  Since its inauguration, ChiNext has gone through three time periods with two
different regulation regimes and three different sets of listing day trading
restrictions. This paper studies the impact of regulation regimes and listing
day trading restrictions on the initial return of ChiNext IPOs. We hypothesize
that the initial return of a ChiNext IPO contains the issuers intrinsic value
and the investors overreaction. The intrinsic value is represented by the IPOs
21st day return (monthly return), and the difference between the monthly and
initial returns (intramonth return) is a proxy of the overreaction. We find
that all significant variables for all three returns in all three time periods
fall into four categories: pre-listing demand, post-listing demand, market
condition and pre-listing issuer value. We observe stark contrasts among
variable categories for each of the returns in the three time periods, which
reveals an evolution of the investors behavior with regard to the progression
of regulation regimes. Based on our findings, we argue that the differences
among the levels and determinants of initial return, monthly return (intrinsic
value) and intramonth return (overreaction) in different time periods can be
largely explained by regulation regime changes along two dimensions: 1)
approval vs. registration and 2) listing day trading curbs and return limits.
We find that IPO pricing is demand-driven under the approval regime, but
value-driven under the registration regime. We further compare the impact of
regulation regime changes on ChiNext IPO pricing practice, and propose a future
research plan on ChiNext IPO pricing efficiency with policy implication.
