Journal of Asset Management

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 235–244 | Cite as

The diminished effect of index rebalances

  • Konstantina Kappou
Original Article


The author revisits the strategy of trading S&P 500 index re-compositions under the pre- and post-crisis financial environments, proving that the return structure has significantly changed. The results show for the first time that there are currently no tradable abnormal returns between announcement and event dates in the post-crisis sample period, indicating smoother rebalancing mechanisms by bank’s client facing desks and better services for passive end-investors. The newly added firms inflate the S&P 500 index by less than ten basis points per year. The results could be attributed to improved execution algorithms used by the banks and potentially to the new regulatory reforms in the sector, which prevents financial institutions from taking large trading positions with their balance sheets.


Index rebalancing Passive investment S&P 500 Additions Index funds 

JEL Classification



  1. Amihud, Y., and H. Mendelson. 1987. Trading mechanisms and stock returns: An empirical investigation. Journal of Finance 42 (3): 533–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beneish, M., and J. Gardner. 1995. Information costs and liquidity effects from changes in the Dow Jones industrial average list. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 30 (1): 135–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beneish, M., and R. Whaley. 1996. An anatomy of the “S&P game”: The effects of changing the rules. Journal of Finance 51 (5): 1909–1930.Google Scholar
  4. Beneish, M., and R. Whaley. 1997. A scorecard from the S&P game: Can I play? Journal of Portfolio Management 23 (2): 16–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beneish, M., and R. Whaley. 2002. S&P 500 index replacements: A new game in town. Journal of Portfolio Management 29 (1): 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chakrabarti, R., Huang, W., Jayaraman, N. and J. Lee. 2002. The index effect on stock prices and trading volumes: International evidence. Working Paper Series, Georgia Tech Center for International Business Education and Research, 2002–2003.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, H., G. Noronha, and V. Singal. 2004. The price response to the S&P 500 additions and deletions: Evidence of asymmetry and a new explanation. Journal of Finance 59 (4): 1901–1929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cusick, P. 2002. Price effects of addition or deletion from the standard and poor’s 500 index: Evidence of increasing market efficiency. Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments 11 (4): 349–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deininger C., Kaserer C. and S. Roos. 2000. Stock price effects associated with index replacements in Germany. Working Paper No 7, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano.Google Scholar
  10. Denis, D., J. McConnell, A. Ovtchinnikov, and Y. Yu. 2003. S&P 500 index additions and earnings expectations. Journal of Finance 58 (5): 1821–1840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dhillon, U., and H. Johnson. 1991. Changes in the standard and poor’s 500 list. Journal of Business 64 (1): 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Doeswijk, R. 2005. The index revision party. International Review of Financial Analysis 14 (1): 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edmister, R., S. Graham, and W. Pirie. 1994. Excess returns of index replacement stocks: Evidence of liquidity and substitutability. Journal of Financial Research 17 (3): 333–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Edmister, R., S. Graham, and W. Pirie. 1996. Trading cost expectations: Evidence from S&P 500 index replacement stock announcements. Journal of Economics and Finance 20 (2): 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Erwin, G., and J. Miller. 1998. The liquidity effects associated with addition of a stock to the S&P 500 index: Evidence from bid/ask spreads. The Financial Review 33: 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goetzmann, W., and M. Garry. 1986. Does delisting affect stock price? Financial Analyst Journal 42 (2): 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harris, L., and E. Gurel. 1986. Price and volume effects associated with changes in the S&P 500 list: New evidence for the existence of price pressures. Journal of Finance 41 (4): 815–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacques, W. 1988. The S&P 500 membership anomaly, or would you join this club? Financial Analyst Journal 44 (6): 73–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jain, P. 1987. The effect on stock price of inclusion or exclusion from the S&P 500. Financial Analysts Journal 43 (1): 58–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kappou, K., C. Brooks, and C.W. Ward. 2010. The S&P 500 index effect reconsidered: Evidence from overnight and intraday stock price performance and volume. Journal of Banking & Finance 34 (1): 116–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kappou, K., and I. Oikonomou. 2016. Is there a gold social seal? The financial effects of additions to and deletions from social stock indices. Journal of Business Ethics 133 (3): 533–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaul, A., V. Mehrotra, and R. Morck. 2000. Demand curves for stocks do slope down: New evidence from an index weights adjustment. Journal of Finance 55 (2): 893–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim, S. 2013. The timing of opening trades and pricing errors. Financial Management 42 (3): 503–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lamoureux, C., and J. Wansley. 1987. Market effects of changes in the standard and poor’s 500 index. The Financial Review 22 (1): 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu, S. 2006. The impacts of index rebalancing and their implications: Some new evidence from Japan. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money 16 (3): 246–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Madhavan, A. 2003. The russell reconstitution effect. Financial Analysts Journal 59 (4): 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Malkiel, B., and A. Radisich. 2001. The growth of index funds and the pricing of equity securities. Journal of Portfolio Management 27 (2): 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mazouz, K., and B. Saadouni. 2007. The price effects of FTSE 100 index revision: What drives the long-term abnormal return reversal? Applied Financial Economics 17 (6): 501–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pruitt, S., and J. Wei. 1989. Institutional ownership and changes in the S&P 500. Journal of Finance 44 (2): 509–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shleifer, A. 1986. Do demand curves for stocks slope down? Journal of Finance 41 (3): 579–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stoll, H., and R. Whaley. 1990. Stock market structure and volatility. Review of Financial Studies 3 (1): 37–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Woolridge, R., and C. Ghosh. 1986. Institutional trading and security prices: The case of changes in the composition of the S&P 500 index. Journal of Financial Research 9 (1): 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wurgler, J., and E. Zhuravskaya. 2002. Does arbitrage flatten demand curves for stocks? Journal of Business 75 (4): 583–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICMA Centre, Henley Business SchoolUniversity of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations