An Action – Identifying Noise Traders Entering the Market with Google and Twitter

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolin Hartmann ◽  
Hans-Peter Burghof ◽  
Marc Mehlhorn
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paritosh Chandra Sinha ◽  
Santanu Kumar Ghosh ◽  
Samapti Chatterjee

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 2697-2727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolae Gârleanu ◽  
Stavros Panageas ◽  
Jianfeng Yu

Abstract We propose a tractable model of an informationally inefficient market featuring nonrevealing prices, general preferences and payoff distributions, but not noise traders. We show the equivalence between our model and a substantially simpler one in which investors face distortionary investment taxes depending on both their identity and the asset class. This equivalence allows us to account for such phenomena as underdiversification. We further employ the model to assess approaches to performance evaluation and find that it provides a theoretical basis for some intuitive practices, such as style analysis, that have been adopted by finance professionals. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 1165-1182
Author(s):  
Scott B. Beyer ◽  
J. Christopher Hughen ◽  
Robert A. Kunkel

PurposeThe authors examine the relation between noise trading in equity markets and stochastic volatility by estimating a two-factor jump diffusion model. Their analysis shows that contemporaneous price deviations in the derivatives market are statistically significant in explaining movements in index futures prices and option-market volatility measures.Design/methodology/approachTo understand the impact noise may have in the S&P 500 derivatives market, the authors first measure and evaluate the influence noise exerts on futures prices and then investigate its influence on option volatility.FindingsIn the period from 1996 to 2003, this study finds significant changes in the volatility and mean reversion in the noise level and a significant increase in its relation to implied volatility in option prices. The results are consistent with a bubble in technology stocks that occurred with significant increases in noise trading.Research limitations/implicationsThis study provides estimates for this model during the periods preceding and during the technology bubble. The study analysis shows that the volatility and mean reversion in the noise level are much stronger during the bubble period. Furthermore, the relation between noise trading and implied volatility in the futures market was of a significantly larger magnitude during this period. The study results support the importance of noise trading in market bubbles.Practical implicationsBloomfield, O'Hara and Saar (2009) find that noise traders lower bid–ask spreads and improve liquidity through increases in trading volume and market depth. Such improved market conditions could have positive effects on market quality, and this impact could be evidenced by lower implied volatility when noise traders are more active. Indeed, the results in this study indicate that the level and characteristics of noise trading are fundamentally different during the technology bubble, and this noise trading activity has a larger impact during this period on implied volatility in the options market.Originality/valueThis paper uniquely analyzes derivatives on the S&P 500 Index in order to detect the presence and influence of noise traders. The authors derive and implement a two-factor jump diffusion noise model. In their model, noise rectifies the difference of analysts' opinions, market information and beliefs among traders. By incorporating a reduced-form temporal expression of heterogeneities among traders, the model is rich enough to capture salient time-series characteristics of equity prices (i.e. stochastic volatility and jumps). A singular feature of the authors’ model is that stochastic volatility represents the random movements in asset prices that are attributed to nonmarket fundamentals.


10.3386/w2395 ◽  
1987 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Bradford De Long ◽  
Andrei Shleifer ◽  
Lawrence Summers ◽  
Robert Waldmann

2020 ◽  
Vol 07 (04) ◽  
pp. 2050043
Author(s):  
Mohamed Marouen Amiri ◽  
Kamel Naoui ◽  
Abdelkader Derbali ◽  
Mounir Ben Sassi

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the risk-return tradeoff allowing for the presence of noise traders, i.e., a subset of investors who either base their trading strategies on sentiment or hold unjustified optimistic/pessimistic views regarding market prospects. We measure noise traders’ sentiment relying on two sets of indices, namely the Baker and Wurgler sentiment index and the Michigan Consumer Confidence Index, in the US stock market. Under the assumption of the presence of noise traders’ sentiment, the risk-return tradeoff is tested through two sets of models: Merton’s Intertemporal CAPM and the GARCH-in-mean model. First, we find that the relationship between risk and return allowing for the presence of noise trader risk as measured by the Baker and Wurgler sentiment index is positive and statistically significant when tested through Merton’s Intertemporal CAPM. Second, the risk-return tradeoff tested through GARCH-in-mean models augmented by noise traders’ risk as measured through survey-based measures of sentiment establishes no clear evidence for a significant mean–variance relationship. Overall, we confirm Merton’s (1973) hypothesis that the more risk an investor bears, the greater his expected returns. This paper contributes to the asset pricing literature by trying to shed some light on the risk-return tradeoff from the standpoint of behavioral finance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document