个人投资者还是机构投资者是泡沫的推动者?‎

J. Choi, Haim Kedar-Levy, S. Yoo
{"title":"个人投资者还是机构投资者是泡沫的推动者?‎","authors":"J. Choi, Haim Kedar-Levy, S. Yoo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2023766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Behavioral bubble models typically assume that uninformed trend-chasers, presumably individual investors, cause bubbles, while informed contrarian investors such as institutions, trade against bubbles. DeLong et al. (1990a) highlight that to be considered a “bubble”, the mis-pricing must prevail in a large, diversified portfolio. To meet this criterion, we use a unique dataset of all transactions by investor type for all non-financial Korean firms, and find evidence at odds with such assumptions. Domestic individual investors systematically apply aggressive contrarian trades, while foreign and some domestic institutions are mostly trend-chasers. These findings suggest that institutional investors rather than individuals are agents of bubbles.","PeriodicalId":431629,"journal":{"name":"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics eJournal","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are Individual or Institutional Investors the Agents of ‎Bubbles?‎\",\"authors\":\"J. Choi, Haim Kedar-Levy, S. Yoo\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2023766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Behavioral bubble models typically assume that uninformed trend-chasers, presumably individual investors, cause bubbles, while informed contrarian investors such as institutions, trade against bubbles. DeLong et al. (1990a) highlight that to be considered a “bubble”, the mis-pricing must prevail in a large, diversified portfolio. To meet this criterion, we use a unique dataset of all transactions by investor type for all non-financial Korean firms, and find evidence at odds with such assumptions. Domestic individual investors systematically apply aggressive contrarian trades, while foreign and some domestic institutions are mostly trend-chasers. These findings suggest that institutional investors rather than individuals are agents of bubbles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":431629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2023766\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2023766","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

行为泡沫模型通常假设,不知情的趋势追逐者(大概是个人投资者)造成了泡沫,而知情的反向投资者(如机构)则在做逆泡沫交易。DeLong等人(1990a)强调,要被认为是“泡沫”,错误定价必须在一个大型的、多元化的投资组合中普遍存在。为了满足这一标准,我们使用了所有非金融韩国公司按投资者类型划分的所有交易的独特数据集,并找到了与此类假设不一致的证据。国内个人投资者系统地进行激进的反向交易,而国外和一些国内机构大多是趋势追逐者。这些发现表明,机构投资者而不是个人是泡沫的推动者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are Individual or Institutional Investors the Agents of ‎Bubbles?‎
Behavioral bubble models typically assume that uninformed trend-chasers, presumably individual investors, cause bubbles, while informed contrarian investors such as institutions, trade against bubbles. DeLong et al. (1990a) highlight that to be considered a “bubble”, the mis-pricing must prevail in a large, diversified portfolio. To meet this criterion, we use a unique dataset of all transactions by investor type for all non-financial Korean firms, and find evidence at odds with such assumptions. Domestic individual investors systematically apply aggressive contrarian trades, while foreign and some domestic institutions are mostly trend-chasers. These findings suggest that institutional investors rather than individuals are agents of bubbles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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