Theoretical models of financial markets built on the assumption that some investors are overconfident yield one central prediction: overconfident investors will trade too much. We test this prediction by partitioning investors on the basis of a variable that provides a natural proxy for overconfidence--gender. Psychological research has established that men are more prone to overconfidence than women. Thus, models of investor overconfidence predict that men will trade more and perform worse than women. Using account data for over 35,000 households from a large discount brokerage firm, we analyze the common stock investments of men and women from February 1991 through January 1997. Consistent with the predictions of the overconfidence models, we document that men trade 45 percent more than women and earn annual risk-adjusted net returns that are 1.4 percent less than those earned by women. These differences are more pronounced between single men and single women; single men trade 67 percent more than single women and earn annual risk-adjusted net returns that are 2.3 percent less than those earned by single women.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/98110615.pdf?abstractid=139415&rulid=175370&mirid=3

Boys Will Be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment

Individual investors who hold common stocks directly pay a tremendous performance penalty for active trading. Of 66,465 households with accounts at a large discount broker during 1991 to 1996, those that traded most earned an annual return of 11.4 percent, while the market returned 17.9 percent. The average household earned an annual return of 16.4 percent, tilted its common stock investment toward high-beta, small, value stocks, and turned over 75 percent of its portfolio annually. Overconfidence can explain high trading levels and the resulting poor performance of individual investors. Our central message is that trading is hazardous to your wealth.

/pdf/trading-is-hazardous-to-your-wealth-the-common-stock-atbrybryw8.pdf

Trading is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors

A model of investor sentiment1We are grateful to the NSF for financial support, and to Oliver Blanchard, Alon Brav, John Campbell (a referee), John Cochrane, Edward Glaeser, J.B. Heaton, Danny Kahneman, David Laibson, Owen Lamont, Drazen Prelec, Jay Ritter (a referee), Ken Singleton, Dick Thaler, an anonymous referee, and the editor, Bill Schwert, for comments.1

A number of theories have been proposed to explain the medium-term momentum in stock returns identified by Jegadeesh and Titman (1993). We test one such theory--based on the gradual-information-diffusion model of Hong and Stein (1997)--and establish three key results. First, once one moves past the very smallest stocks (where thin market-making capacity appears to be an issue) the profitability of momentum strategies declines sharply with firm size. Second, holding size fixed, momentum strategies work particularly well among stocks which have low analyst coverage. Finally, there is a strong asymmetry: the effect of analyst coverage is much more pronounced for stocks that are past losers than for stocks that are past winners. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that firm-specific information only gradually across the investing public.

Stephen E. Wilcox

Papers

Investor Psychology and Security Market Under- and Overreactions

Offshore Hedge Funds: Survival and Performance, 1989–95

Information Asymmetry, Monitoring, and the Placement Structure of Corporate Debt

What Determines Real Exchange Rates? The Long and the Short of It

Growth versus Value and Large-Cap versus Small-Cap Stocks in International Markets