A New Method to Measure the Performance of Leveraged Exchange‐Traded Funds

We examine the effects of daily return compounding, financing costs, and management factors on the performance of leveraged exchange‐traded funds (LETFs) over various holding periods. We propose a new method to measure LETFs’ tracking errors that allows us to disentangle these effects. Our results show that the compounding effect generally has more influence on tracking errors than other factors, especially for long holding periods and in a “sideways” market. The explicit costs (i.e., the expense ratios) and other factors (e.g., financing costs) can materially affect the performance of LETFs, especially for those with high leverage ratios and bear funds.     

The pricing and performance of leveraged exchange-traded funds

Leveraged ETFs are a recent and very successful financial innovation. They provide daily returns that are in a multiple or a negative multiple of the daily returns on a market benchmark. In this paper, we examine the characteristics, trading statistics, pricing efficiency and tracking errors of a sample of leveraged ETFs. We find that these ETFs are traded mainly by retail traders with very short holding periods. Price deviations (from NAV) are small on average, but large premiums and discounts are prone to occur. More interestingly, the behavior of premiums is different between bull (i.e., those with a positive multiple) and bear ETFs (i.e., those with a negative multiple). Our findings are consistent with the argument that the end-of-day rebalancing of the funds’ exposures increases market volatility at the close of a trading day. As for tracking errors, they are small for holding periods of up to a week, but become increasingly larger for longer horizons.     

An experimental examination of the house money effect in a multi-period setting

There is evidence that risk-taking behavior is influenced by prior monetary gains and losses. When endowed with house money, people become more risk taking. This paper is the first to report a house money effect in a dynamic, financial setting. Using an experimental method, we compare market outcomes across sessions that differ in the level of cash endowment (low and high). Our experimental results provide support for a house money effect. Traders’ bids, price predictions, and market prices are influenced by the amount of money that is provided prior to trading. However, dynamic behavior is difficult to interpret due to conflicting influences. JEL Classification C91 · C92 · D80 The views expressed here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta or the Federal Reserve System.     

Margin,Short Selling,and Lotteries in Experimental Asset Markets

The robustness of bubbles and crashes in markets for assets with finite lives is perplexing. This paper reports the results of experimental asset markets in which participants trade two assets. In some markets, price bubbles form. In these markets, traders pay higher prices for the asset with lottery characteristics (i.e., a claim on a large, unlikely payoff). However, institutional design has a significant impact on deviations in prices from fundamental values, particularly for an asset with lottery characteristics. Price run-ups and crashes are moderated when traders finance purchases of the assets themselves and are allowed to short sell.