Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (21) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (21)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (21)
Keywords
- Consumer financial protection (1)
- Financial advice (1)
- Household finance (1)
- Individual investor (1)
- Inducements (1)
Institute
ROBO-ADVICE HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DISRUPT THE MARKET FOR FINANCIAL ADVICE. ALGORITHMS ALREADY DELIVER LOW-COST, AUTOMATIC, AND STANDARDIZED INVESTMENT GUIDANCE TO CLIENTS FROM ALL WEALTH LEVELS AND ESPECIALLY TO THOSE PREVIOUSLY EXCLUDED FROM PERSONAL FACE-TO-FACE ADVICE. TODAY’S OFFERINGS CONCENTRATE ON CONVENIENCE AND COMPLEXITY REDUCTION, COUPLED WITH PASSIVE INVESTMENTS. THE NEXT STEP WILL ADVANCE ALGORITHMS TO DELIVER TAILOR-MADE DECISION SUPPORT FOR THE GROWING NUMBER OF SELF-DIRECTED INVESTORS. THIS ARTICLE PRESENTS REAL-LIFE EMPIRICAL RESULTS ON THE INTRODUCTION OF A PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION TOOL THAT GUIDES BROKERAGE CLIENTS TOWARDS INDIVIDUAL OPTIMAL PORTFOLIOS.
What does your personality reveal about your financial behavior? Evidence from a FinTech experiment
(2022)
We co-operate with a German financial account aggregator (FAA) and conduct a personality survey with 1,700 app users. We combine the survey results with their anonymized transaction data and investigate links between personality traits and spending behavior. Observing many lottery windfalls in our dataset and treating these incidents as real-life experiments, we ask: what do individuals do with unexpected income changes? Our findings suggest that highly extraverted individuals tend to overspend in response to lottery windfalls.
WE STUDY REDISTRIBUTIVE EFFECTS OF INFLATION USING A RANDOMIZED INFORMATION EXPERIMENT ON BANK CLIENTS. ON AVERAGE, INDIVIDUALS ARE WELL INFORMED ABOUT CURRENT INFLATION AND ARE CONCERNED ABOUT ITS IMPACT ON WEALTH. YET, MOST INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT AWARE OF HOW INFLATION ERODES NOMINAL POSITIONS. ONCE THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION ON THIS EROSION CHANNEL, THEY UPDATE PERCEPTIONS AND EXPECTATIONS ABOUT OWN NET NOMINAL POSITIONS. LEARNING ABOUT THE INFLATION-INDUCED EROSION OF NOMINAL POSITIONS CAUSALLY AFFECTS CHOICES IN HYPOTHETICAL REAL-ESTATE TRANSACTIONS AND ACTUAL CONSUMPTION. THE FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT HOUSEHOLD WEALTH MEDIATES THE SENSITIVITY OF CONSUMPTION TO INFLATION ONCE HOUSEHOLDS ARE AWARE OF THE BALANCE-SHEET EFFECTS OF INFLATION.
INDIVIDUALS WITH LOWER SELF-CONTROL OFTEN FAIL IN STICKING TO THEIR PLANS WHEN FACING STRONG TEMPTATIONS. ARE THEY ALSO PRONE TO EXHIBIT INVESTMENT BIASES AND SHOW A MORE IMPULSIVE TRADING BEHAVIOR WHILE FORFEITING POTENTIAL PERFORMANCE IN A FINANCIAL CONTEXT? WE USE CIGARETTE ADDICTION, IDENTIFIED THROUGH CHECKING ACCOUNT TRANSACTIONS, AS A PROXY FOR LOW SELFCONTROL AND COMPARE THE INVESTMENT BEHAVIOR OF SMOKERS TO THAT OF NONSMOKERS TO ADDRESS THIS QUESTION EMPIRICALLY.
RECENTLY, PASSIVE ETFS AND INDEX FUNDS HAVE BECOME POPULAR AMONG INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS. IN OUR STUDY, WE INVESTIGATE WHETHER INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS BENEFIT FROM USING THEM. WITH DATA FROM ONE OF THE LARGEST BROKERAGES IN GERMANY, WE FIND THAT INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS WORSEN THEIR PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE AFTER USING THESE PRODUCTS IN COMPARISON TO NON-USERS. SINCE THESE SECURITIES MAKE MARKET TIMING EASIER, FURTHER ANALYSIS REVEALS THAT THE DECREASE IN USERS’ PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE IS PRIMARILY DUE TO BAD MARKET TIMING.
THIS STUDY INVESTIGATES WHAT HAPPENS WHEN RETAIL CUSTOMERS ARE OFFERED FREE AND UNBIASED ADVICE. USING A LARGE FIELD EXPERIMENT IT SHOWS THAT THOSE WHO ACCEPT THE OFFER (5%) ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE MALE, OLDER, WEALTHIER, MORE EXPERIENCED AND MORE FINANCIALLY SOPHISTICATED. HOWEVER, EVEN THOUGH THE ADVICE WOULD HAVE HELPED, IT ACTUALLY LARGELY FAILED TO HELP BECAUSE THE CUSTOMERS DID NOT LISTEN TO IT. OVERALL, OUR RESULTS SUGGEST THAT THE MERE AVAILABILITY OF UNBIASED FINANCIAL ADVICE IS A NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR BENEFITING RETAIL CUSTOMERS.
WE DECOMPOSE INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS’ PORTFOLIO RETURNS INTO PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS, ACTIVE SECURITY SELECTION RETURNS, AND ACTIVE MARKET TIMING RETURNS. FOR THE AVERAGE INVESTOR IN OUR SAMPLE, PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS EXPLAIN SOME 40% OF VARIATION IN LONGITUDINAL PORTFOLIO RETURNS, SECURITY SELECTION EXPLAINS AN ADDITIONAL 50%, AND MARKET TIMING PLAYS ONLY A MINOR ROLE. THIS STANDS IN STARK CONTRAST TO EARLIER RESULTS ON INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS WHERE PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS (REFLECTING DIFFERENT ASSET ALLOCATION STRATEGIES) EXPLAIN OVER 90%. THE PREDOMINANCE OF SECURITY SELECTION COMES AT A COST FOR INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS: INVESTORS FROM THE HIGHEST QUINTILE IN TERMS OF SECURITY SELECTION ACTIVITY UNDERPERFORM THEIR PEERS FROM THE LOWEST QUINTILE BY MORE THAN 10 PERCENTAGE POINTS PER YEAR. TRANSACTION COSTS EXPLAIN ONLY PART OF THIS UNDERPERFORMANCE. THE LESS INVESTORS DIVERSIFY, THE WORSE THEY DO.