The price-leadership relationship between stock index futures and spot markets is crucial for assessing market efficiency and implementing risk management. Traditional Granger causality tests based on conditional methods cannot capture their nonlinear and time-varying characteristics. In this study, we innovatively construct a Granger causality testing framework based on distributional forecasting. By integrating nonlinear modeling, time-varying volatility estimation, and rolling-window distributional forecasting techniques, the framework identifies and characterizes the price-leadership mechanism from the perspective of out-of-sample forecast performance improvement. Monte Carlo simulations verify that the proposed test possesses desirable finite-sample properties. An empirical study of China’s CSI 300 stock index futures and spot markets reveals a significant bidirectional nonlinear leadership relationship with distinct time-varying features. Specifically, futures lead spot through linear information transmission with lags of three to four periods, whereas spot leads futures through a rapid one-period impact and continuous feedback with lags of three to four periods. The seemingly counter-intuitive three- to four-day lag is attributable to daily price limits, a retail-dominated investor structure, and arbitrage constraints. Cross-market transmission is dominated by linear spillovers, whereas nonlinear effects are primarily internalized within each market’s respective volatility structure. This study not only transcends the classical linear and static analysis paradigm but also provides new methodological support and a decision-making basis for optimizing dynamic hedging strategies and cross-market risk early warning.

1. [1] C. He, L. Zhang, and W. Chen, “Research on Price Discovery of HS300 Index Futures Based on High Frequencies Data,” J. Quant. Tech. Econ., Vol.28, No.5, pp. 139-151, 2011 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2011.05.010
2. [2] J. Yang, Z. Yang, and Y. Zhou, “Intraday price discovery and volatility transmission in stock index and stock index futures markets: Evidence from China,” J. Futures Mark., Vol.32, No.2, pp. 99-121, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1002/fut.20514
3. [3] K. Fang and Z. Cai, “Research on price discovery function of stock index futures in Chinese emerging market,” Stat. Res., Vol.29, No.5, pp. 73-78, 2012 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2012.05.010
4. [4] H. Zhao, X. Chen, and S. Huang, “Difference of information transmission between the Chinese stock and index futures markets,” Syst. Eng. Theory Pract., Vol.38, No.4, pp. 863-872, 2018 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.12011/1000-6788(2018)04-0863-10
5. [5] Z. Li, L. Bu, and Y. Hao, “Further discussion on price discovery function of Chinese stock index futures—Evidence from three listed species,” Financ. Trade Econ., Vol.2016, No.7, pp. 79-93, 2016 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.19795/j.cnki.cn11-1166/f.2016.07.006
6. [6] A. Ghedira and M. S. Nakhli, “Dynamic causality between oil prices and stock market indexes in Russia and China: Does US financial instability matter?,” Int. J. Emerg. Mark., Vol.19, No.11, pp. 4186-4203, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-06-2022-1018
7. [7] C. Diks and V. Panchenko, “A new statistic and practical guidelines for nonparametric Granger causality testing,” J. Econ. Dyn. Control, Vol.30, Nos.9-10, pp. 1647-1669, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2005.08.008
8. [8] N. Qiu, “General causality test based on improvement of Lasso,” Stat. Inf. Forum, Vol.2008, No.2, pp. 18-21+36, 2008 (in Chinese).
9. [9] X. Ren and W. Sun, “Asymmetric risk spillovers between the chinese stock market and index futures market based on Granger non-causality test in quantiles,” Oper. Res. Manag. Sci., Vol.30, No.8, pp. 190-197, 2021 (in Chinese).
10. [10] M. J. Kim and S. Y. Park, “Quantile causal relationship between Bitcoin and stock indices,” J. Asia Pac. Econ., Vol.30, No.3, pp. 812-828, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860.2024.2347481
11. [11] J. Zhang, J. Zhao, and C. C. Lee, “Asymmetric dynamics between cryptocurrency uncertainty and the oil and gold markets: Evidence from Granger causality in quantiles,” Appl. Econ., Vol.57, No.7, pp. 709-722, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2024.2305618
12. [12] C. W. J. Granger, “Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods,” Econometrica, Vol.37, No.3, pp. 424-438, 1969. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912791
13. [13] Y. Hong and H. Li, “Nonparametric specification testing for continuous-time models with applications to term structure of interest rates,” Rev. Financ. Stud., Vol.18, No.1, pp. 37-84, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhh006
14. [14] G. Amisano and R. Giacomini, “Comparing density forecasts via weighted likelihood ratio tests,” J. Bus. Econ. Stat., Vol.25, No.2, pp. 177-190, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1198/073500106000000332
15. [15] C. W. J. Granger, “Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification,” J. Econom., Vol.16, No.1, pp. 121-130, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(81)90079-8
16. [16] Y. Fang and X. W. Xie, “Research on nonlinear linkage effects in China’s multi-level capital markets: Also on the maturity of capital markets,” Econ. Sci., No.3, pp. 72-84, 2014 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.19523/j.jjkx.2014.03.006
17. [17] H. Liu and L. He, “The spatial network structure of China’s provincial economic growth: Reexamination based on nonlinear Granger causality test,” J. Financ. Econ., Vol.42, No.2, pp. 97-107, 2016 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.2016.02.009
18. [18] R. M. Xue, “The impact of price limit system on Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets,” Master’s thesis, North China University of Technology, 2009 (in Chinese).
19. [19] B. M. Barber and T. Odean, “All that glitters: The effect of attention and news on the buying behavior of individual and institutional investors,” Rev. Financ. Stud., Vol.21, No.2, pp. 785-818, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhm079
20. [20] A. Shleifer and R. W. Vishny, “The limits of arbitrage,” J. Financ., Vol.52, No.1, pp. 35-55, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03807.x