Slide background
Slide background

Journals come in both print and online editions. You can submit your articles by any one of the following three methods: 1. You can send the full papers/articles directly to our gmail id: issnjournals2u@gmail.com (Or) 2.Register/Login to Submit/Browse Journal & Events Listings with full control (Or) 3. Submit papers/articles without registration by clicking here.
For any assistance, please call/whatsapp us over our mobile numbers: +919245777148 / +919486068813

SEMI-STRONG FORM OF EFFICIENCY OF INDIAN STOCK MARKET – AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF BONUS ANNOUNCEMENT (Pages 129-146) by Dr. M. Bharath in THE INTERNATIONAL MANAGER / ISSN: 2348-9413 (Online); 2348-9405 (Print)

DM Updated
 
3.7
 
3.4 (1)
376 0 0 0 1 0

Journals

Please Login
To view the complete details of the Journal, please login.
Publication Year
Author Name
Efficient market hypothesis is based on the idea that information is quickly and efficiently incorporated into asset prices at any point in time and consequently past prices cannot be used to predict future price movements since addition to existing information cannot be foreseen. In other words the current market price reflects all publically available information. Under the conditions the current market price in any financial market could be the best unbiased estimate of the value of the investment. The present study is an attempt to test the informational efficiency of the Indian stock market in the semi strong form of efficient market hypothesis with respect to event of bonus issue announced by listed on BSE 500 companies during the study period. In this study to test the stock price reaction to information content of bonus issues with a view of examining whether the Indian stock market is semi strong efficient. All AARs after the announcement day (except +3 day) are not statistically significant. It reveals that the investors are not earned AARs in the sample companies.
Key Words: Stock Market, Efficient Market Hypothesis, Bonus Issue, Event Study, AAR and CAAR.

Editor reviews

1 reviews

Reviewed by Editorial Board
(Updated: January 21, 2020)
Overall rating 
 
3.7
Expertise 
 
4.0
Relevancy 
 
4.0
Presentation 
 
3.0
Fulfills all criteria
Comments (0) | Was this review helpful to you? 0 0

User reviews

1 reviews

Overall rating 
 
3.4
Expertise 
 
4.0  (1)
Relevancy 
 
3.0  (1)
Presentation 
 
3.0  (1)
To write a review please register or
Reviewed by my colleagues
Overall rating 
 
3.4
Expertise 
 
4.0
Relevancy 
 
3.0
Presentation 
 
3.0
Hope this will be published
DM
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful to you? 0 0
 
     
Forgot Login?   Sign up  

Choose Archives

advertise with us 1