This study investigates the relation between idiosyncratic volatility and future returns around the firm-specific news announcements in the Korean stock market from July 1995 to June 2018. The excess returns of decile portfolios that are formed by sorting the stocks based on news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility measures. The Fama and French three-factor model is also examined to see whether systematic risk affects news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility profits. The pricing of our news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility are confirmed in the cross-sectional regression using the Fama and MacBeth method. Market beta, size, book to market, momentum, liquidity, and maximum return are controlled to determine robustness. Our empirical evidence suggests that the pricing of the non-news idiosyncratic volatility is more strongly negative compared to the news idiosyncratic volatility, which is contrary to the limited arbitrage explanation for the negative price of the idiosyncratic volatility. We find that the non-news idiosyncratic volatility has a robust negative relation to returns in non-January months. Macro-finance factors drive the conditioned on the missing risk factor hypothesis, the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility. This study contributes to a better understanding of the role of the conditional idiosyncratic volatility in asset pricing. As the Korean stocks provide a fresh sample, our non-U.S. investigation delivers a useful out-of-sample test on the pervasiveness of the non-news volatility effect across the emerging markets.
- idiosyncratic volatility
- news idiosyncratic volatility
- firm-specific news
- macro-finance factors
- JEL classification:
Idiosyncratic volatility (IV) has been recently well documented in the field of empirical finance. However, empirical results on the nature of the idiosyncratic volatility and future return are mixed and show the significantly negative to the insignificant or significant positive relationship (see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]). Of these studies on the relationship between IV and expected returns, Ang et al. [1, 7] have received a lot of attention. Thus, a large number of studies have been trying to solve the IV puzzle, such as missing risk factor [8, 9], lottery preference , limited arbitrage , Liquidity and microstructure issues ; Lag and expected IV , and influence of macroeconomic and financial variables .
More recently, the short-sale constraints were reported to keep an important role in the IV puzzle explanation . This is the most promising interpretation of the negative price relation and the “mispricing-correction” stemming from the idiosyncratic volatility limited arbitrage. However, the mispricing correction hypothesis cannot sufficiently resolve the deep idiosyncratic volatility puzzle as the firm-specific news moves prices and the news announcements should increase the likelihood of mispricing . Moreover, high mispricing should focus on stocks with great idiosyncratic volatility because of the limited arbitrage effect . Consequently, the idiosyncratic volatility relative to the firm-specific news should be strongly negatively priced compared to the idiosyncratic volatility without the effect of firm-specific news. However, regarding the empirical tests, results reported by DeLisle et al.  are reverse of the mispricing correction hypothesis for the negative price of idiosyncratic volatility, stating that the non-news volatility is priced more strongly than news volatility. In addition, the non-news volatility is strongly significantly negative, which seems to violate the established features of the mispricing correction hypothesis.
On the other hand, the realized idiosyncratic volatility is believed to exist due to a risk factor that is neglected in the Fama and French  three factors model . Additionally, the stock volatility and the macroeconomy are mentioned to be strongly related. In particular, Chen et al.  and Ferson and Harvey  propose that the term structure spread, inflation, industrial production, and spread of bonds are significant risk factors for the US stock market. Added to this, Shi et al.  postulate that the perceived negative IV-expected return relation can be the artifact of the confounding effect of public news arrivals. More recently, the negative relation between expected idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns are proved to reverse to a positive relationship when accounting for the macro-finance effects . However, the IV around the firm-specific news return, which is not considered by DeLisle et al. , still remains highly statistically significant in all sample periods.
Motivated by these above discussions, in this study, the relationship between the idiosyncratic volatility and future returns around the firm-specific news announcements is examined in the Korean stock market. Based on this examination, the sufficiency of the limited arbitrage explanation of the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility can be evaluated. In particular, the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility news and no-news regarding the mispricing correction hypothesis will be examined as mention above. Next, portfolio analysis will be performed to understand whether idiosyncratic volatility is driven by some systematic variations, such as the macro-finance variables.
The Korean stock market can be regarded as an ideal setting to study the idiosyncratic volatility. The demand for IV is largely driven by individual investors than institutional investors . The Korean market is driven by individual investors  and most of the explanations in the US market cannot be applied well in some emerging stock markets, such as China and South Korea . Added to this, the test out-of-sample will be performed in one of the emerging equity markets characterized by its high volatility .
To test the hypotheses empirically, the firm-specific news is defined as a public announcement or declaration of 22 types of events. Following DeLisle et al. , the IVnews is defined as the idiosyncratic volatility around the firm-specific news announcements and the IVnonews is the idiosyncratic volatility unrelated to the firm-specific news announcements. Since the firm-specific news may fluctuate stock prices, news announcements should increase the likelihood of mispricing. Thus, we expect to see the stronger effect of IVnews compared to IVnonews in the empirical test.
From the empirical results, by conducting portfolio-level analysis and Fama and MacBeth  regressions, the IVnonews is found to be more strongly negatively associated with future returns, rather than the IVnews. The results from univariate portfolio sorting analysis show that the monthly equal-weighted (value-weighted) Fama and French  three-factor alpha on the high-minus-low (H-L) IVnonews portfolio is −0.0182 (−0.0179) with a Newey-West t-statistics of −5.09 (−5.11), while IVnews is not priced. This observation is consistent with that of DeLisle et al.  in the US market and is robust after controlling for several well-known predictors, such as market beta, book-to-market ratio, momentum, liquidity, and maximum return. The relationship between IVnonews and future returns is statistically significantly and economically negative, indicating that the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility must be driven by some factor that is beyond the limited arbitrage.
For further empirical tests related to the IVnonews characteristics, first, given the January seasonality in the monthly idiosyncratic volatility found by Peterson and Smedema , we examine the seasonality in the pricing of IVnonews. As a result, the IVnonews has a significantly positive and negative relation to the return in January and non-January months, respectively. In addition, motivating by recently empirical findings, such as Chen and Petkova  and Aslanidis et al. , the explanation of the IVnonews anomaly is also investigated based on the missing risk factor hypothesis. In more detail, we examine whether the more recent asset-pricing model of Fama and French  and macro-finance risk factors can price the portfolios formed on IVnonews relative to the Fama and French  three-factor model. For the construction of the macro-finance variables, we follow the recent trend in the financial literature exploiting information obtained from a large amount of macro-finance variables in predicting the asset returns (e.g., [27, 28]). The macro-finance factors are then constructed from a large set of macroeconomic and financial variables by using the first principal component of the variables in the group.
Consistent with the missing risk factor hypothesis and previous empirical findings, the IVnonews still exists after controlling for the Fama and French  five factors model. However, interestingly, results in this study show that the IVnonews is not priced conditional on the macro factors. Especially, the IVnonews coefficient attenuation is toward zero from the inclusion of macro-finance risk factors and is enough to eliminate the statistical significance. These observations indicate that the pricing of non-news volatility is driven by macro-finance factors. In other words, the macroeconomy can capture the common component in the idiosyncratic volatility .
The empirical results in the current study provide an important understanding of the idiosyncratic volatility puzzle on the asset pricing models, especially relative to the firm-specific news. First, this study empirically demonstrates the pricing of news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility in the Korean stock market. This finding is in line with that reported by DeLisle et al.  in the US market. Second, the limited arbitrage is also proved to not fully explain the negative relationship between IV and return in the Korean stock market. Third, the IVnonews is interpreted by considering the relationship between the idiosyncratic volatility and the macroeconomy.
The remainder of this study is organized in four sections: Section 2 addresses the dataset, variable constructions, and methodology; Section 3 presents the empirical test and reports the results; and the conclusion is provided in Section 4.
2. Data, variable constructions, and methodology
2.1 Data and variable constructions
The sample data used in this study is drawn primarily from the DataGuie database (
Following DeLisle et al. , we compute the monthly idiosyncratic volatility estimates with the daily data by applying the factors of Fama and French  three factors model, which is the excess market return (MKT), size (SMB), and book-to-market equity (HML). Specifically, the model can be defined as below (1), (2), and (3).
In more detail, first, the stock’s loading on the factor is estimated in each month using the previous 60 months return data (from month t-61 to month t-2) following Eq. (1). A minimum of 36 months of valid returns is required during the study period. is the excess return relative to the risk-free rate of month j, α represents the intercept of the month, is the month j return of the factor portfolio (k = 3, ),is the stock’s loading on the kth factor (), and is a regression error term.
Then, we use the factor loading estimates in Eqs. (1) and (2) to estimate the daily idiosyncratic returns during month t-1. is the raw return of the firm i in the day d, is the risk-free on day d, is the day d return of the kth factor portfolio (k = 3, , and is an estimate of the stock’s loading on the kth factor (). is the estimate of day d idiosyncratic return. Finally, the stock idiosyncratic risk (IV) in Eq. (3) is measured in month t-1. is the number of trading days in month t-1. is square of the , estimated from Eq. (2). The scaling factor is selected as 30 because the potential for stocks has a different number of trading days in a month (we require a minimum of 15 trading days in a month to have a viable volatility estimate [1, 14]).
For the news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility measures, the firm-specific news is incorporated into the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility and the volatility is decomposed into the news and non-news volatility following Eqs. (4) and (5).
where is the number of trading days during month in which the firm-specific news announcement occurs, is an indicator variable that equal to 1 in case the firm-specific news announcement occurs in day d. Otherwise, the is zero. We employ an eight-day window (= 8) around the reported announcement date, except the case where the news announcement is made on the first or last day of a calendar month. For instance, for a given firm, when a firm-specific news announcement is made on day , the days from d-3 to d + 4 over month t-1 are defined as event dates and equals one.
For the other controlling variables, several standard controls variables are used, including market beta, size and book to market ratio following Fama and French , momentum returns (the cumulative return over months t-7 to t-2), the turnover following Han and Lesmond , and the maximum daily return during month t-1 following Bali et al. .
Table 1 shows the time-series average of the cross-sectional statistics of idiosyncratic volatility (IV), news idiosyncratic volatility (IVnews) and non-news idiosyncratic volatility (IVnonews). The mean, standard deviation, median, Q1, Q3, and number of the monthly stock observation of the volatility measures are computed in each month. Then, these five statistics are averaged across cross-sections.
As can be seen in Table 1, the news volatility, rather than the non-news volatility, is higher and more dispersed across stocks. The time-series means of the cross-sectional news volatility and the non-news volatility are 0.1415 and 0.1235, respectively. The standard deviations of the news volatility and the non-news volatility in the typical cross-section are 0.0937 and 0.0888, respectively.
A number of 22 types of firm-specific news are obtained from the DataGuie database. The firm-specific news is defined as a public announcement or declaration of 1) Capital introduction technology, 2) Cash dividends, 3) Chane of the sector, 4) Change business objective, 5) Change of CEO, 6) DR issuance, 7) Facility investment or resource, 8) Investor relation, 9) Lawsuit, 10) Paid in the capital, 11) Paid in incineration, 12) Reverse stock split, 13) Sale transfer, 14) Stock dividend, 15) Stock split, 16) Suspension of the business case, 17) Take overbid, 18) Tangible asset acquisition disposal, 19) Write-down of income, 20) Merge, 21) Gratuitous pay-off, and 22) Patent application.
Similar to Ludvigson and Ng , the macro-finance variables in the current study are primarily obtained from Datastream and DataGuie database. Then, a number of 118 macro-finance variables are classified into five groups, including employment and hours; interest rate and import–export; compensation and labor cost; sale; and price. Details concerning the macro-finance variables are described in Appendix A. For each macro-finance variable group, a macro-finance factor, which is the first principal component of the variables in the group, is constructed. On average, the macro-finance factors account for 78.13% and 87.45% of the total variation of the group, indicating that they provide strong information about the macro-finance variables.
Motivated by the results of DeLisle et al. , the portfolio-level analysis and Fama and MacBeth  cross-sectional regressions are conducted to directly investigate whether the relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and future returns around the firm-specific news announcements is priced in the Korean stock market.
First, the time-series portfolios are constructed to examine the relationship between the idiosyncratic volatility and future returns conditional on firm-specific news. At the beginning of each month, the IV, IVnews, and IVnonews are sorted independently into quintile portfolios. Then, the significance of the value-weighted (VW) and equal-weighted (EW) portfolio returns is calculated and tested. Finally, the zero-investment “high minus low” (H–L) portfolios along with their Newey-West adjusted t-statistics are constructed by buying a portfolio of stocks in the highest IV (IVnews, IVnonews) quintile and shorting the stocks in the lowest one. Furthermore, three-factor alphas of the H-L portfolio and their Newey-West adjusted t-statistics are reported as FF3 alpha. Therefore, the significance of the H-L portfolio return and FF3 alpha indicate the existence of IV, IVnews, and IVnonews effects.
The portfolio sorts, which are interpreted easily, do not impose a functional form on the relationship between IV (IVnews, IVnonews) and expected returns. Therefore, the pricing of our idiosyncratic volatility (IV, IVnews, IVnonews) is confirmed in the cross-sectional regression using the Fama and MacBeth  method. Particularly, the procedure for estimation of the cross-sectional impact of the IV, IVnews, IVnonews measures follows this regression:
where is the return of firm i in month t, is the month t risk-free rate and is one of our three idiosyncratic volatility measures (n = 1,2,3). denotes a vector of control variables specific to firm i in month t. In all cross-sectional regressions, is regarded as = [BETA, LOGME, LOGBM, MOM, REV, LIQ, MAX].
To address the seasonal effect of the negative risk–return relation, we examine the pricing power of IV in the separated sample: January and Non-January. However, we focus only on the IVnonews, considered as an IV anomaly. To estimate the January effect, only observations in January are used. On the contrary, the January observations are excluded for the estimation of the Non-January effect.
Next, a possibly missing factor is tested by considering the recently well-known factor model, such as Fama and French  five-factor model and Macro-finance factors. The returns of zero portfolios are regressed and measured relative to the IVnonews on the MKT, SMB, HML, RMW, and CMA or five groups of Macro-finance factors. These two specifications are estimated as below:
where (H-L)t is the IVnonews return on the H-L portfolio in month t. The independent variables include MKT, SMB, HML, UMD, RMW, and CMA following Fama and French . Xt-1 is the vector of Macro-finance factors at time t-1 as mentioned above.
3.1 Pricing of the news and non-news idiosyncratic volatility
3.1.1 Univariate portfolio sort
The portfolio-level analysis is firstly conducted to investigate the relationship between the idiosyncratic volatility (as in ) or the news idiosyncratic volatility and the non-news idiosyncratic volatility (as in ) in the Korean stock market. Specifically, at the beginning of each month t-1, the stocks are sorted into quintiles based on their idiosyncratic volatility, news volatility, or non-news volatility. We then hold these quintile portfolios over month t and estimate the average portfolio returns and Fama and French  three-factor alphas in month t on equal-weighted (EW) and value-weighted (VW) basis. Then, a zero-cost portfolio, that is short for the lowest quintile portfolio and long for the highest quintile portfolio, is formed. Next, the time-series average of monthly returns and Fama and French  three-factor alphas are reported.
Table 2 shows the results of the value-weighted (VW) and equal-weighted (EW) returns on portfolios sorted based on the idiosyncratic volatility (IV in Panel A, IVnews in Panel B, and IVnonews in Panel C). The zero-investment portfolio returns, that are long the quintile of stocks with the highest idiosyncratic volatility and short the quintile of stocks with the lowest idiosyncratic volatility, are seen in the rightmost columns of Table 2. The Newey and West  adjusted t-statistic are reported in parentheses.
|Panel A: Idiosyncratic Volatility – IV|
|Panel B: News Idiosyncratic Volatility - IVNEWS|
|Panel C: Non-News Idiosyncratic Volatility – IVNONEWS|
Panel A presents the EW and VW returns of portfolios sorted on IV. The returns are roughly decreasing in IV for both the VW and EW portfolios. The average returns (FF3 alpha) of the EW H–L portfolio and the VW H-L portfolio are −0.0153 (−0.0162) and − 0.0151 (−0.0159), respectively and significant at the 1% level, suggesting that the IV puzzle is confirmed in the Korean data sample. This result is consistent with that reported by Nartea et al. , Cheon and Lee . Panel B of Table 2 shows the sorted IVnews. The average portfolio returns are fluctuant in the idiosyncratic volatility for both the VW and EW portfolios. The returns (FF3 alpha) of the EW H–L portfolio and VW H-L portfolio are −0.0018 (0.0017) and − 0.0014 (0.0024), respectively and statistically insignificant with the t-statistic of −1.04 (1.09) and − 1.07 (1.23), respectively. In Panel C, the returns are fluctuation and decreasing in IVnonews for both the EW and VW portfolios. The EW H–L and VW H-L portfolio returns (FF3 alpha) are −0.0169 (−0.0182) and − 0.0167 (−0.0179), respectively and both of them are significant at the 1% level.
As seen in Table 2, the results of IV and IVnonews are similarly priced feature while those of the IVnews are not priced. These findings are not consistent with the limits of arbitrage explanation, meaning that the pricing of IVnews should be significant and stronger than the IVnonews. This result is also in line with that reported by DeLisle et al. .
3.1.2 Firm-level cross-sectional regressions
In the current study, the firm-specific news effect on the pricing of idiosyncratic volatility has been observed in the Korean stock market using a single portfolio sort method. However, the portfolio tests are limited by the number of control variables at one time . Therefore, the Fama and MacBeth  cross-sectional regressions, which are necessary to control the large set of potential covariates, are performed as a robustness test. Based on this test, we can re-examine the pricing of news and no-news idiosyncratic volatility in the firm-level regression and control other relevant variables affecting the pricing of news and no-news idiosyncratic volatility in the cross-section of stock returns. The control variables are size, book-to-market ratio , momentum, turnover , and maximum return . The results are present in Table 3.
As seen in Model 1, the coefficient on IV is negative (−0.1769) and significant at 1% level (t-statistics of −4.02). The average slope of IV remains negative and statistically significant in Model 1, indicating that none of the control variables can explain the IV anomaly individually. This finding is consistent with that in previous studies [10, 34]. In Model 2, the coefficient of IVnews is positive (0.0074) and insignificant (t-statistics of 1.23), however, that of the IVnonews is negative (−0.0826) and significant at 1% level (t-statistics of −2.69). Moreover, the pricing of IVnews and IVnonews in Model 3 is same as that in Model 2. The predicting power of the other control variables is the same as that in Model 1, Model 3, and previous studies about the Korean stock market [21, 31].
As shown in Tables 1 and 2, there is no evidence of the predictive power of stock returns by IVnews. Nevertheless, a strong negative predicted power of the IVnonews, which cannot be eliminated by the other control variables, is observed in the Korean stock market. This finding is in line with that of the portfolio analysis and those in the US market , suggesting that the IVnonews is strongly priced in the Korean stock market. This result also indicates that the mispricing correction hypothesis is not sufficient to resolve the deep idiosyncratic volatility puzzle.
3.2 Additional test
3.2.1 Seasonality in pricing of non-news idiosyncratic volatility
The January seasonality is reported to affect the relations between idiosyncratic volatility and future returns . Therefore, in this part, the effect of seasonality on the relationship between IVnonews and return is also investigated in the Korean stock market. To address the seasonality, the average returns and risk-adjusted alpha (FF3) are calculated in only January (Panel A of Table 4) and non-January (Panel B of Table 4). The results of the portfolio-level analysis are also reported in Table 4.
|Panel A: January – IVnonews|
|Panel B: Non-January - IVnonews|
In panel A, the stocks are sorted based on the IVnonews for only the January data. The portfolio returns fluctuate and both of the VW and EW H–L portfolio returns, as well as the FF3 alpha, are positive and significant. Particularly, the return of the EW (VW) H–L portfolio is 0.0251 (0.0252) and significant at the 5% level (5% level), whereas that of the EW (VW) FF3 portfolio is 0.0124 (0.0122) with the t-statistics of 1.95 (1.92).
Panel B reports results for the non-January data, which is expected to observe the strongly negative IVnonews. The results show that the returns monotonically decrease in the IVnonews for the VW and EW portfolios. In particular, the EW (VW) H–L portfolio return and the EW (VW) FF3 alpha portfolio return are −0.0206 (−0.0205) and − 0.204 (−0.0200), respectively and significant at the 1% (1%) level. Furthermore, the average return in Table 4 is stronger compared to that in Table 2. The negative predicting power of IVnonews is strong and robust to the value weighting and equal weighting outside of January month. In general, these results are consistent with those reported by Peterson and Smedema  for the idiosyncratic volatility analysis, and DeLisle et al.  for the non-news idiosyncratic volatility in the US market.
3.2.2 The non-news idiosyncratic volatility and missing risk factors
In this section, the time-series alphas are estimated for the zero-investment portfolios of the non-news idiosyncratic volatility measured by DeLisle et al.  mothed. We present the time-series results from regressing the VW (EW) H–L IVnonews portfolio returns based on the five control variables (i.e., MKT, SMB, HML, RMW, and CMA as in ), and the Macro-finance variables , for further details consult Tables 6 and 7 in the Appendix. The procedure for portfolio construction is the same as that reported in Table 2.
For the FF5 alpha results, the results shown in Table 5 are almost the same as those in Tables 2 and 4. The strongly negative time-series alphas are found in all months and non-January months after controlling for Fama and French  five factors model. The pricing power of the IVnonews is negatively stronger in the non-January months compared to the other months. For instance, the EW (VW) FF5 alpha in all months is −0.0180 (−0.0176) and significant at the conventional level, while those in the months excluding January is −0.0203 (−0.0210) with t-statistics of −5.44 (−5.49).
|EW portfolios||VW portfolios||EW portfolios||VW portfolios|
Next, we are interested in controlling for the macro-finance variables following Aslanidis et al.  findings. Regarding the results of the Macro-finance panel, the time series alpha is toward zero when the Macro-finance variables are included. Additionally, the time series alpha is strong enough to eliminate the statistical significance, suggesting that the IVnonews in the Korean stock market can be explained by the Macro-finance variables. Added to this, these coefficients are lower than their corresponding values in the FF5 alpha as well as in Tables 2 and 4. These observations reflect that the pricing of IV is driven by the macro variables, which is also consistent with the findings reported by Goyal and Welch , Aslanidis et al. .
The findings in this study are also supported by several recent empirical findings, such as the IV puzzle explanation based on the missing risk factor [1, 8]. Additionally, this study also indicates that the common component, existing in the idiosyncratic volatility , is related to the macro-finance variables.
This study investigates the effect of firm-specific news on the idiosyncratic volatility and future return relationship in the Korean stock market from July 1995 to June 2018. The results show that the non-news volatility relative to the firm-specific news, defined as in DeLisle et al. , is negatively priced and positively priced in the months excluding and including January, respectively. These findings are robust after controlling for several important factors, such as market beta, size, book-to-market ratio, momentum, liquidity, and maximum return.
In addition, the effect of firm-specific news on the idiosyncratic volatility and future return relationship suggests that the usage of limited arbitrage content cannot fully support the interpretation of idiosyncratic volatility in the Korean stock market. The strong evidence of the significantly negative IVnonews is found, however, no evidence is observed for the IVnews in the Korean stock market. Thus, this study contributes to a better understanding of the role of the conditional idiosyncratic volatility in asset pricing. As the Korean stocks provide a fresh sample, our non-U.S. investigation delivers a useful out-of-sample test on the pervasiveness of the non-news volatility effect across the emerging markets.
Moreover, this study also shows that non-news volatility is driven by the macro-finance variables. The macro-finance factors are constructed from a large pool of macroeconomic and financial variables. This finding is confirmed by using different kinds of methods, including portfolio analysis and Fama and Macbeth  cross-sectional regression tests. These tests represent methods that aim to validate and qualify the data as well as the establishment of empirical evidence appropriate for the evaluation of the objectives.
Appendix: macro-finance variables
|Employment and Hours|
|1||KO ACTIVE POPULATION(LABOUR FORCE),ALL PERSONS(AGES 15 & OVER)||KOMLFT06R|
|2||KO ACTIVE POPULATION(LABOUR FORCE),FEMALES(AGES 15 & OVER) VOLA||KOMLFF06O|
|3||KO ACTIVE POPULATION(LABOUR FORCE),MALES (AGES 15 AND OVER) VOLA||KOMLFM06O|
|4||KO BOP: INCOME - COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEES CURA||KOBPIEMNB|
|5||KO CALL MONEY/INTERBANK RATE NADJ||KOOIR060R|
|6||KO CIVILIAN LABOUR FORCE: TOTAL(DISC.) SADJ||KOOPL032Q|
|7||KO EMPLOYED REGULAR EMPLOYEES VOLN||KOEMPRGRP|
|8||KO EMPLOYED SELF-EMPLOYED WORKERS VOLN||KOEMPSELP|
|9||KO EMPLOYED TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES VOLN||KOEMPTPRP|
|10||KO EMPLOYEES: TOTAL (HOUSEHOLD SURVEY)(DISC.) VOLA||KOOEM103O|
|11||KO EMPLOYEES: TOTAL VOLA||KOMLF007O|
|12||KO EMPLOYMENT - 15-19 YEARS OLD VOLN||KOEMPM15P|
|13||KO EMPLOYMENT - 20-29 YEARS OLD VOLN||KOEMPM20P|
|14||KO EMPLOYMENT - 30-39 YEARS OLD VOLN||KOEMPM30P|
|15||KO EMPLOYMENT - 40-49 YEARS OLD VOLN||KOEMPM40P|
|16||KO EMPLOYMENT - 50-59 YEARS OLD VOLN||KOEMPM50P|
|17||KO EMPLOYMENT - 60 YEARS OLD & OVER VOLN||KOEMPM60P|
|18||KO EMPLOYMENT - AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, HUNTING & FISHING VOLN||KOEMPAGRF|
|19||KO EMPLOYMENT - FEMALE VOLN||KOEMPFEMP|
|20||KO EMPLOYMENT - MALE VOLN||KOEMPMALP|
|21||KO EMPLOYMENT - MANUFACTURING & MINING VOLN||KOEMPMANF|
|22||KO EMPLOYMENT - MANUFACTURING VOLN||KOEMPMANP|
|23||KO EMPLOYMENT VOLA||KOEMPTOTO|
|24||KO EMPLOYMENT, FEMALES (AGES 15 AND OVER) VOLA||KOMLFF12O|
|25||KO EMPLOYMENT, MALES (AGES 15 AND OVER) VOLA||KOMLFM12O|
|26||KO EMPLOYMENT, MFG, ALL PERSONS VOLA||KOMLF005O|
|27||KO HARMONIZED UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: ALL PERSONS(DISC.) SADJ||KOOUN014Q|
|28||KO HARMONIZED UNEMPLOYMENT: LEVEL, ALL PERSONS (ALL AGES) VOLA||KOMLFT15O|
|29||KO HOURS WORKED - ALL EMPLOYEES VOLN||KOHWRWEMP|
|30||KO LABOUR FORCE: ALL PERSONS(DISC.) VOLA||KOOPL032O|
|31||KO LABOUR MARKET - NUMBER OF WORKING DAYS VOLN||KOLMNOWDP|
|32||KO LAGGING INDEX: REGULAR EMPLOYEES NUMBER (%MOM)(DISC.) NADJ||KOCYLAE5R|
|33||KO UNEMPLOYMENT LEVEL: SURVEY-BASED (ALL PERSONS)(DISC.) VOLA||KOOUN010O|
|Interest rate and Import–Export|
|34||BOND YIELDS FINANCIAL DEBENTURES(3YAA-)(%)||E11.02.003.012|
|35||BOND YIELDS GOVERNMENT BONDS(10Y)(%)||E11.02.003.021|
|36||BOND YIELDS GOVERNMENT BONDS(1Y)(%)||E11.02.003.013|
|37||BOND YIELDS GOVERNMENT BONDS(20Y)(%)||E11.02.003.031|
|38||BOND YIELDS GOVERNMENT BONDS(3Y)(%)||E11.02.003.008|
|39||BOND YIELDS GOVERNMENT BONDS(5Y)(%)||E11.02.003.014|
|40||BOND YIELDS KEP(3Y) BONDS(%)||E11.02.003.019|
|41||BOND YIELDS MONEY STAB. BONDS(%)||E11.02.003.009|
|42||BOND YIELDS MONEY STAB. BONDS(2Y)(%)||E11.02.003.016|
|43||BOND YIELDS MONEY STAB. BONDS(91 DAYS)(%)||E11.02.003.032|
|44||CALL RATES OVERNIGHT(%)||E11.02.003.003|
|45||COFIX RATE FOR NEW LOANS(%)||E11.02.003.034|
|46||COFIX RATE FOR OUTSTANDING LOANS(%)||E11.02.003.033|
|48||KO BOP: GOODS(FOB) - EXPORTS CURA||KOEXPBOPB|
|49||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX - BASIC METAL PRODUCTS NADJ||KOEXMBMTF|
|50||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX - CHEMICAL PRODUCTS NADJ||KOEPIPCHF|
|51||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX - COAL PRODUCTS & PETROLEUM PRODUCTS NADJ||KOEXCPPPF|
|52||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX - ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT NADJ||KOEXPEEEF|
|53||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX - FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS NADJ||KOEXMETPF|
|54||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX NADJ||KOEXPPRCF|
|55||KO EXPORT PRICE INDEX-AGRICULTURAL, FORESTRY & MARINE PRODS. NADJ||KOEXAGRIF|
|56||KO EXPORTS FOB (CUSTOMS CLEARANCE BASIS) CURN||KOEXPGDSA|
|57||KO IMPORT PRICE INDEX NADJ||KOIMPPRCF|
|58||KO IMPORTS CIF (CUSTOMS CLEARANCE BASIS) CURN||KOIMPGDSA|
|59||KO INCOME TERMS OF TRADE INDEX NADJ||KOTOTPRCF|
|60||KO TRADE BALANCE (CUSTOMS CLEARANCE BASIS) CURN||KOVISGDSA|
|61||OVERNIGHT: INTERBANK DIRECT TRANSACTIONS(%)||E11.02.003.002|
|62||OVERNIGHT: INTERMEDIATED TRANSACTIONS(%)||E11.02.003.001|
|63||UNCOLLATERALIZED CALL RATES(ALL TRANSACTIONS)(%)||E11.02.003.004|
|64||YIELD ON CD(91 DAYS)(%)||E11.02.003.005|
|65||YIELD ON CP(91 DAYS)(%)||E11.02.003.017|
|66||YIELDS OF FINANCIAL DEBENTURES(%)||E11.02.003.010|
|67||YIELDS OF NATIONAL HOUSING BONDS TYPE1(5YR)(%)||E11.02.003.007|
|Compensations and Labour cost|
|68||KO BOP: INCOME - COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEES CURA||KOBPIEMNB|
|69||KO BOP: INCOME - COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEES, CREDIT CURA||KOBPIEMCB|
|70||KO CURRENT A/C.: INCOME-DEBIT, COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEE(DISC CURA||KOCUIDCEB|
|71||KO FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT BY PURPOSE - LOW LABOR COST CURN||KOFDOPLLA|
|72||KO LCI: 12MONTH SMOOTHED CHANGES(DISC.) NADJ||KOCY1200R|
|73||KO MONTHLY EARN: MFG - PROXY(DISC.) SADJ||KOMLC007E|
|74||KO MONTHLY EARN: MFG(DISC.) SADJ||KOOLC009E|
|75||KO MONTHLY EARN: PRIVATE SECTOR(DISC.) SADJ||KOMLC034E|
|76||KO REAL EFFECTIVE FX RATE (REER) BASED ON UNIT LABOUR COSTS NADJ||KOI.RELF|
|77||KO AVG MONTHLY DAYS WORKED- WHOLESALE & RETAIL TRADE(DISC.) VOLN||KODWRWROP|
|78||KO AVG.MONTHLY EARN.: FEMALE - WHSLE. & RETAIL TRADE(DISC.) CURN||KOERAFWRA|
|79||KO AVG.MONTHLY EARN.: MALE-WHSLE.& RETAIL,HOTELS & R(DISC.) CURN||KOERAMWHA|
|80||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: DOM.SALES GROWTH-MANUFACTURING, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSIDMPR|
|81||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: EXPORTS GROWTH - MANUFACTURING, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSIXMPR|
|82||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: SALES GROWTH - ALL INDUSTRIES, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSISAPR|
|83||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: SALES GROWTH - MANUFACTURING, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSISMPR|
|84||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: SALES GROWTH-NON-MANUFACTURING, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSISNPR|
|85||KO BOK BUSINESS SVY: SALES PRICE - MANUFACTURING, ACTUAL NADJ||KOBSIPMPR|
|86||KO BOK CONSUMER SVY: EXPECT.OF HSG.& SHOPPING CENTER,NEXT(D NADJ||KOCSEHSCR|
|87||KO BUS SALES VOLN||KOSLSBUSP|
|88||KO CAR SALES VOLN||KOSLSCARP|
|89||KO CENTRAL GOVT.FINANCE: CASH-LIABILITIES, TRANSACTI(DISC.) CURN||KOICC3LBA|
|90||KO COINCIDENT INDEX: RETAIL SALE INDEX (%MOM) NADJ||KOCYCORSR|
|91||KO DAYS WORKED PER MONTH - WHOLESALE & RETAIL TRADE(DISC.) VOLN||KODAYWHSP|
|92||KO EMPLOYMENT - WHOLESALE & RETAIL TRADE VOLN||KOEMPWREP|
|93||KO EMPLOYMENT-W’SALE., RETAIL TRADE, HOTELS & RESTAURANTS VOLN||KOEMPWRHP|
|94||KO EXPORTS - COMMODITIES & TRANSACTIONS NEC(DISC.) CURN||KOEXNECXA|
|95||KO FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT BY IND-W’SALE. & RETAIL TRADE CURN||KOFDOWRTA|
|96||KO IMPORT OF COMMODITIES AND TRANSACTIONS, N.E.C(DISC.) CURN||KOOICOMMA|
|97||KO INDUSTRIAL INVENTORIES - MINING VOLA||KOIPMINFG|
|98||KO INDUSTRIAL SHIPMENTS - MINING VOLA||KOIPMINEG|
|99||KO LIGHT TRUCK SALES VOLN||KOSLSLTRP|
|100||KO CPI - EXCLUDING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT & OIL NADJ||KOCPCOREF|
|101||KO CPI NADJ||KOCONPRCF|
|102||KO CPI: ALCOHOL BEVERAGES & TOBACCO NADJ||KOCPALTOF|
|103||KO CPI: CLOTHING & FOOTWEAR NADJ||KOCPCLFTF|
|104||KO CPI: COMMUNICATION NADJ||KOCPCOMMF|
|105||KO CPI: EDUCATION NADJ||KOCPEDCNF|
|106||KO CPI: FOOD & NON-ALCOHOL BEVERAGES NADJ||KOCPFDBVF|
|107||KO CPI: FURNISHINGS, HOUSEHOLD EQP.& ROUTINE HOUSEHOLD MAINTENANCE||KOCPFUHEF|
|108||KO CPI: HEALTH NADJ||KOCPHLTHF|
|109||KO CPI: HOUSING, WATER, ELECTRICITY, GAS & OTHER FUELS NADJ||KOCPHWEFF|
|110||KO CPI: MISCELLANEOUS GOODS & SERVICES NADJ||KOCPMSGSF|
|111||KO CPI: RECREATION & CULTURE NADJ||KOCPRECUF|
|112||KO CPI: RESTAURANTS & HOTELS NADJ||KOCPREHOF|
|113||KO CPI: TRANSPORT NADJ||KOCPTRNSF|
|114||KO DUBAI SPOT PRICE OF CRUDE OIL (US$/BBL) CURN||KODUBOILA|
|115||KO FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT CURN||KOFDI…A|
|116||KO INFLATION RATE NADJ||KOCPANNL|
|117||KO KERI BSI: BUSINESS CONDITIONS, PROSPECTS NADJ||KOBUSCBCR|
|118||KO PPI NADJ||KOPROPRCF|
variation explained (%)
|Employment and Hours||81.91||0.61|
|Interest rate and Import–Export||80.94||0.52|
|Compensations and Labour cost||78.13||0.49|
|Sale, Order, and Purchase||83.39||0.56|
|Price and Inflation||87.45||0.68|