[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
"Thomas Jacobs" <thomasjacobs@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Re: Suggestions On Event Study Implementation Using Sureg |

Date |
Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:41:38 -0600 |

Dear Kit, Sorry I missed your reply until now. Actually, the code below places a 1 in days 1381 and 1382 and even if I extend the event period to twenty days it still drops the dummy variable in the results. I found a couple papers that recommended this methodology (seemingly unrelated regression and a dummy for the event days) for regulatory type events. Further, for similar firms (all of my firms are financial) with identical event windows this method (using -sureg-) allows one to reflect the time series and cross-sectional relationship of the errors in the model but still provide differing loadings on the independent variables. The "standard" method leaves me with either measuring the standard deviation of the abnormal returns for the event period across very few observations if I do it firm by firm or else having to combine all abnormal returns of the firms in the measurement of an event abnormal return standard deviation. It is also unclear how to adjust the errors unless I use something like -pcse-. Most of the papers utilizing the standard event study approach I reviewed were able to rely on some kind of randomness in the individual events (such as earnings or dividend announcements) across firms as opposed to one event for all firms as well as diversity in the firm type. 1. Is there any reason you would expect the dummy to be dropped for a longer event window from a -sureg- design viewpoint as opposed to a statistical measurement viewpoint? 2. I don't understand your comment that -sureg- prevents me from examining any number of firms 3. Do you have any suggestions or are you familiar with any standard event study approaches that have similar characteristics to my problem (short event window, same window for multiple firms, all firms of very similar error structure - heteroskedastic, strong cross sectional and time series correlation, etc.) 4. Would you simply use firm specific abnormal return standard deviations or combine into one abnormal return standard deviation across all firms? Thanks for your thoughts and sorry, again, for missing your earlier reply. Tom On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Kit Baum <baum@bc.edu> wrote: > < > > If you examine the reshaped data created by this logic, I think you will > find that only the last observation (with tradedatenum == 1382) has a 1 in > eventindicator. It is thus a 'singleton dummy'. Putting in a dummy that is 1 > for only 1 observation in a timeseries in plain old OLS is equivalent to > dropping that observation from the regression, as you can then 'explain' > y[1382] perfectly -- it has its own intercept term. I don't think you want > to do this. > > This is not the standard methodology for an event study (in particular, > because the use of -sureg- prevents you from examining any number of firms). > Why wouldn't you rather want to estimate over the pre-event period and > forecast returns over the event period, and look for abnormal returns? > > > Kit Baum, Boston College Economics and DIW Berlin > http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html > An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata: > http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html > > > On Nov 4, 2008, at 02:33 ,Thomas wrote: > >> >> scalar EventBegin = 1381 >> scalar EventEnd = 1382 >> scalar ObservationPeriod = 250 >> >> keep if TradeDateNum >= EventBegin - ObservationPeriod >> keep if TradeDateNum <= EventEnd >> >> gen EventIndicator = 0 >> replace EventIndicator = 1 if TradeDateNum >= EventBegin > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > -- Thomas Jacobs * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Re: Suggestions On Event Study Implementation Using Sureg***From:*Kit Baum <baum@bc.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Reshape limit** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: RE: extract t-values** - Previous by thread:
**st: Re: Suggestions On Event Study Implementation Using Sureg** - Next by thread:
**st: Re: Suggestions On Event Study Implementation Using Sureg** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |