1 / 19

1. ANOMALIES

1. ANOMALIES. Excessive Volatility Robert J. Shiller (1981) The American Economic Review Do stock prices move too much to be justified by subsequent changes in dividends? . Summary :

keran
Télécharger la présentation

1. ANOMALIES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 1. ANOMALIES

  2. ExcessiveVolatilityRobert J. Shiller (1981) The American Economic ReviewDo stock prices move too much to be justified by subsequent changes in dividends? Summary: Stock prices volatility is greater than can be justified by fundamentals (i.e. a new info about change in dividends) Purpose: What accounts for movements in stock prices? theremay be a human element addingtovolatility

  3. High volatility of stock market prices compared to fundamental prices

  4. Short-term momentum Positive short-term (6-12 months) autocorrelation in stock returns (underreaction) – news is incorporated slowly into prices Momentum Strategies: (To exploit short lags) • Create zero-cost arbitrage portfolios by buying most winners and selling most losers of the past 3-12 months, hold them for the next 3-12 months. • Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) and Rauwenhorst (1998): report around 1% monthly average excess returns to this strategy.

  5. Long-term reversal Negative long-term (3-5 years) autocorrelation in stock returns Contrarian Strategies: (To exploit long lags) Buy most losers and sell most winners of the past 3-5 years, hold the portfolio for the next 3-5 years. DeBondtand Thaler (1985) report significantly positive returns to this strategy Yesterday's top performers become tomorrow's underperformers, and vice versa. Short-lag positive and long-lag negative autocorrelation in Rtseries are a violation of weak form of efficiency.

  6. TheProfitabilityof Technical Analysis (Trends, Trend Reversals): Itmay be possibletomakemoneybyfollowingtrends. IPO Stocks’ Underperformance Ritter(1991): IPO stocksyieldbelow normal returnsin the 36 monthsfollowingthe IPO. Investorsbecome too optimistic about IPO firms, inflating the initial IPO return (buy at a high price, stocks later underperform)

  7. Facebook IPO

  8. 2. Behavioral Theories Designed to Explain These Anomalies…

  9. Barberis, Shleifer, Vishy (BSV)Journal of Financial Economics (1998)A model of investor sentiment • Underreaction due to Conservatism bias: • Individuals are slow to change their beliefs in the face of new evidence • Information is reflected step-by-step in prices rather than in a single step • Stock prices underreact to earnings announcements • This creates positive short-term autocorrelation in returns and explains the profitability of momentum rule

  10. Barberis, Shleifer, Vishy (BSV)Journal of Financial Economics (1998)A model of investor sentiment • Overreaction due to Representativeness Bias: Tendency of people to underweight statistical properties of population/see patterns in random sequences/reemphasize the most recent and salient

  11. Representativeness Bias • Investor might think that high earnings growth of a company is trending (when it is not) and overvalues the company • Stock prices overreact to consistent patterns of good/bad news, creating excessive volatility (continuing trends, then reversals) • This explains negative long-term autocorrelation in returns and profitability of contrarian strategy

  12. Effect on the market • Conservatism + Representativeness Bias: • Short-run momentum (continuation) • Long-run reversal

  13. Daniel, Hirshleifer, SubrahmanyamThe Journal of Finance (1998)DHS model Overconfidence: An investor tends to be overconfident about the information he has generated but NOT about public signals. Biased self-attribution: When confirming public information is received – investor’s confidence rises. When disconfirming public information is received – investor’s confidence falls only modestly, if at all.

  14. OVERREACTION to private information And UNDERREACTION to public information Q: HOW DO THESE BIASES AFFECT MARKET BEHAVIOR? Tend to produce: • Short-run momentum • Long-run reversals E.g. Bubbles

  15. 3. DEBATE

  16. Shleifer and Summers Journal of Economic Perspective(1990)The Noise Trader Approach to Finance Efficient markets approach: Random trades SHOULD cancel out. Noise Trader approach: Random trades DO NOT cancel out.  Movements in investor sentiment are an important determinant of prices

  17. Fama’s critique of behavioral theoriesMarket efficiency, long-term returns, and behavioral finance (1998), Journal of Financial Economics • Long-term return anomalies – NO EVIDENCE AGAINST EFFICIENT MARKET THEORY • anomalies are chance results, underreactions are equally likely as overreactions, so they cancel each other out • unpredictability of behavioral facts • methodology problem • temporarityof behavioral facts

  18. Thaler (1999)The End of Behavior Finance“After all, to do otherwise would be irrational “ • Evidence that should worry the efficient market advocates • Volume • Volatility • Predictability Fama 1970/1991 • Dividents (MM - 1958) • Why do most large companies pay cash dividends? • And why do stock prices rise when dividends are initiated or increased? • “Behavioral finance" will be correctly viewed as a redundant phrase • “After all, to do otherwise [not include the human factor in trading ] would be irrational “

  19. Summary of Behavioral Finance Theories in ONE formula:

More Related