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.     

On the efficacy of stop-loss rules in the presence of overnight gaps

A stop-loss rule is a risk management tool whereby the investor predefines some condition that, upon being triggered by market dynamics, implies the liquidation of her outstanding position. Such a tool is widely used by practitioners in financial markets with the hope of improving their investment performance by cutting losses and consolidating gains. We analyze in this work the performance of four popular implementations of stop-loss rules applied to asset prices whose returns are modeled with consideration of overnight gaps, that is, jumps from the closing price of one day to the opening price of the next trading day. In addition, our models include acute momentary price drops (flash crashes), which are often believed to erode the performance gains that might be derived from stop-loss rules. For this analysis we consider different models of asset returns: random walk, autoregressive and regime-switching models. In addition, we test the performance of the considered stop-loss rules in a non-parametric, data-driven framework based on the stationary bootstrap. As a general conclusion we find that, even when including overnight gaps and flash crashes in our price models, in rising markets stop-loss rules improve the expected risk-adjusted return according to most metrics, while improving absolute expected return in falling markets. Furthermore, we find that in general the simple fixed percentage stop-loss rule may be, in risk-adjusted terms, the most powerful among the popular rules that this work considers.     

High Idiosyncratic Volatility and Low Returns: A Prospect Theory Explanation

The well‐documented negative relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns is puzzling if investors are risk‐averse. However, under prospect theory, while investors are risk‐averse in the domain of gains, they exhibit risk‐seeking behavior in the domain of losses. Consistent with risk‐seeking investors’ preference for high‐volatility stocks in the loss domain, we find that the negative relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns is concentrated in stocks with unrealized capital losses, but is nonexistent in stocks with unrealized capital gains. This finding is robust to control for short‐term return reversals and maximum daily return, among other variables.     

The capital gain lock-in effect with short sales constraints

This paper develops a post-tax asset pricing model under the assumption that investors cannot defer the taxation of capital gains by costlessly short selling tax exempt perfect substitute securities. Contrary to existing literature, it is demonstrated that trading rules of immediate realization of losses and voluntary deferral of gains may not be optimal. Further, equilibrium prices are shown to be higher for stocks held by investors with large accrued capital gains and lower for stocks held by investors with small accrued capital gains or losses.     

Short Interest and Lottery Stocks

We find short interest‐related mispricing is strongest in lottery stocks. As stocks become more lottery‐like, arbitrage risk increases, resulting in higher overpricing (underpricing) in high (low) relative short interest (RSI) stocks. Monthly portfolio alphas are –1.61% for high RSI lottery stocks, whereas high RSI stocks with the least lottery‐like attributes show statistically insignificant alphas. Among lightly shorted stocks, lottery securities exhibit monthly alphas of 1.80%. Thus, although lottery stocks as a group typically underperform, investors can earn positive abnormal returns in lightly shorted lottery stocks. Our results suggest that lottery stocks’ greater noise trader risk and higher transactions costs impedes arbitrage in short interest‐related mispricing.     

The tax-loss selling hypothesis,market liquidity,and price pressure around the turn-of-the-year

In this paper, we use intra-day data for all stocks listed on the ISSM and provide new and direct evidence consistent with the tax-loss selling hypothesis. We find that (a) there is abnormal selling pressure prior to the year-end for stocks that have experienced large capital losses in the current and prior years (b) investors delay realizing capital gain by postponing the sale of capital gain stocks until after the new year (c) there is a significant decrease in the average trade size for stocks with large capital losses before the year-end and for stocks with capital gains in the new year, which suggests that individuals, rather than institutional investors, are the major sellers around the year-end (d) the tax-loss selling hypothesis, and not firm size or share price, is the fundamental explanation for abnormal January returns. Further, small or low share priced firms with capital gains do not experience abnormal returns in January. However, conditional on capital losses, small or low share priced firms magnify the turn-of-the-year effect (e) On average, the increase in selling activity adversely affects market liquidity by increasing bid-ask spreads and reducing depths. (f) The tax-loss selling pressure not only causes the price to be at the bid at the year-end, it also temporarily depresses the equilibrium price indicating the short run demand curve is not perfectly elastic (g) the year-end buying activity suggests that large investors buy capital loss stocks prior to the year-end to take advantage of the temporarily depressed price and capital gain stocks after the new year to reinvest the proceeds of the tax-loss selling.     

Intraday dynamics of volatility and duration: Evidence from Chinese stocks

We propose a new joint model of intraday returns and durations to study the dynamics of several Chinese stocks. We include three U.S. stocks for comparison. Flexible innovation distributions are used for durations and returns, and the total variance of returns is decomposed into different volatility components associated with different transaction horizons. The new model provides strong improvements in density forecasts for duration and returns and only modest gains for points forecasts of the variance of returns. The conditional hazard functions are non-monotonic and there is strong evidence for different volatility components. Although diurnal patterns, volatility components, and market microstructure implications are similar across the markets, there are interesting differences. Durations for lightly traded Chinese stocks tend to carry more information than heavily traded stocks. Chinese investors usually have longer investment horizons, which may be explained by the specific trading rules in China.     

Capital Gains Tax Rules, Tax-loss Trading, and Turn-of-the-year Returns

Changes in the capital gains tax rules facing individual investors do not affect the incentives for "window dressing" by institutional investors, but they can affect the incentives for year-end tax-induced trading by individual investors. Empirical evidence for the 1963 to 1996 period suggests that when the tax law encouraged taxable investors who accrued losses early in the year to realize their losses before year-end, the correlation between early year losses and turn-of-the-year returns was weaker than when the law did not provide such an early realization incentive. These findings suggest that tax-loss trading contributes to turn-of-the-year return patterns.     

Who Gambles in the Stock Market?

This study shows that the propensity to gamble and investment decisions are correlated. At the aggregate level, individual investors prefer stocks with lottery features, and like lottery demand, the demand for lottery-type stocks increases during economic downturns. In the cross-section, socioeconomic factors that induce greater expenditure in lotteries are associated with greater investment in lottery-type stocks. Further, lottery investment levels are higher in regions with favorable lottery environments. Because lottery-type stocks underperform, gambling-related underperformance is greater among low-income investors who excessively overweight lottery-type stocks. These results indicate that state lotteries and lottery-type stocks attract very similar socioeconomic clienteles.     

Direct evidence of dividend tax clienteles

The paper is the first to evaluate the dividend tax clientele hypothesis using a data set of all domestic stock portfolios in the market. We find that investment funds that face a higher effective tax rate on dividend income than on capital gains tilt their portfolios away from dividend-paying stocks. These investors consequently earn a dividend yield that is about 35 basis points lower than that of investors who are tax neutral between dividends and capital gains (pension funds, unit-linked insurance, life insurance). Consistent with tax rules and charter provisions, we also find that private corporations prefer growth stocks, that foundations exhibit strong dividend preferences, and that partnerships rarely hold stocks portfolios.     

Left-tail momentum: Underreaction to bad news,costly arbitrage and equity returns

This paper documents a significantly negative cross-sectional relation between left-tail risk and future returns on individual stocks trading in the US and international countries. We provide a behavioral explanation to this anomaly based on the idea that investors underestimate the persistence in left-tail risk and overprice stocks with large recent losses. Thus, low returns in the left-tail of the distribution persist into the future causing left-tail return momentum. We find that the left-tail risk anomaly is stronger for stocks that are more likely to be held by retail investors, that receive less investor attention, and that are costlier to arbitrage.     

Leverage Is a Double-Edged Sword

We use proprietary data on intraday transactions at a futures brokerage to analyze how implied leverage influences trading performance. Across all investors, leverage is negatively related to performance, due partly to increased trading costs and partly to forced liquidations resulting from margin calls. Defining skill out-of-sample, we find that relative performance differentials across unskilled and skilled investors persist. Unskilled investors' leverage amplifies losses from lottery preferences and the disposition effect. Leverage stimulates liquidity provision by skilled investors, and enhances returns. Although regulatory increases in required margins decrease skilled investors' returns, they enhance overall returns, and attenuate return volatility.     

Foreign and Local Institutional Ownership and the Speed of Price Adjustment

Abstract:  This paper examines the relation between the speed of price adjustment and stock ownership by foreign and local institutional investors using data from the Korean stock market. We show that returns of stocks with high foreign institutional ownership lead returns of stocks with low foreign institutional ownership, especially after foreign ownership restriction is lifted. Likewise, returns of stocks with high local institutional ownership lead returns of stocks with low local institutional ownership. These results support the idea that foreign institutional (local institutional) investors have faster access to or processing power of new information than local institutional (local individual) investors.     

On the relationship between concentration of prospect theory/mental accounting investors,cointegration, and momentum

We examine the role of cointegration between stock prices and their estimated fundamental values in return momentum. We find that the positive relationship between capital gains overhang and future stock returns in Grinblatt and Han (2005) is significantly stronger among the “non-cointegrated” group of stocks as compared with the “cointegrated” group of stocks. Further, for the cointegrated stocks, the slower the speed of adjustment to the cointegrating equilibrium, the greater (smaller) is the future return of stocks with unrealized capital gains (losses). These findings are robust to various firm characteristics including firm size, book-to-market ratio, past returns, idiosyncratic volatility, dispersion in analysts’ earnings forecasts, turnover, individual investor ownership, and industry returns.     

How prior realized outcomes affect portfolio decisions

Investors have been shown to have particular preferences when it comes to the characteristics of stock they hold in their portfolios, while prior gains and losses have been shown to impact on individuals’ economic decisions, both in an investment context and more widely. This paper is the first to investigate how prior gains and losses affect investors’ preferences for particular stock characteristics and so shape their portfolio compositions. Using a rich dataset combination from China, we conclude that prior realized outcomes play an important role in shaping portfolio composition through their impact on the characteristics of stocks that investors choose to hold. We find that positive prior realized outcomes encourage investors to select stocks with a variety of characteristics broadly consistent with higher risk taking (for example, higher betas and higher levels of idiosyncratic risk), though there are some differences across investor classes. While our empirical results are in line with what one would expect from the existing literature on the disposition and house money effects, we also consider other possible interpretations of the results.     

Coexistence of disposition investors and momentum traders in stock markets: experimental evidence

Prior research documents that many investors disproportionately hold on to losing stocks while selling stocks which have gained in value. This systematic behavior is labeled as the “disposition effect”. The phenomenon can be explained by prospect theory's idea that subjects value gains and losses relative to a reference point like the purchase price (PP), and that they are risk-seeking in the domain of possible losses and risk-averse when a certain gain is obtainable. Our experiments were designed to test whether individual-level disposition effects attenuate or survive in a dynamic market setting. We analyze a series of 36 stock markets with 490 subjects. The majority of our investors demonstrate a strong preference for realizing winners (paper gains) rather than losers (paper losses). We adopt different reference points and compare the behavioral patterns across three main trading mechanisms, i.e. rules of price formation. The disposition effect is greatly reduced only within high-pressure mechanisms like a dealer market (DM) when the last price (LP) is assumed as a reference point, which is a more market driven (external) benchmark. If disposition investors use the PP as a reference point, which is a more mental-accounting driven (internal) benchmark, they die hard in all market settings. Interestingly, our markets do not collapse or become illiquid by disposition investors' reluctance to trade. A main reason for this is the coexistence of two or more groups of investors, e.g. momentum traders and disposition investors.     

Downside Risk

Economists have long recognized that investors care differentlyabout downside losses versus upside gains. Agents who placegreater weight on downside risk demand additional compensationfor holding stocks with high sensitivities to downside marketmovements. We show that the cross section of stock returns reflectsa downside risk premium of approximately 6% per annum. Stocksthat covary strongly with the market during market declineshave high average returns. The reward for beasring downsiderisk is not simply compensation for regular market beta, noris it explained by coskewness or liquidity risk, or by size,value, and momentum characteristics. (JEL C12, C15, C32, G12)     

Realization utility

A number of authors have suggested that investors derive utility from realizing gains and losses on assets that they own. We present a model of this “realization utility,” analyze its predictions, and show that it can shed light on a number of puzzling facts. These include the disposition effect, the poor trading performance of individual investors, the higher volume of trade in rising markets, the effect of historical highs on the propensity to sell, the individual investor preference for volatile stocks, the low average return of volatile stocks, and the heavy trading associated with highly valued assets.     

The turn-of-the-year effect and tax-loss-selling by institutional investors

Prior studies attribute the turn-of-the-year effect whereby small capitalization stocks earn unusually high returns in early January to tax-loss-selling by individual investors and window-dressing by institutional investors. My results suggest that a significant portion of the effect on turn-of-the-year returns that prior studies attribute to window-dressing is actually attributable to tax-loss-selling by institutional investors. Among small capitalization stocks, I find that institutional investors with strong tax incentives and weak window-dressing incentives realize significantly more losses in the fourth quarter than in the first three quarters of the calendar year, and that their fourth quarter realized losses have a significant impact on turn-of-the-year returns. A one percentage point change in these institutional investors' fourth quarter realized losses scaled by a firm's market capitalization results in an increase of 47 basis points in the firm's average daily return over the first three trading days of January, which represents a 46 percent change for the mean firm.     

On interpreting security returns during the ex-dividend period

In this paper we examine the ex-dividend day returns of several taxable and non-taxable distributions. The ex-dividend day returns for the taxable common stocks are consistent with the hypothesis that dividends are taxed more heavily than capital gains. However, the ex-dividend day returns of preferred stocks suggest that preferred dividends are taxed at a lower rate than capital gains; non-taxable stock dividends and splits are priced on ex-dividend days as if they are fully taxable; and non-taxable cash distributions are priced as if investors receive a tax rebate with them. We also find that each of these distributions exhibits abnormal return behavior for several days surrounding the ex-dividend day. We investigate several possible explanations for this anomaly, but none is capable of explaining the phenomenon.