Mirela Momcilovic, Dejan Zivkov, Sanja Vlaovic Begovic
The cost of equity represents signiﬁcant input in the investment process evaluation, company valuation or in the process of an acquisition. In developed countries, the cost of equity is usually determined on the basis of Capital Asset Pricing Model – CAPM (Sharpe, 1964; Litner, 1965) according to which in the state of market equilibrium investors expect return from the security proportional to its systematic risk. The model uses beta coefﬁcient of secutity as a measure of systematic risk. The CAPM disregards unsystematic risk, because the model assumes that investors hold highly diversiﬁed portfolios, which enable investors to eliminate unsystematic risk (see Wagner & Lau, 1971; Klemosky & Martin, 1975). Investors at developed markets, besides CAPM often use some other asset pricing models, like Arbitrage Pricing Model (Ross, 1976) or Fama-French Three-Factor Model (Fama & French, 1992; 1993).
Selver Seda Ada, Johan Christiaens
In recent decades, public sector accounting reforms have been one of the most striking aspects of the adoption of New Public Management (NPM) (Lapsley & Pallot, 2000; Christensen, 2007; Christensen & Parker, 2010; Ball & Craig, 2010; Pollanen & LoiselleLappointe, 2012). Accrual accounting, which is closely related to public-sector accounting reforms, has been studied in various contexts from various perspectives (Pallot, 1994; Shand, 1990; English, Guthrie, & Carlin, 2000; Ryan, 1998; Carnegie & Wolnizer, 1995; Barton, 1999; Carnegie & Wolnizer, 1999; Salinas, 2002; Carlin, 2005).
Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) are still considered to be new-born institutional investors, in international ﬁnancial markets, as well as innovative investment vehicles, despite their relatively long history. Several funds have been operating at a global level for more than ﬁfty years, however the number of those created after the year 2000 represents the majority of the total in existence. For many years, these state-run funds have been almost anonymous investors, existing in the shadows, maintaining a low proﬁle in the public eye. SWFs have been regarded as investment vehicles established in order to manage, in a rational and proﬁtoriented way, pools of national wealth for future generations.
Pavla Klepková Vodová, Daniel Stavárek
The recent ﬁnancial crisis has shown that liquidity risk plays an important role in the contemporary ﬁnancial system. This is especially true for economies that are traditionally based on banks and credit markets. A liquidity shock may propagate through a real channel or an information channel and then affect the entire ﬁnancial system (Frait & Komárková, 2011). As a systemic banking crisis can have costly consequences such as declines in gross domestic product growth, real house prices and real equity prices and increases in unemployment rate, real public debt, among other effects (Reinhart and Rogoff, 2009), it is not surprising that most regulators, policymakers and academics devote signiﬁcant attention to various aspects of liquidity risk measurement and management.
The interest in bank liquidity has grown signiﬁcantly in recent times not only among regulators, but in authors’ studies as well. The trigger mechanism was mainly the recent global ﬁnancial crisis, where a number of systems faced liquidity problems. On the basis of the crisis, the regulation on the part of the Basel Committee (Bank for International Settlements, 2010) in the area of liquidity has increased. The Basel Committee proposed the introduction of two liquidity indicators: the LCR (Liquidity Coverage Ratio) and the NSFR (Net Stable Funding Ratio), which the member states must obligatorily fulﬁl based on European law.