A Review of Securities Commission of Malaysia’s Revised Shariah Stock-Screening Criteria

E. N. Engkuchik
{"title":"A Review of Securities Commission of Malaysia’s Revised Shariah Stock-Screening Criteria","authors":"E. N. Engkuchik","doi":"10.15640/JIBF.V4N1A8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper addresses the perceived more tolerant Shariah-screening criteria by the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SCM). Recently, in 2013, SCM introduced the “two-tier” screening process of the stocks traded on Bursa Malaysia. Despite this revision, the two-tier process is seen as being less stringent than the Shariahscreening process of e.g. Dow Jones and MSCI. Such perception may affect the credibility of the SCM in determining Shariah-compliant securities compared to international standards. Proponents of SCM screening criteria argue that since Shariah screening in Malaysia only includes Malaysian listed stocks, more rigid screening process may limit the list of investible stocks, and may further restrict the benefits of diversification, i.e. one may not be able to form efficient portfolios or achieve appropriate risk-return portfolios while complying with the Shariah principles. This paper argues that the justification for the less-stringent screening process adopted by the SCM does not seem to be corroborated by theoretical or portfolio diversification studies, and evidence from the socially-responsible investing and Shariah-compliant empirical findings.","PeriodicalId":31275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Islamic Banking and Finance","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Islamic Banking and Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15640/JIBF.V4N1A8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This paper addresses the perceived more tolerant Shariah-screening criteria by the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SCM). Recently, in 2013, SCM introduced the “two-tier” screening process of the stocks traded on Bursa Malaysia. Despite this revision, the two-tier process is seen as being less stringent than the Shariahscreening process of e.g. Dow Jones and MSCI. Such perception may affect the credibility of the SCM in determining Shariah-compliant securities compared to international standards. Proponents of SCM screening criteria argue that since Shariah screening in Malaysia only includes Malaysian listed stocks, more rigid screening process may limit the list of investible stocks, and may further restrict the benefits of diversification, i.e. one may not be able to form efficient portfolios or achieve appropriate risk-return portfolios while complying with the Shariah principles. This paper argues that the justification for the less-stringent screening process adopted by the SCM does not seem to be corroborated by theoretical or portfolio diversification studies, and evidence from the socially-responsible investing and Shariah-compliant empirical findings.
检讨马来西亚证券委员会修订的伊斯兰教法股票筛选标准
本文解决了马来西亚证券委员会(SCM)认为更宽容的伊斯兰教法筛选标准。最近,在2013年,SCM对在马来西亚交易所交易的股票引入了“双层”筛选程序。尽管进行了修订,但两级流程被视为不如道琼斯(Dow Jones)和MSCI等公司的伊斯兰教法筛选流程严格。与国际标准相比,这种看法可能会影响SCM在确定符合伊斯兰教法的证券方面的可信度。SCM筛选标准的支持者认为,由于马来西亚的伊斯兰教法筛选只包括马来西亚上市股票,更严格的筛选过程可能会限制可投资股票的清单,并可能进一步限制多元化的好处,即在遵守伊斯兰教法原则的同时,可能无法形成有效的投资组合或实现适当的风险回报组合。本文认为,SCM采用的不那么严格的筛选过程的理由似乎没有得到理论或投资组合多样化研究的证实,也没有得到社会责任投资和符合伊斯兰教法的实证研究结果的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信