Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Working Paper (4)
- Part of Periodical (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (11)
Keywords
- Household Finance (3)
- Disposition Effect (2)
- Investor Protection (2)
- Private Investment (2)
- Retail Investor (2)
- Consumer financial protection (1)
- Financial Market Cycles (1)
- Financial advice (1)
- Higher Moments of Return (1)
- Household finance (1)
We use data from a German online brokerage and a survey to show that retail investors sharply reduce risk-taking in response to nearby firm bankruptcies, which are not pre- dictive of returns. The effects on trading are spatially highly concentrated, immediate and not persistent. They seem to operate through more pessimistic expected returns and increased risk aversion and do not reflect wealth effects or changes in background risks. Investors learn about bankruptcies through immediate coverage in local newspapers. Our findings suggest that non-informative local experiences that make downside risks of stock investment more salient contribute to idiosyncratic short-term fluctuations in trading.
The disposition effect is implicitly assumed to be constant over time. However, drivers of the disposition effect (preferences and beliefs) are rather countercyclical. We use individual investor trading data covering several boom and bust periods (2001-2015). We show that the disposition effect is countercyclical, i.e. is higher in bust than in boom periods. Our findings are driven by individuals being 25% more likely to realize gains in bust than in boom periods. These changes in investors’ selling behavior can be linked to changes in investors’ risk aversion and in their beliefs across financial market cycles.
Smart(phone) investing? A within investor-time analysis of new technologies and trading behavior
(2021)
Using transaction-level data from two German banks, we study the effects of smartphones on investor behavior. Comparing trades by the same investor in the same month across different platforms, we find that smartphones increase purchasing of riskier and lottery-type assets and chasing past returns. After the adoption of smartphones, investors do not substitute trades across platforms and buy also riskier, lottery-type, and hot investments on other platforms. Using smartphones to trade specific assets or during specific hours contributes to explain our results. Digital nudges and the device screen size do not mechanically drive our results. Smartphone effects are not transitory.
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.
Using German and US brokerage data we find that investors are more likely to sell speculative stocks trading at a gain. Investors’ gain realizations are monotonically increasing in a stock’s speculativeness. This translates into a high disposition effect for speculative and a much lower disposition effect for non-speculative stocks. Our findings hold across asset classes (stocks, passive, and active funds) and explain cross-sectional differences in investor selling behavior which previous literature attributed primarily to investor demographics. Our results are robust to rank or attention effects and can be linked to realization utility and rolling mental account.
