Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Management and Administrative Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

2 Ph.D. in Finance - Financial Engineering, Faculty of Economics, Management and Administrative Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

Abstract

This research examined the asymmetric effects of domestic economic policy uncertainty (DEPU) and global economic policy uncertainty (GEPU) on stock market index returns in Iran. The study focused on simultaneous analysis of economic policy uncertainty originating from both domestic and global sources within a nonlinear framework, as well as the stock market’s asymmetric responses to these uncertainties. It used the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) model, as it enables dynamic analysis and distinguishes the market’s reactions to positive and negative shocks across different time horizons. The dataset consisted of quarterly observations from 1997 to 2024. In addition to the uncertainty indices, the model incorporated several control variables, including the exchange rate, global oil prices, the consumer price index, money supply, real non-oil GDP, and stock market liquidity. Before estimating the model, the statistical properties of the data—such as nonlinearity, stationarity, the presence of long-term relationships, and response symmetry—were examined to ensure the suitability of the NARDL approach and the validity of the results. The results indicated that positive and negative shocks to DEPU have significant positive and negative effects, respectively, on stock market index returns in both the short and long run. Furthermore, GEPU shocks exert significant short-term effects with a time lag: positive shocks increase, while negative shocks decrease stock market index returns. In the long term, however, only positive GEPU shocks have a significant positive impact. The control variables also exhibited significant effects on stock market index returns.

Introduction

Economic policy uncertainty (EPU) is widely recognized as a critical factor influencing financial markets, including stock market returns. In today’s interconnected global economy, both domestic and global sources of policy uncertainty play a pivotal role in shaping investor behavior, economic decision-making, and overall market stability. Given Iran’s repeated exposure to policy shifts, economic sanctions, and geopolitical tensions, the country presents a unique setting for analyzing the impacts of policy uncertainty. Uncertainties—whether originating domestically or globally—can affect the stock market in diverse ways, varying in timing, direction, and intensity. This study aimed to investigate the asymmetric effects of domestic economic policy uncertainty (DEPU) and global economic policy uncertainty (GEPU) on stock market returns in Iran over the period 1997–2024. The primary objective was to examine how different forms of policy uncertainty influence the behavior of the Iranian stock market, while accounting for the non-linear and dynamic nature of these relationships. Market responses are not only asymmetric but are also shaped by the specific nature of each uncertainty source and the market’s sensitivity to these factors. Therefore, a nuanced analytical approach is required to capture the interactions between policy uncertainty and stock market performance. To this end, the present study employed the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) model, an advanced econometric technique designed to capture asymmetric responses to positive and negative shocks in EPU. The findings can provide valuable insights into the role of EPU in shaping stock market returns in an emerging market such as Iran.

Materials and Methods

The present study used the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) model, an appropriate method for analyzing nonlinear relationships in economic time series data. The NARDL model allows for the differentiation between positive and negative shocks, offering a more nuanced understanding of how various forms of uncertainty impact market behavior. Unlike traditional linear models, which assume symmetric effects of shocks, the NARDL approach enables the examination of distinct effects arising from positive and negative policy uncertainty shocks on stock market returns. This asymmetry is central to the study, as it reveals how market responses vary depending on the intensity and direction of uncertainty—an essential aspect for comprehensively assessing the effects of EPU on stock market performance. The analysis used quarterly time series data spanning the period 1997 to 2024. Key variables included DEPU and GEPU, Iran’s stock market returns, the exchange rate, global oil prices, the consumer price index (CPI), money supply, real non-oil GDP, and stock market liquidity. The DEPU and GEPU indices were constructed using content analysis of news reports, a widely accepted method for measuring EPU. Based on the theoretical framework and following the model proposed by Shin et al. (2014), the nonlinear long-term specification for Iran’s stock market index returns is presented in Equation (1):




 


(1)




The analysis aimed to simultaneously analyze the asymmetric short-term and long-term effects of the variables, so Equation (1) was reformulated as a NARDL model in the form of an error correction model (ECM), as presented in Equation (2):




+


(2)




Before estimating the NARDL model, several preliminary tests were conducted to ensure its statistical validity and the suitability of applying this nonlinear model. These tests included the BDS test for nonlinear dependence, the ADF and PP tests for stationarity, the Zivot–Andrews test for structural breaks, the cointegration test of Pesaran et al. (2001) for long-run relationships, and the Wald test for asymmetry. The results confirmed that the data satisfied the necessary assumptions for valid estimation and that the NARDL model was appropriate for the analysis. Following the estimation of the NARDL model, several diagnostic tests were performed to assess the reliability of the results. These included the ARCH and Breusch–Godfrey tests to detect heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation in the residuals, as well as the CUSUM and CUSUMQ to check for parameter stability. The outcomes of these diagnostic tests indicated that the model was correctly specified and that the findings were robust and reliable.

Results and Discussion

The results from the dynamic NARDL model (Table 1) showed that, in the short term, the lagged value of the stock market index has a significant positive effect on its returns. This indicates that past market growth can stimulate future growth. In the short term, DEPU displayed asymmetric effects: positive shocks have a significant positive impact, while negative shocks have a significant negative effect. GEPU also showed delayed and asymmetric effects. Positive GEPU shocks are statistically insignificant, but their first and second lags exert significant positive impacts on stock market returns. Negative GEPU shocks are also statistically insignificant, although their first lag has a significant negative effect. Regarding the control variables, the exchange rate had a positive and significant effect in the current period, while its lag was statistically insignificant. Moreover, global oil prices can exert positive effects in the second and third lags, but not in the current period or the first lag.
Table 1. Results of Dynamic NARDL Model Estimation




p-value


t-Statistic


Standard error


Coefficient


Variable


 




0.00


3.12


0.09


0.30


LSP(-1)


 




0.02


2.32


0.10


0.23


LDEPU_POS


 




0.72


0.34


0.93


0.32


LDEPU_POS)-1)


 




0.01


-2.51


0.08


-0.22


LDEPU_NEG


 




0.14


1.45


0.70


1.02


LGEPU_POS


 




0.03


2.15


0.52


1.12


LGEPU_POS(-1)


 




0.02


2.30


0.56


1.29


LGEPU_POS(-2)


 




0.10


1.64


0.39


0.64


LGEPU_NEG


 




0.00


-2.66


0.54


-1.45


LGEPU_NEG)-1)


 




0.04


2.07


0.44


0.93


LEX


 




0.14


-1.45


0.51


-0.75


LEX(-1)


 




0.25


-1.15


0.30


-0.35


LOIL


 




0.23


1.18


0.44


0.53


LOIL (-1)


 




0.03


2.17


0.45


0.98


LOIL (-2)


 




0.00


4.82


0.29


1.42


LOIL (-3)


 




0.00


2.70


0.47


1.27


LCPI


 




0.72


-0.34


2.11


-0.73


LMS


 




0.60


-0.52


2.46


-1.29


LMS)-1)


 




0.02


2.49


0.41


1.03


LMS)-2)


 




0.69


-0.40


4.55


-1.82


LMS)-3)


 




0.54


0.60


0.17


0.10


LRNOGDP


 




0.72


0.35


0.10


0.03


LLIQ


 




0.04


2.00


0.10


0.20


LLIQ (-1)


 




 


=0.88            F-statistic=7.6836              Prob (F-statistic) =0.0000



 
 
 
 
 
 
 



Source: Research Results
The consumer price index was found to have a significant positive impact on stock market returns. Money supply has a significant positive effect only in the second lag. Real non-oil GDP is not statistically significant in the short term, whereas market liquidity is significant only in its first lag. The overall model significance was confirmed by the F-statistic.
The long-term results from the NARDL model (Table 2) indicated that DEPU exhibits significant asymmetric effects: positive shocks lead to a positive long-term impact on stock market returns, whereas negative shocks produce a negative long-term effect. GEPU also showed asymmetric long-term behavior, with only positive shocks having a statistically significant influence. Among the control variables, the exchange rate and real non-oil GDP exert positive and significant long-term effects on stock market returns, while global oil prices and the consumer price index have negative long-term effects. The ECM coefficient confirmed that, following any shock, the market gradually adjusts back to its long-term equilibrium.
Table 2. Long-Term Relationships and the Error Correction Model (ECM) Results From NARDL




p-value


t-Statistic


Standard error


Coefficient


Variable




0.01


2.41


0.14


0.34


LDEPU_POS




0.00


2.92


0.09


-0.28


LDEPU_NEG




0.00


2.70


0.37


1.02


LGEPU_POS




0.11


-1.60


0.55


-0.89


LGEPU_NEG




0.00


2.87


0.24


0.69


LX




0.04


-2.04


0.45


-0.92


LOIL




0.01


-2.39


0.80


-1.93


LCPI




0.40


-0.83


0.75


-0.63


LMS




0.01


2.47


0.56


1.38


LRNOGDP




0.33


0.97


0.22


0.21


LLIQ




0.02


-2.2


0.11


-0.25


ECM




Source: Research Results

Conclusion

According to the findings, both DEPU and GEPU exert significant and asymmetric effects on stock market returns in Iran. The results highlighted the importance of recognizing non-linear relationships when examining the impact of EPU, particularly in emerging markets such as Iran. In light of the findings, it is recommended that economic policymakers proceed with greater caution when announcing policies and avoid issuing contradictory or ambiguous signals that could trigger short-term market overreactions and instability. Moreover, achieving long-term economic stability requires careful attention to fundamental factors such as exchange rates, oil prices, and economic growth. The results also indicated that, in the short term, speculative and emotional behaviors play a substantial role in market fluctuations. These behaviors can be curbed by improving regulatory frameworks, for example by facilitating short-selling, futures contracts, and options trading. In the long term, enhancing investors’ financial literacy and encouraging long-term investment strategies can help reduce volatility driven by short-term speculation.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

Aftab, M., Ahmad, R., Ismail, I. & Phylaktis, K. (2021). Economic integration and the currency and equity markets nexus. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(4), 5278–5301.
Ahir, H., Bloom, N. & Furceri, D. (2022). The world uncertainty index (No. w29763). National bureau of economic research.
https://doi.org/10.3386/w29763
Akhgar, M.O., Sajjadi, Z. & Rasooli Kordestani, N. (2023). Uncertainty in economic policy and corporate risk-taking: Product market competition, financial friction, and financialization. Accounting and Auditing Review, 30(4), 614–658. [In Persian]
Al-Thaqeb, S.A., Algharabali, B.G. & Alabdulghafour, K.T. (2022). The pandemic and economic policy uncertainty. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 27(3), 2784–2794.
Al-Yahyaee, K.H., Rehman, M.U., Mensi, W. & Al-Jarrah, I.M.W. (2019). Can uncertainty indices predict Bitcoin prices? A revisited analysis using partial and multivariate wavelet approaches. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 49, 47-56.
Arbab, H.R., Amadeh, H. & Amini, A. (2021). The impact of economic policy uncertainty on the returns of petrochemical companies in different market conditions. Iranian Economic Research, 26(88), 191–221. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22054/ijer.2021.50187.838
Arouri, M., Estay, C., Rault, C. & Roubaud, D. (2016). Economic policy uncertainty and stock markets: Long-run evidence from the US. Finance Research Letters, 18, 136–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2016.04.011
Ashena, M. & Lal Khezri, H. (2020). The dynamic correlation of global economic policy uncertainty index with stock, exchange rate and gold markets in Iran: Application of M-GARCH and DCC approach. Journal of Economic Modeling, 5(2), 147–172. [In Persian]
Ashraf, B.N. & Shen, Y. (2019). Economic policy uncertainty and banks’ loan pricing. Journal of Financial Stability, 44, 1-12.
Aydin, M., Pata, U.K. & Inal, V. (2022). Economic policy uncertainty and stock prices in BRIC countries: Evidence from asymmetric frequency domain causality approach. Applied Economic Analysis, 30(89), 114–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEA-12-2020-0172
Bahmani-Oskooee, M. & Saha, S. (2016). Do exchange rate changes have symmetric or asymmetric effects on stock prices? Global Finance Journal, 31, 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2016.06.005
Baker, S.R., Bloom, N. & Davis, S.J. (2016). Measuring economic policy uncertainty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1593–1636. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw024
Balcilar, M., Gupta, R., Kim, W.J. & Kyei, C. (2015). The role of domestic and global economic policy uncertainties in predicting stock returns and their volatility for Hong Kong, Malaysia and South Korea: Evidence from a nonparametric causality-in-quantiles approach. Department of Economics, University of Pretoria, Working Paper No, 201586. https://ideas.repec.org/p/pre/wpaper/201586.html
Balcilar, M., Gupta, R., Lee, C.C. & Olasehinde-Williams, G. (2020). Insurance and economic policy uncertainty. Research in International Business and Finance, 54, 101253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101253
Basher, S.A., Haug, A.A. & Sadorsky, P. (2018). The impact of oil-market shocks on stock returns in major oil-exporting countries. Journal of International Money and Finance, 86, 264–280.
Bhattacharya, S.N., Bhattacharya, M. & Basu, S. (2019). Stock market and its liquidity: Evidence from ARDL bound testing approach in the Indian context. Cogent Economics & Finance, 7, 1-12.
Birz, G. & Lott, J.R.Jr. (2011). The effect of macroeconomic news on stock returns: new evidence from newspaper coverage. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(11), 2791–2800.
Bissoon, R., Seetanah, B., Bhattu-Babajee, R., Gopy-Ramdhany, N. & Seetah, K. (2016). Monetary policy impact on stock return: evidence from growing stock markets. Theoretical Economics Letters, 6(5), 1186–1195. https://doi.org/10.4236/tel.2016.65112
Bloom, N. (2009). The impact of uncertainty shocks. Econometrica, 77(3), 623–685. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA6248
Brogaard, J. & Detzel, A. (2015). The asset-pricing implications of government economic policy uncertainty. Management Science, 61(1), 3–18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24551068
Broock, W.A., Scheinkman, J.A., Dechert, W.D. & LeBaron, B. (1996). A test for independence based on the correlation dimension. Econometric Reviews, 15(3), 197–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474939608800353
Caggiano, G., Castelnuovo, E. & Figueres, J.M. (2017). Economic policy uncertainty and unemployment in the United States: A nonlinear approach. Economics Letters, 151, 31-34.
Chen, N.F., Roll, R. & Ross, S.A. (1986). Economic forces and the stock market. The Journal of Business, 59(3), 383–403. https://doi.org/10.1086/296344
Cheng, F., Wang, C., Cui, X., Wu, J. & He, F. (2021). Economic policy uncertainty exposure and stock price bubbles: Evidence from China. International Review of Financial Analysis, 78, 101961.
Chiang, T.C. & Chen, P.Y. (2023). Inflation risk and stock returns: Evidence from US aggregate and sectoral markets. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 66, 101986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2023.101986
Choudhry, T. (2001). Inflation and rates of return on stocks: evidence from high inflation countries. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 11(1), 75–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-4431(00)00037-3
Chuliá, H., Mosquera-López, S. & Uribe, J.M. (2023). Nonlinear market liquidity: an empirical examination. International Review of Financial Analysis, 87, 102532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102532
Da, Z., Engelberg, J. & Gao, P. (2015). The sum of all FEARS: Investor sentiment and asset prices. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhu072
Dakhlaoui, I. & Aloui, C. (2016). The interactive relationship between the US economic policy uncertainty and BRIC stock markets. International Economics, 146, 141-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2015.12.002
Davis, S.J. (2016). An index of global economic policy uncertainty (No. w22740). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w22740
Dindar Farkoushy, P., Panahian, H. & Jabbari, H. (2021). Economic uncertainty and stock price crash risk companies listed in tehran stock exchange. Accounting and Auditing Research, 13(51), 143–164. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/IAAR.2021.141681
Dong, Q., Du, Q. & Du, A.M. (2024). Interplay between oil prices, country risks, and stock returns in the context of global conflict. Research in International Business and Finance, 66, 102545.
Dornbusch, R. & Fischer, S. (1980). Exchange rates and the current account. American Economic Review, 70(5), 960–971.
Eidi, M., Hejbar Kiani, C., Rajaee, Y. & Rahimzadeh, A. (2020). Investigating the asymmetric effects of exchange rate on Iran's money demand function despite household religious expenditure: NARDL approach. Financial Economics Quarterly, 14(52), 27–54. [In Persian]
Elroukh, A.W. (2025). Economic policy uncertainty and stock returns in the G7 countries: A panel NARDL approach [Working paper]. Sultan Qaboos University, College of Economics & Political Science.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4718712
Engle, R.F. & Granger, C.W. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 5(22), 251-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
Erdogan, L., Ceylan, R. & Abdul-Rahman, M. (2022). The impact of domestic and global risk factors on Turkish stock market: evidence from the NARDL approach. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 58(7), 1961–1974. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2021.1949282
Fama, E.F. & French, K.R. (1989). Business conditions and expected returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 25(1), 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(89)90095-0
Friedman, M. (1968). The role of monetary policy. American Economic Review, 58(1), 1–17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1831652
Georgescu, I. & Kinnunen, J. (2025). Nonlinear ARDL analysis of economic growth, nuclear energy, and innovation's asymmetric effects on Finland's load capacity factor. SN Business & Economics5(4), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-025-00808-9
Ghani, M. & Ghani, U. (2024). Economic policy uncertainty and emerging stock market volatility. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 31(1), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10690-023-09410-1
Goel, G., Dash, S.R., Mata, M.N., Caleiro, A.B., Xavier Rita, J. & Filipe, J.A. (2021). Economic policy uncertainty and stock return momentum. Journal of Risk and Financial Management14(4), 141.
Guedhami, O., Mansi, S., Reeb, D. & Yasuda, Y. (2021). Economic policy uncertainty and allocative distortions. Journal of Financial Stability, 56, 100923. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/106991
He, F., Wang, Z. & Yin, L. (2020). Asymmetric volatility spillovers between international economic policy uncertainty and the US stock market. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 51, 101084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2019.101084
Hemrit, W. & Nakhli, M.S. (2021). Insurance and geopolitical risk: Fresh empirical evidence. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 82, 320-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2021.10.001
Hoque, M.E. & Zaidi, M.A.S. (2019). The impacts of global economic policy uncertainty on stock market returns in regime switching environment: Evidence from sectoral perspectives. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 24(2), 991–1016. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.1702
Huq, M.F. & Billah, M.M. (2023). Macroeconomic factors and stock exchange return: A statistical analysis. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4492017
Idnani, S., Adil, M.H., Mal, H. & Kolte, A. (2023). Economic policy uncertainty and investors' sentiment—An Indian perspective. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(10), 3462–3485. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-04-2021-0567
Ioannidis, C. & Kontonikas, A. (2008). The impact of monetary policy on stock prices. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(1), 33–53.
Johansen, S. (1991). Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegration vectors in Gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 59(6), 1551-1580. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938278
Jurado, K., Ludvigson, S.C. & Ng, S. (2015). Measuring uncertainty. American Economic Review, 105(3), 1177–1216.
Kang, W. & Ratti, R.A. (2013). Oil shocks, policy uncertainty and stock market return. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 26, 305-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2013.07.001
Kilian, L. & Park, C. (2009). The impact of oil price shocks on the U.S. stock market. International Economic Review, 50(4), 1267–1287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2009.00568.x
Ko, J.H. & Lee, C.M. (2015). International economic policy uncertainty and stock prices: Wavelet approach. Economics Letters, 134, 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.07.012
Kundu, S. & Paul, A. (2022). Effect of economic policy uncertainty on stock market return and volatility under heterogeneous market characteristics. International Review of Economics & Finance, 80, 597-612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2022.02.047
Laakkonen, H. & Lanne, M. (2008). Asymmetric news effects on volatility: Good vs. bad news in good vs. bad times. MPRA Paper, 8296, 1–27. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8296
Loni, S., Abbasian, E. & Haji, G. (2021). The effect of economic policy uncertainty on corporate investment: evidence from companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange. Financial Research Journal, 23(2), 249–268. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22059/frj.2021.310437.1007069
Lotfi, M., Haghighat, H. & Ghaemi, M.H. (2018). Validation and development of stock return synchronicity measures and the impact of the country’s economic situation on its changes. Journal of Accounting Knowledge and Management Auditing, 7(25), 81–98. [In Persian]
Mensi, W., Hammoudeh, S., Reboredo, J.C. & Nguyen, D.K. (2014). Do global factors impact BRICS stock markets? A quantile regression approach. Emerging Markets Review, 19, 1-17.
Mujtaba, A., Jena, P.K., Mishra, B.R., Kyophilavong, P., Hammoudeh, S., Roubaud, D. & Dehury, T. (2022). Do economic growth, energy consumption and population damage the environmental quality? Evidence from five regions using the nonlinear ARDL approach. Environmental Challenges, 8, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100554
Nguyen, G. & Vo, V. (2024). Economic policy uncertainty around the world: Implications for Vietnam. International Review of Economics & Finance. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2024.05.028
Nkoro, E. & Uko, A.K. (2016). Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) cointegration technique: application and interpretation. Journal of Statistical and Econometric methods5(4), 63-91.
Nusair, S.A. & Al-Khasawneh, J.A. (2022). Impact of economic policy uncertainty on the stock markets of the G7 countries: A nonlinear ARDL approach. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 26, e00251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2022.e00251
Pástor, Ľ. & Veronesi, P. (2013). Political uncertainty and risk premia. Journal of Financial Economics, 110(3), 520–545.
Paule-Vianez, J., Gómez-Martínez, R. & Prado-Román, C. (2020). Effect of Economic and Monetary Policy Uncertainty on stock markets. Evidence on return, volatility and liquidity. Economics Bulletin40(2), 1261-1271. http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2020/Volume40/EB-20-V40-I2-P107.pdf
Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y. & Smith, R.J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2678547
Ritter, J.R. (2012). Revisiting economic growth and equity returns. Financial Analysts Journal, 68(4), 6–23.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2012.00385.x
Saltzman, B. & Yung, J. (2018). A machine learning approach to identifying different types of uncertainty. Economics Letters, 171, 58–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2018.07.003
Samadi, S. & Bayani, O. (2011). The relationship between macroeconomic variables and stock returns in the Tehran Stock Exchange. Journal of Financial Economics, 5(16), 91–111. [In Persian]
Samsami, H. & Ebrahimnejad, A. (2019). The impact of economic policy uncertainty on the entrepreneurship and unemployment in Iranian economy: Simultaneous equations system approach. Journal of Economic Research, 54(4), 995–1016. [In Persian]
Schwert, G.W. (1990). Stock returns and real activity: A century of evidence. The Journal of Finance, 45(4), 1237–1257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb02434.x
Scotti, C. (2016). Surprise and uncertainty indexes: Real-time aggregation of real-activity macro-surprises. Journal of Monetary Economics, 82, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2016.06.002
Sharma, A.K. (2024). Asymmetric nexus between economic policy uncertainty and the Indian stock market: Evidence using NARDL approach. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 93, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2023.11.006
Shekarkhah, J., Asiaie, M.R. & Mahmoudi, M. (2023). The relationship between economic uncertainty and synchronization of stock returns in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange. Journal of Securities and Exchange, 16(2), 225–252. [In Persian]
Shin, Y., Yu, B. & Greenwood-Nimmo, M. (2014). Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a nonlinear ARDL framework. In Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt: Econometric Methods and Applications, 7(2), 281–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1807745
Soroka, S.N. (2006). Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information. The Journal of Politics, 68(2), 372–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00413.x
Su, F., Wang, F. & Xu, Y. (2024). Economic policy uncertainty and volatility spillovers among international stock market indices during the COVID-19 outbreak. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 1-30.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10690-024-09452-z
Sum, V. (2013). The ASEAN stock market performance and economic policy uncertainty in the United States. Economic Papers: A Journal of Applied Economics and Policy, 32(4), 512–521.
Toda, H.Y. & Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of econometrics66(1), 225-250.
Ugurlu‐Yildirim, E., Kocaarslan, B. & Ordu‐Akkaya, B.M. (2021). Monetary policy uncertainty, investor sentiment, and US stock market performance: new evidence from nonlinear cointegration analysis. International Journal of Finance & Economics26(2), 1724-1738.
Vega-Gutiérrez, P.L., López-Iturriaga, F.J. & Rodríguez-Sanz, J.A. (2025). Economic policy uncertainty and capital structure in Europe: An agency approach. The European Journal of Finance, 31(1), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/1351847X.2024.2364044
Völkert, C. (2015). The distribution of uncertainty: Evidence from the VIX options market. Journal of Futures Markets35(7), 597-624. https://doi.org/10.1002/fut.21673
Wang, Q., Wu, S., Huang, P. & Hueng, C.J. (2025). The influence of market liquidity on the efficiency of China's pilot carbon markets. Finance Research Letters, 72, 106560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.106560
Xu, Y., Wang, J., Chen, Z. & Liang, C. (2021). Economic policy uncertainty and stock market returns: new evidence. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 58, 101525.
Yu, H., Fang, L. & Sun, W. (2018). Forecasting performance of global economic policy uncertainty for volatility of Chinese stock market. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 505, 931–940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2018.03.083
Yuan, D., Li, S., Li, R. & Zhang, F. (2022). Economic policy uncertainty, oil and stock markets in BRIC: Evidence from quantiles analysis. Energy Economics, 110, 105972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105972
Zarra Nezhad, M. & Motamedi, S. (2012). Investigation of the relationship between macroeconomic variables and total price index of Tehran Stock Exchange. Economics Research, 12(46), 101–116. [In Persian] https://joer.atu.ac.ir/article_943.html
Zhu, H., Su, X., You, W. & Ren, Y. (2017). Asymmetric effects of oil price shocks on stock returns: Evidence from a two-stage Markov regime-switching approach. Applied Economics, 49(25), 2491–2507. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1240351
Zivot, E. & Andrews, D.W.K. (2012). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics20(1), 25-44.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1391541
Zomorodian, G.R., Shabanzadeh, M. & Shariatzadeh, I. (2016). Examining the effect of uncertainty in monetary and fiscal policy on capital markets. Financial Engineering and Securities Management, 6(25), 81–106. [In Persian] https://journals.iau.ir/article_517200.html