锦标赛型效用,绝对累积季度内回报,机构反馈交易和回报自相关

IF 4.3 2区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Numan Ülkü , Justyna Dul
{"title":"锦标赛型效用,绝对累积季度内回报,机构反馈交易和回报自相关","authors":"Numan Ülkü ,&nbsp;Justyna Dul","doi":"10.1016/j.jbef.2024.101010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine the behavioral basis of Johnson’s (2016) model of competition among asset managers with tournament type utility, offered to explain short-horizon reversals in stock market returns. First, we report that the intriguing pattern -the absolute cumulative intra-quarter return <span><math><mrow><mfenced><mrow><msubsup><mrow><mi>r</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>t</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>Q</mi></mrow></msubsup></mrow></mfenced></mrow></math></span> drives negative autocorrelation in S&amp;P500 returns-, by which Johnson (2016) supports the disagreement-about-persistence (DAP) mechanism in his model, pervasively holds in international stock markets. In contrast, we find limited evidence of institutional trading behavior consistent with the DAP mechanism, using data with institutional trader identities from Finland and S&amp;P500 futures position data. The pattern’s association with the DAP mechanism is doubtful. We document a new empirical fact, which provides a more robust alternative explanation compatible with the pervasiveness of this pattern: <span><math><mrow><mfenced><mrow><msubsup><mrow><mi>r</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>t</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>Q</mi></mrow></msubsup></mrow></mfenced></mrow></math></span> drives the intensity of aggregate institutional positive feedback trading, which in turn drives time-variation in return autocorrelation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47026,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 101010"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tournament-type utility, absolute cumulative intra-quarter return, institutional feedback trading and return autocorrelation\",\"authors\":\"Numan Ülkü ,&nbsp;Justyna Dul\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbef.2024.101010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>We examine the behavioral basis of Johnson’s (2016) model of competition among asset managers with tournament type utility, offered to explain short-horizon reversals in stock market returns. First, we report that the intriguing pattern -the absolute cumulative intra-quarter return <span><math><mrow><mfenced><mrow><msubsup><mrow><mi>r</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>t</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>Q</mi></mrow></msubsup></mrow></mfenced></mrow></math></span> drives negative autocorrelation in S&amp;P500 returns-, by which Johnson (2016) supports the disagreement-about-persistence (DAP) mechanism in his model, pervasively holds in international stock markets. In contrast, we find limited evidence of institutional trading behavior consistent with the DAP mechanism, using data with institutional trader identities from Finland and S&amp;P500 futures position data. The pattern’s association with the DAP mechanism is doubtful. We document a new empirical fact, which provides a more robust alternative explanation compatible with the pervasiveness of this pattern: <span><math><mrow><mfenced><mrow><msubsup><mrow><mi>r</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>t</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>Q</mi></mrow></msubsup></mrow></mfenced></mrow></math></span> drives the intensity of aggregate institutional positive feedback trading, which in turn drives time-variation in return autocorrelation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance\",\"volume\":\"45 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101010\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214635024001254\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214635024001254","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们研究了Johnson(2016)的资产管理公司之间竞争模型的行为基础,该模型具有锦标赛型效用,用于解释股票市场回报的短期逆转。首先,我们报告了一个有趣的模式——季度内绝对累积回报rtQ驱动标准普尔500指数回报的负自相关——Johnson(2016)通过该模式支持其模型中关于持久性的分歧(DAP)机制,该模式在国际股票市场普遍存在。相比之下,我们发现机构交易行为与DAP机制一致的证据有限,使用来自芬兰的机构交易员身份数据和标普500期货头寸数据。该模式与DAP机制的关联值得怀疑。我们记录了一个新的经验事实,它提供了一个更强大的替代解释,与这种模式的普遍性相兼容:rtQ驱动总体机构正反馈交易的强度,这反过来又驱动回报自相关的时间变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tournament-type utility, absolute cumulative intra-quarter return, institutional feedback trading and return autocorrelation
We examine the behavioral basis of Johnson’s (2016) model of competition among asset managers with tournament type utility, offered to explain short-horizon reversals in stock market returns. First, we report that the intriguing pattern -the absolute cumulative intra-quarter return rtQ drives negative autocorrelation in S&P500 returns-, by which Johnson (2016) supports the disagreement-about-persistence (DAP) mechanism in his model, pervasively holds in international stock markets. In contrast, we find limited evidence of institutional trading behavior consistent with the DAP mechanism, using data with institutional trader identities from Finland and S&P500 futures position data. The pattern’s association with the DAP mechanism is doubtful. We document a new empirical fact, which provides a more robust alternative explanation compatible with the pervasiveness of this pattern: rtQ drives the intensity of aggregate institutional positive feedback trading, which in turn drives time-variation in return autocorrelation.
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
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
6.10%
发文量
75
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Behavioral and Experimental Finance represent lenses and approaches through which we can view financial decision-making. The aim of the journal is to publish high quality research in all fields of finance, where such research is carried out with a behavioral perspective and / or is carried out via experimental methods. It is open to but not limited to papers which cover investigations of biases, the role of various neurological markers in financial decision making, national and organizational culture as it impacts financial decision making, sentiment and asset pricing, the design and implementation of experiments to investigate financial decision making and trading, methodological experiments, and natural experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance welcomes full-length and short letter papers in the area of behavioral finance and experimental finance. The focus is on rapid dissemination of high-impact research in these areas.
×
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