Home-field advantage or a matter of ambiguity aversion? Local bias among German individual investors

This paper investigates whether familiarity induced by ambiguity aversion can help explaining the local bias phenomenon among individual investors. Using geographic closeness as a proxy for investor familiarity, we find that investors pull out of (unfamiliar) remote stocks and pour into (familiar) local stocks during times of increased market uncertainty. Moreover, the magnitude of this ‘flight to familiarity’ increases in the spread of an investor's ambiguity (about expected returns) between local and remote stocks. Our results prove robust to a number of alternative explanations of local bias. Specifically, we rule out a ‘home-field advantage’, where investors are able to translate information advantages about nearby companies into excess returns on their local stockholdings. We conclude that individual investors’ local bias is induced by ambiguity aversion in the portfolio selection process rather than a trading strategy based on superior information about local companies.     

Do Dividend Clienteles Exist? Evidence on Dividend Preferences of Retail Investors

We study stock holdings and trading behavior of more than 60,000 households and find evidence consistent with dividend clienteles. Retail investor stock holdings indicate a preference for dividend yield that increases with age and decreases with income, consistent with age and tax clienteles, respectively. Trading patterns reinforce this evidence: Older, low‐income investors disproportionally purchase stocks before the ex‐dividend day. Furthermore, among small stocks, the ex‐day price drop decreases with age and increases with income, consistent with clientele effects. Finally, consistent with the behavioral “attention” hypothesis, we document that older and low‐income investors purchase stocks following dividend announcements.     

Heterogeneity in asset allocation decisions: Empirical evidence from Switzerland

We analyze the heterogeneity in asset allocation decisions of different investor groups in response to changes in the macroeconomic environment. Using a new data set that includes the monthly portfolio holdings of private, commercial, and institutional investors deposited with Swiss banks, we estimate the relationship between equity and bond holdings and common business cycle indicators. Regression analysis indicates that private investors do not systematically move from stocks into bonds by selling stocks to institutional investors and purchasing bonds from them in adverse macroeconomic states. A VAR-error correction framework including cointegration and error correction restrictions suggests that the investment behavior of commercial investors leads and private investors follow in their investment decisions only slowly over time. The asset allocation decisions of institutional investors are not affected by the actions of private and commercial investors. Our results refute a principle of “institutional irrelevance”.     

Winners in the spotlight: Media coverage of fund holdings as a driver of flows

We show that media coverage of mutual fund holdings affects how investors allocate money across funds. Fund holdings with high past returns attract extra flows, but only if these stocks were recently featured in the media. In contrast, holdings that were not covered in major newspapers do not affect flows. We present evidence that media coverage tends to contribute to investors? chasing of past returns rather than facilitate the processing of useful information in fund portfolios. Our evidence suggests that media coverage can exacerbate investor biases and that it is the primary mechanism that makes fund window dressing effective.     

Investigation of investors' overconfidence, familiarity and socialization

This study, using a sample of New Zealand investors, investigates three behavioural finance theories: investor overconfidence, socialization and the familiarity effect. We find support for the investor overconfidence theory, using characteristics such as past success, optimism, confidence in one's abilities, investment experience and investment‐related knowledge. Concerning the socialization theory, we observe that the investors actively sought information regarding the stock market, 75 per cent doing this on a weekly basis. Those investors that kept themselves informed daily outperformed other investors by 8 per cent. The familiarity effect was confirmed, showing investors to hold a far too high proportion of local stocks, although the majority of investors believed international equity markets would provide returns that were either better or equal to New Zealand stocks.     

Institutional investors: Arbitrageurs or rational trend chasers

This paper studies the relationship between institutional investor holdings and stock misvaluation in the U.S. between 1980 and 2010. I find that institutional investors overweigh overvalued and underweigh undervalued stocks in their portfolio, taking the market portfolio as a benchmark. Cross-sectionally, institutional investors hold more overvalued stocks than undervalued stocks. The time-series studies also show that institutional ownership of overvalued portfolios increases as the portfolios' degree of overvaluation. As an investment strategy, institutional investors' ride of stock misvaluation is neither driven by the fund flows from individual investors into institutions, nor industry-specific. Consistent with the agency problem explanation, investment companies and independent investment advisors have a higher tendency to ride stock misvaluation than other institutions. There is weak evidence that institutional investors make a profit by riding stock misvaluation. My findings challenge the models that view individual investors as noise traders and disregard the role of institutional investors in stock market misvaluation.     

Local Does as Local Is: Information Content of the Geography of Individual Investors' Common Stock Investments

Using data on the investments a large number of individual investors made through a discount broker from 1991 to 1996, we find that households exhibit a strong preference for local investments. We test whether this locality bias stems from information or from simple familiarity. The average household generates an additional annualized return of 3.2% from its local holdings relative to its nonlocal holdings, suggesting that local investors can exploit local knowledge. Excess returns to investing locally are even larger among stocks not in the S&P 500 index (firms for which information asymmetries between local and nonlocal investors may be largest).     

Which institutional investor types are the most informed?

We examine the informativeness of quarterly disclosed portfolio holdings across four institutional investor types: hedge funds, mutual funds, pension funds and private banking firms. Overweight positions outperform underweight positions only for hedge funds. By decomposing holdings and stock returns, we find that hedge funds are superior to other institutional investors both at picking industries and stocks and that they are better at forecasting long‐term as well as short‐term returns. Furthermore, our results show that hedge funds, mutual funds and pension funds are able to successfully time the market. The outperformance of hedge funds is not explained by a liquidity premium.     

Are paper winners gamblers? Evidence from Australian retail investors

This study examines stock market gambling using a comprehensive set of investor characteristics and past portfolio performance measures. We find that retail investors overinvest in ‘lottery stocks’, stocks with gambling‐like properties. Significant portfolio underperformance is the result of gambling through lottery stocks. Investors are more likely to gamble following recent portfolio paper gains, regardless of realised performance, providing new evidence that paper gains trigger a house money effect. Investors trading greater values or holding more stocks, and older and female investors, are less likely to invest in lottery stocks.     

How Do Different Types of Investors React to New Earnings Information?

Abstract:   The purpose of this study is to investigate how different types of investors react to new earnings information. Using the extremely comprehensive official register of share holdings in Finland, we find that the majority of investors are more likely to sell (buy) stocks in a company after a positive (negative) earnings surprise and that they are biased towards buying after the disclosure of an annual report. Large investors show behaviour opposite to that of the majority of investors. We consider several possible explanations for this heterogeneous investor behaviour, of which differences in investor overconfidence emerges as the strongest candidate.     

Foreign institutional investors,information asymmetries,and asset valuation in emerging markets

This study investigates the effects of information asymmetries and asset valuation model differences (investor heterogeneity) between foreign and domestic investors on their distinct portfolio holdings in an emerging market setting. I argue that information asymmetry and investor heterogeneity views significantly interact in explaining the different asset allocation decisions of foreign and domestic investors. Employing a large dataset from Turkey, the findings suggest that both information asymmetry and investor heterogeneity view play a key role in explaining the investment decisions of different investor groups. Specifically, different from domestic investors, foreign investors are more likely to invest in firms with a higher global market performance which supports the investor heterogeneity view. However, this relationship only holds for firms with high information asymmetries. The difference in valuation models between foreign and domestic investors converge when asymmetric information problems between these investor groups weaken. This study contributes to the international finance literature by providing a new explanation of why foreign and domestic investors invest in different assets.     

When does attention matter? The effect of investor attention on stock market volatility around news releases

We empirically investigate how retail and institutional investor attention is related to the way stock markets process information. With a focus on 360 US stocks in the S&P 500 universe, our results show that higher retail investors’ attention around news releases increases the post-announcement stock return volatility, whereas institutional investor attention has a small but negative impact on volatility on days following news releases on average over the cross-section of companies. These findings are in line with the hypotheses that attention of retail investors slows price-adjustments to new information and attention of institutional investors results in the opposite reaction. We show that these effects are heterogeneous in the type of news and the topic of the information being released. A portfolio allocation application highlights that these results are not only statistically significant but also sizeable in economic terms and can lead to an overperformance as large as dozens of basis points.     

Returns,volatility and investor sentiment: Evidence from European stock markets

In this study, we show that patterns in returns behave as if investors, influenced by their level of optimism, selected stocks according to their volatility. Our goal is to confirm the contribution of behavioral finance while showing that investor sentiment can be profitably used by practitioners. We incorporate volatility in the relationship between investor sentiment and future returns, this is the main originality of our approach. Our methodology consists in comparing returns, volatility and higher-order moments of portfolios managed with investor sentiment against those obtained either with passive (buy and hold) portfolio management or with a minimum variance portfolio. Portfolios managed with investor sentiment have better returns and involve less risk under certain conditions.     

Performance Attribution of US Institutional Investors

Institutional investors play a prominent role in today's markets. Quarterly reported portfolio holdings make it possible to evaluate the risk-adjusted equity investment performance of all institutional investors in the United States during 1981–2002. The results indicate that institutional investors have been successful in managing client assets; they have added significant value by generating excess returns after controlling for underlying portfolio risk factors. Style choice is the main factor in determining overall portfolio performance, but institutional investors also displayed significant stock selection skills during the period. The stocks they choose for their portfolios have outperformed the stocks they exclude.     

Equilibrium Underdiversification and the Preference for Skewness

We develop a one-period model of investor asset holdings whereinvestors have heterogeneous preference for skewness. Introducingheterogeneous preference for skewness allows the model's investors,in equilibrium, to underdiversify. We find support for our model'sthree key implications using a dataset of 60,000 individualinvestor accounts. First, we document that the portfolio returnsof underdiversified investors are substantially more positivelyskewed than those of diversified investors. Second, we showthat the apparent mean-variance inefficiency of underdiversifiedinvestors can be largely explained by the fact that investorssacrifice mean-variance efficiency for higher skewness exposure.Furthermore, we show that idiosyncratic skewness, and not justcoskewness, can impact equilibrium prices. Third, the underdiversificationof investors does not appear to be coincidentally related toskewness. Stocks most often selected by underdiversified investorshave substantially higher average skewness—especiallyidiosyncratic skewness—than stocks most often selectedby diversified investors.     

Market Segmentation and Cross‐predictability of Returns

We present evidence supporting the hypothesis that due to investor specialization and market segmentation, value‐relevant information diffuses gradually in financial markets. Using the stock market as our setting, we find that (i) stocks that are in economically related supplier and customer industries cross‐predict each other's returns, (ii) the magnitude of return cross‐predictability declines with the number of informed investors in the market as proxied by the level of analyst coverage and institutional ownership, and (iii) changes in the stock holdings of institutional investors mirror the model trading behavior of informed investors.     

Do locals know better? A comparison of the performance of local and foreign institutional investors

We compare the performance of local versus foreign institutional investors using a comprehensive data set of equity holdings in 32 countries during the 2000–2010 period. We find that foreign institutions perform as well as local institutions on average, but only domestic institutions show a trading pattern consistent with an information advantage. Our results suggest a smart-money effect of local institutions in countries subject to higher information asymmetry, non-English speaking countries, countries with less efficient stock markets, with poor investor protection, or high levels of corruption. The local advantage is more pronounced in periods of market turmoil and in illiquid stocks.     

The Effect of Fiduciary Standards on Institutions' Preference for Dividend‐Paying Stocks

Many researchers apparently believe that some institutional investors prefer dividend‐paying stocks because they are subject to the “prudent man” (PM) standard of fiduciary responsibility, under which dividend payments provide prima facie evidence that an investment is prudent. Although this was once accurate for many institutions, during the 1990s most states replaced the PM standard with the less‐stringent “prudent investor” (PI) rule, which evaluates the appropriateness of each investment in a portfolio context. Controlling for the general decline in dividend‐paying stocks, we find that institutions reduced their holdings of dividend‐paying stocks by 2% to 3% as the PI standard spread during the 1990s. Studies of asset pricing and corporate governance should no longer consider dividend payments when evaluating the actions of institutional investors.     

Institutional trading,investor sentiment,and lottery-like stock preferences

This paper explores the time-varying institutional investor preference for lottery-like stocks. On average, institutional investor holdings reflect an aversion to lottery-like stocks. However, I find that an institutions’ aversion to lottery-like stocks is reduced when investor sentiment is low. Moreover, I find that during low sentiment periods, institutional investors have abnormally high trading profits in more positively skewed stocks. These results suggest that institutions reduce their aversion toward lottery-like stocks during low sentiment periods to profitably trade in lottery-like stocks.     

Expected Mispricing: The Joint Influence of Accounting Transparency and Investor Base

We examine how accounting transparency and investor base jointly affect financial analysts' expectations of mispricing (i.e., expectations of stock price deviations from fundamental value). Within a range of transparency, these two factors interactively amplify analysts' expectations of mispricing—analysts expect a larger positive deviation when a firm's disclosures more transparently reveal income‐increasing earnings management and the firm's most important investors are described as transient institutional investors with a shorter‐term horizon (low concentration in holdings, high portfolio turnover, and frequent momentum trading) rather than dedicated institutional investors with a longer‐term horizon (high concentration in holdings, low portfolio turnover, and little momentum trading). Results are consistent with analysts anticipating that transient institutional investors are more likely than dedicated institutional investors to adjust their trading strategies for near‐term factors affecting stock mispricings. Our theory and findings extend the accounting disclosure literature by identifying a boundary condition to the common supposition that disclosure transparency necessarily mitigates expected mispricing, and by providing evidence that analysts' pricing judgments are influenced by their anticipation of different investors' reactions to firm disclosures.