Whose Disagreement Matters? Household Belief Dispersion and Stock Trading Volume

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Li ◽  
Geng Li

Abstract Theoretical models have long recognized the role of investor disagreements in the marketplace, but little evidence is documented regarding how belief dispersion affects trading activities in the broad equity market. Using over three decades of data from a survey of US households, we introduced a novel measure of household macroeconomic belief dispersion and document its positive relationship with market-wide stock trading volume, even after controlling for an array of professional analysts’ belief dispersion. Results are more pronounced for the belief dispersion among households who are more likely to own stocks. Furthermore, we show that the household belief dispersion is priced in the cross-section of stock returns, whereas that among professional analysts is not.

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 149-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Copeland ◽  
Aaron Dolgoff ◽  
Alberto Moel

2004 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
pp. 397-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Lien ◽  
Li Yang

In this study, we investigate the daily relationships between returns on individual stocks and their corresponding futures contracts in Australian, Hong Kong, and United Kingdom markets. We find that, at the beginning of the life of a futures market, autocorrelation of futures returns is similar to that of individual stock returns. As the market becomes mature, the autocorrelation of futures returns behaves differently from the autocorrelation of stock returns. Through the linkage between return autocorrelations and trading volume, we find that a larger trading volume depresses the return autocorrelation and shrinks the differences of return autocorrelation between stock and its futures. In addition, futures trading volume has more significant impact on the patterns of return autocorrelations than the stock trading volume. The effect is non-linear in the sense that it is much more prominent during high futures trading periods. Summary of these findings suggests that the difference of return autocorrelations between an individual stock and its futures contract is due to low trading activities of futures.


1999 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven L. Heston ◽  
K. Geert Rouwenhorst ◽  
Roberto E. Wessels

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai-Magnus Schulte

Purpose – This study is the first to examine the role of idiosyncratic risk in the pricing of European real estate equities. The capital asset pricing model predicts that in equilibrium, investors should hold the market portfolio. As a result, investors should only be rewarded for carrying undiversifiable systematic risk and not for diversifiable idiosyncratic risk. The study is adding to the growing body of countering studies by first examining time trends of idiosyncratic risk and subsequently the pricing of idiosyncratic risk in European real estate equities. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – The study analyses 293 real estate equities from 16 European capital markets over the 1991-2011 period. The framework of Fama and MacBeth is employed. Regressions of the cross-section of expected equity excess returns on idiosyncratic risk and other firm characteristics such as beta, size, book-to-market equity (BE/ME), momentum, liquidity and co-skewness are performed. Due to recent evidence on the conditional pricing of European real estate equities, the pricing is also investigated using the conditional framework of Pettengill et al. Either realised or expected idiosyncratic volatility forecasted using a set of exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models are employed. Findings – The initial analysis of time trends in idiosyncratic risk reveals that while the early 1990s are characterised by both high total and idiosyncratic volatility, a strong downward trend emerged in 1992 which was only interrupted by the burst of the dotcom bubble and the 9/11 attacks along with the global financial and economic crisis. The largest part of total volatility is idiosyncratic and therefore firm-specific in nature. Simple cross-correlations indicate that high beta, small size, high BE/ME, low momentum, low liquidity and high co-skewness equities have higher idiosyncratic risk. While size and BE/ME are priced unconditionally from 1991 to 2011, both measures of idiosyncratic risk fail to achieve significance at reasonable levels. However, once conditioned on the general equity market or real estate equity market, a strong positive relationship between idiosyncratic risk and expected returns emerges in up-markets, while the opposite relationship exists in down-markets. The relationship is robust to firm-specific factors and a series of robustness checks. Research limitations/implications – The results show that ignoring the conditional relationship between idiosyncratic risk and returns might result in the false realisation that idiosyncratic risk does not matter in the pricing of risky (real estate) assets. Originality/value – This study is the first to examine the role of idiosyncratic risk in the pricing of European real estate equities. The study reveals differences in the pricing of European real estate equities and US REITs. The study highlights that ignoring the conditional relationship between idiosyncratic risk and returns might result in the false realisation that idiosyncratic risk does not matter in the pricing of risky assets.


Author(s):  
Yakov Amihud ◽  
Joonki Noh

Abstract Lou and Shu decompose Amihud’s illiquidity measure (ILLIQ) proposing that its component, the average of inverse dollar trading volume (IDVOL), is sufficient to explain the pricing of illiquidity. Their decomposition misses a component of ILLIQ that is related to illiquidity. We find that this component affects stock returns significantly, both in the cross-section and in time-series. We show that the ILLIQ premium is significantly positive after controlling for mispricing, sentiment, and seasonality. In addition, the aggregate market ILLIQ outperforms market IDVOL in estimating the effect of market illiquidity shocks on realized stock returns.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document