., Timmermann, A., White, H. (2001). Dangers of data mining: the case of calendar effects in stock returns. Journal of Econometrics, 105(1), 249–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tsay, R. (2005). Analysis of financial time series (Vol. 543). New York: Wiley-Interscience.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. White, H. (2000). A reality check for data snooping. Econometrica, 68(5), 1097–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wiley, J., & Zumpano, L. (2009). Institutional investment and the turn-of-the-month effect: evidence from reits. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 39(2), 180–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Building and Real EstateThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityKowloonHong Kong
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations