Skip to main content

You are here

Blog Listing Page

Capturing pricing anomalies: China A- and H-shares (part 2 of 2)

In our previous posting on China A and H shares, we discussed the pricing differential on dual-listed Chinese stocks—those listed both domestically (A-shares) and in Hong Kong (H-shares). We explored how to potentially construct a transparent index methodology that could take into account such pricing anomalies. The simulated A/H index is expected to outperform the market-cap weighted China A-shares benchmark when the A/H share pricing differential converges and underperform when the differential diverges. Now, let’s see if the simulated performance supports our expectation. 

Empirical evidence suggests a convergence/divergence pattern where the prices of the two markets diverge at times but tend to converge when the price gap becomes wide enough. As demonstrated in part 1 of the series, A-shares have most often traded at a premium to their H-share counterparts.  As we can see below, the simulated China A/H Index has outperformed the FTSE China A Index over a 10-year period. This indicates that the A/H switching mechanism is able to capture the A/H price anomaly historically.

In addition, the simulated A/H Index has exhibited less volatility than its market cap benchmark. As seen below, these results hold true over the three-, five- and ten-year time horizons. The A/H switching mechanism appears to have successfully captured the A/H price anomaly—but at what cost?

As discussed in part 1 of this series, the construction of an A/H index would include switching to the cheaper of the two listed prices at each rebalancing date. We used an assumption of quarterly rebalancing periods with a 3% buffer zone around the pricing anomaly threshold.

When rebalancing a simple market cap weighted index like the FTSE China A Index, turnover is completely attributable to changes in the underlying market cap of its constituents. For the A/H Index, the turnover is attributable to both the underlying market cap changes and the share switching—making annual turnover within the index significantly higher.

An analysis starting in June 2007 demonstrates that the average annual turnover for the simulated A/H index was 55.2% versus just 18.5% for the FTSE China A Index.  Market participants would need to take into account the impact of a higher turnover in their assessment of an A/H index for a more complete understanding.

In February 2016, FTSE Russell launched the FTSE China A-H50 Index based on the FTSE China A50 Index which is a smaller subset of only the largest dual-listed Chinese companies. Even when the higher turnover associated with capturing the A/H pricing anomaly is considered, the  index may be of interest to market participants.

For further details on capturing the China A- and H-share pricing anomaly, see the corresponding FTSE Russell Insights paper.
 

--------------------------------- 

© 2016 London Stock Exchange Group plc and its applicable group undertakings (the “LSE Group”). The LSE Group includes (1) FTSE International Limited (“FTSE”), (2) Frank Russell Company (“Russell”), (3) FTSE TMX Global Debt Capital Markets Inc. and FTSE TMX Global Debt Capital Markets Limited (together, “FTSE TMX”) and (4) MTSNext Limited (“MTSNext”). All rights reserved.

FTSE Russell® is a trading name of FTSE, Russell, FTSE TMX and MTS Next Limited. “FTSE®”, “Russell®”, “FTSE Russell®” “MTS®”, “FTSE TMX®”, “FTSE4Good®” and “ICB®” and all other trademarks and service marks used herein (whether registered or unregistered) are trade marks and/or service marks owned or licensed by the applicable member of the LSE Group or their respective licensors and are owned, or used under licence, by FTSE, Russell, MTSNext, or FTSE TMX.

All information is provided for information purposes only. Every effort is made to ensure that all information given in this publication is accurate, but no responsibility or liability can be accepted by any member of the LSE Group nor their respective directors, officers, employees, partners or licensors for any errors or for any loss from use of this publication or any of the information or data contained herein.

No member of the LSE Group nor their respective directors, officers, employees, partners or licensors make any claim, prediction, warranty or representation whatsoever, expressly or impliedly, either as to the results to be obtained from the use of the FTSE Russell indexes or the fitness or suitability of the indexes for any particular purpose to which they  might be put.

No member of the LSE Group nor their respective directors, officers, employees, partners or licensors provide investment advice and nothing in this communication  should be taken as constituting financial or investment advice. No member of the LSE Group nor their respective directors, officers, employees, partners or licensors make any representation regarding the advisability of investing in any asset. A decision to invest in any such asset should not be made in reliance on any information herein. Indexes cannot be invested in directly. Inclusion of an asset in an index is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold that asset. The general information contained in this publication should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from a licensed professional.

No part of this information may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the applicable member of the LSE Group. Use and distribution of the LSE Group index data and the use of their data to create financial products require a license from FTSE, Russell, FTSE TMX, MTSNext and/or their respective licensors.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Charts and graphs are provided for illustrative purposes only. Index returns shown may not represent the results of the actual trading of investable assets. Certain returns shown may reflect back-tested performance. All performance presented prior to the index inception date is back-tested performance. Back-tested performance is not actual performance, but is hypothetical. The back-test calculations are based on the same methodology that was in effect when the index was officially launched. However, back- tested data may reflect the application of the index methodology with the benefit of hindsight, and the historic calculations of an index may change from month to month based on revisions to the underlying economic data used in the calculation of the index.

Blog Listing Page