Forecasting returns instead of prices exacerbates financial bubbles
Tóm tắt
Expectations of future returns are pivotal for investors’ trading decisions, and are therefore an important determinant of the evolution of actual returns. Evidence from individual choice experiments with exogenously given time series of returns suggests that subjects’ return forecasts are substantially affected by how they are elicited and by the format in which subjects receive information about past asset performance. In order to understand the impact of these effects found at the individual level on market dynamics, we consider a learning to forecast experiment where prices and returns are endogenously determined and depend directly upon subjects’ forecasts. We vary both the variable (prices or returns) subjects observe and the variable (prices or returns) they have to forecast, with the same underlying data generating process for each treatment. Although there is no significant effect of the presentation format of past information, we do find that markets are significantly more unstable when subjects have to forecast returns instead of prices. Our results therefore show that the elicitation format may exacerbate, or even create, bubbles and crashes in financial markets.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Amromin, G., & Sharpe, S. A. (2014). From the horse’s mouth: Economic conditions and investor expectations of risk and return. Management Science, 60(4), 845–866.
Andreassen, P. B. (1987). On the social psychology of the stock market: Aggregate attributional effects and the regressiveness of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 490.
Andreassen, P. B. (1988). Explaining the price-volume relationship: The difference between price changes and changing prices. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41(3), 371–389.
Andreassen, P. B., & Kraus, S. J. (1990). Judgmental extrapolation and the salience of change. Journal of Forecasting, 9(4), 347–372.
Anufriev, M., Bao, T., Sutan, A., & Tuinstra, J. (2019). Fee structure and mutual fund choice: An experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 158, 449–474.
Arifovic, J., & Petersen, L. (2017). Stabilizing expectations at the zero lower bound: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 82, 21–43.
Bacchetta, P., Mertens, E., & Van Wincoop, E. (2009). Predictability in financial markets: What do survey expectations tell us? Journal of International Money and Finance, 28(3), 406–426.
Bao, T., & Hommes, C. (2019). When speculators meet suppliers: Positive versus negative feedback in experimental housing markets. Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 107, 103730.
Bao, T., Hommes, C., & Makarewicz, T. (2017). Bubble formation and (in) efficient markets in learning-to-forecast and optimise experiments. The Economic Journal, 127(605), F581–F609.
Bao, T., Hommes, C., Sonnemans, J., & Tuinstra, J. (2012). Individual expectations, limited rationality and aggregate outcomes. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 36(8), 1101–1120.
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Fuster, A., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2013). What goes up must come down? Experimental evidence on intuitive forecasting. American Economic Review, 103(3), 570–74.
Borsboom, C., & Zeisberger, S. (2020). What makes an investment risky? An analysis of price path characteristics. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 169, 92–125.
Branch, W. (2004). The theory of rationally heterogeneous expectations: Evidence from survey data on inflation expectations. Economic Journal, 114, 592–621.
Carlé, T. A., Lahav, Y., Neugebauer, T., & Noussair, C. N. (2019). Heterogeneity of beliefs and trade in experimental asset markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 54(1), 215–245.
Carroll, C. D. (2003). Macroeconomic expectations of households and professional forecasters. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 269–298.
Case, K. E., Shiller, R. J., & Thompson, A. (2012). What have they been thinking? Home buyer behavior in hot and cold markets. In Brooking papers on economic activity, pages 265–315.
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2009). Reinforcement learning and savings behavior. The Journal of Finance, 64(6), 2515–2534.
Czaczkes, B., & Ganzach, Y. (1996). The natural selection of prediction heuristics: Anchoring and adjustment versus representativeness. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(2), 125–139.
Diacon, S., & Hasseldine, J. (2007). Framing effects and risk perception: The effect of prior performance presentation format on investment fund choice. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(1), 31–52.
Dwyer, G. P., Williams, A. W., Battalio, R. C., & Mason, T. I. (1993). Tests of rational expectations in a stark setting. The Economic Journal, 103(418), 586–601.
Forsberg, L., & Ghysels, E. (2007). Why do absolute returns predict volatility so well? Journal of Financial Econometrics, 5(1), 31–67.
Frankel, J., & Froot, K. (1987). Using survey data to test standard propositions regarding exchange-rate expectations. American Economic Review, 77, 133–153.
Füllbrunn, S., Huber, C., Eckel, C., & Weitzel, U. (2023). Heterogeneity of beliefs and trading behavior: A reexamination. Forthcoming in the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002210902300011X
Ghysels, E., Santa-Clara, P., & Valkanov, R. (2006). Predicting volatility: getting the most out of return data sampled at different frequencies. Journal of Econometrics, 131(1–2), 59–95.
Glaser, M., Iliewa, Z., & Weber, M. (2019). Thinking about prices versus thinking about returns in financial markets. Journal of Finance, 74(6), 2997–3039.
Glaser, M., Langer, T., Reynders, J., & Weber, M. (2007). Framing effects in stock market forecasts: The difference between asking for prices and asking for returns. Review of Finance, 11(2), 325–357.
Greenwood, R., & Shleifer, A. (2014). Expectations of returns and expected returns. The Review of Financial Studies, 27(3), 714–746.
Grosshans, D., & Zeisberger, S. (2018). All’s well that ends well? On the importance of how returns are achieved. Journal of Banking & Finance, 87, 397–410.
Hanaki, N., Akiyama, E., & Ishikawa, R. (2018). Effects of different ways of incentivizing price forecasts on market dynamics and individual decisions in asset market experiments. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 88, 51–69.
Heemeijer, P., Hommes, C., Sonnemans, J., & Tuinstra, J. (2009). Price stability and volatility in markets with positive and negative expectations feedback: An experimental investigation. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 33(5), 1052–1072.
Hey, J. D. (1994). Expectations formation: Rational or adaptive or? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 25(3), 329–349.
Hoffmann, A. O., Iliewa, Z., & Jaroszek, L. (2017). Wall street crosses memory lane: How witnessed returns affect professionals’ expected returns. SSRN working paper, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2877366.
Hommes, C. (2011). The heterogeneous expectations hypothesis: Some evidence from the lab. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 35(1), 1–24.
Hommes, C., Kopányi-Peuker, A., & Sonnemans, J. (2021). Bubbles, crashes and information contagion in large-group asset market experiments. Experimental Economics, 24(2), 414–433.
Hommes, C., Sonnemans, J., Tuinstra, J., & Van de Velden, H. (2005). Coordination of expectations in asset pricing experiments. The Review of Financial Studies, 18(3), 955–980.
Hommes, C., Sonnemans, J., Tuinstra, J., & Van de Velden, H. (2008). Expectations and bubbles in asset pricing experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 67(1), 116–133.
Huber, C., & Huber, J. (2019). Scale matters: Risk perception, return expectations, and investment propensity under different scalings. Experimental Economics, 22(1), 76–100.
Kirchler, E., Maciejovsky, B., & Weber, M. (2005). Framing effects, selective information, and market behavior: An experimental analysis. The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 6(2), 90–100.
Kirchler, M., Huber, J., & Stöckl, T. (2012). Thar she bursts: Reducing confusion reduces bubbles. American Economic Review, 102(2), 865–83.
Kopányi-Peuker, A., & Weber, M. (2021). Experience does not eliminate bubbles: Experimental evidence. Review of Financial Studies, 34(9), 4450–4485.
Malmendier, U., & Nagel, S. (2016). Learning from inflation experiences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(1), 53–87.
Marimon, R., Spear, S. E., & Sunder, S. (1993). Expectationally driven market volatility: An experimental study. Journal of Economic Theory, 61(1), 74–103.
Palan, S. (2013). A review of bubbles and crashes in experimental asset markets. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(3), 570–588.
Sirri, E. R., & Tufano, P. (1998). Costly search and mutual fund flows. The Journal of Finance, 53(5), 1589–1622.
Smith, V. L., Suchanek, G. L., & Williams, A. W. (1988). Bubbles, crashes, and endogenous expectations in experimental spot asset markets. Econometrica, 56, 1119–1151.
Sonnemans, J., & Tuinstra, J. (2010). Positive expectations feedback experiments and number guessing games as models of financial markets. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(6), 964–984.
Stöckl, T., Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2010). Bubble measures in experimental asset markets. Experimental Economics, 13(3), 284–298.
Stössel, R. & Meier, A. (2015). Framing effects and risk perception: Testing graphical representations of risk for the KIID. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2606615 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2606615.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgement of and by representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.