Corporate prediction markets: evidence from google, ford, and firm X

Bo Cowgill, Eric Zitzewitz
{"title":"Corporate prediction markets: evidence from google, ford, and firm X","authors":"Bo Cowgill, Eric Zitzewitz","doi":"10.1145/2600057.2602901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the popularity of prediction markets among economists, businesses and policymakers have been slow to adopt them in decision making. Most studies of prediction markets outside the lab are from public markets with large trading populations. Corporate prediction markets face additional issues, such as thin- ness, weak incentives, limited entry and the potential for traders with ulterior motives raising questions about how well these markets will perform. We examine data from prediction markets run by Google, Ford and Firm X (a large private materials company). Despite theoretically adverse conditions, we find these markets are relatively efficient, and improve upon the forecasts of experts at all three firms by as much as a 25% reduction in mean squared error. The most notable inefficiency is an optimism bias in the markets at Google and Ford. The inefficiencies that do exist generally become smaller over time. More experienced traders and those with higher past performance trade against the identified inefficiencies, suggesting that the markets efficiency improves because traders gain experience and less skilled traders exit the market.","PeriodicalId":203155,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM conference on Economics and computation","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"100","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM conference on Economics and computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2600057.2602901","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 100

Abstract

Despite the popularity of prediction markets among economists, businesses and policymakers have been slow to adopt them in decision making. Most studies of prediction markets outside the lab are from public markets with large trading populations. Corporate prediction markets face additional issues, such as thin- ness, weak incentives, limited entry and the potential for traders with ulterior motives raising questions about how well these markets will perform. We examine data from prediction markets run by Google, Ford and Firm X (a large private materials company). Despite theoretically adverse conditions, we find these markets are relatively efficient, and improve upon the forecasts of experts at all three firms by as much as a 25% reduction in mean squared error. The most notable inefficiency is an optimism bias in the markets at Google and Ford. The inefficiencies that do exist generally become smaller over time. More experienced traders and those with higher past performance trade against the identified inefficiencies, suggesting that the markets efficiency improves because traders gain experience and less skilled traders exit the market.
企业预测市场:来自谷歌、福特和X公司的证据
尽管预测市场在经济学家中很受欢迎,但企业和政策制定者在决策中采用预测市场的速度很慢。实验室之外对预测市场的大多数研究都来自拥有大量交易人口的公开市场。企业预测市场还面临着其他问题,比如市场规模小、激励机制弱、进入受限,以及可能出现别有用心的交易员,这些人会对这些市场的表现提出质疑。我们研究了由谷歌、福特和X公司(一家大型私人材料公司)运营的预测市场的数据。尽管理论上条件不利,但我们发现这些市场相对有效,并且在所有三家公司的专家预测的基础上,均方误差减少了25%。最显著的低效率是谷歌(Google)和福特(Ford)市场的乐观偏见。随着时间的推移,确实存在的低效率通常会变得越来越小。更有经验的交易者和那些过去表现更好的交易者在被确定的低效率下进行交易,这表明市场效率的提高是因为交易者获得了经验,而技能较差的交易者退出了市场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信