August 12, 2019 posted by

De Bondt, W. F. M., & Thaler, R. H. (). Does the stock market overreact. Journal of finance, 40, Werner F M De Bondt and Richard Thaler · Journal of Finance, , vol. link: :bla:jfinan:vyip Behavioral finance theorists Werner De Bondt and Richard Thaler released a study in the Journal of Finance called “Does the Market Overreact?” In their .

Author: Vudokree Vim
Country: El Salvador
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 19 May 2008
Pages: 373
PDF File Size: 10.20 Mb
ePub File Size: 15.22 Mb
ISBN: 934-8-72447-362-6
Downloads: 99037
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mikaramar

Differencesin CumulativeAverageResidualBetween Winner and Loser Portfolios of 35 Stocks formedover the previousone, two, or three years; months into the test period 1. Finally, deondt choice of December as the “portfolio formation month” and, therefore, of January as the “starting month” is essentially arbitrary. Their combined citations are counted only for the first article.

In spite of the observedtrendiness of dividends, investors seem to attach disproportionate importanceto short-run economic developments. A third hypothesis, advocated by Marsh and Merton [19], is that Shiller’sfindingsare a result of his misspecificationof the dividendprocess.

Publisher contact information may be obtained at http: In Section Debindt, it was mentioned that the use of market-adjustedexcess returns is likely to bias the researchdesign against the overreactionhypothesis.

Careful examination of Figure 3 also reveals a tendency, on the part of the loser portfolio, to decline in value relativeto the market between October and December. Two specific examples of the research to which Arrowwas referringare the excess volatility of security prices and the so-called price earnings ratio anomaly. The Theoryof Investment Value.

The following articles are merged in Scholar. Constitutional Political Economy 19 4, Most financial economists seem to regardthe anomaly as a statistical artifact. The paper ends with a brief summaryof conclusions.

Therefore,we will only report the results based on market-adjusted excess returns. There ‘ Of course,the variabilityof stock prices may also reflect changes in real interest rates.

Grether [12] dwbondt replicatedthis finding under incentive compatible conditions. However, since all three methods are single-index models that follow from the CAPM, misspecification problems may still confound the results. Much to our surprise, the effect is observed as late as five years after portfolio formation.


JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. There is also considerable evidence that the actual expectations of professionalsecurity analysts and economic forecastersdisplay the same overreactionbias for a review, see De Bondt [7]. Throughoutthe test period, the debonndt in ACAR for the experiment with a three-year formation period the upper curve exceeds the same statistic for the experiments based on two- and one-year formationperiods middle and lower curves.

The next section describes the actual empirical tests we have performed. If no such quote is availablebecause the stockholdersreceive nothing for their shares, the return is entered as minus one. The effect of multiplying the numberof replications is to remove part of the random noise.

Does the Stock Market Overreact?

The remainderof the paper is organizedas follows. But all three experiments are clearly affected by the same underlyingseasonal pattern. There is no risk adjustmentexcept for movements of the market as a whole and the adjustment is identical for all stocks.

Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency R Thaler Economics letters 8 3, Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. Ohlson and Penman [20] have further suggestedthat the increasedvolatility of security returns following stock splits may also be linked to overreaction.

For every stockj on the tape with at least 85 months of returndata months 1 through 85without 198 missing values in between, and starting in January month 49the next 72 monthly residualreturns ujt months 49 through are estimated.

The problem is particularlysevere with respect to the winner portfolio. Over the last half-century, loser portfolios of 35 stocks outperformthe market by, on average, And in debomdt the third and fourthJanuaries?

Their findings largely redefine the small firm effect as a “losing firm” effect around the turn-of-theyear. However,Basu [4] found a significant PIE effect after controlling for firm size, and earlier Graham [11] even found an effect within the thirty Dow Jones Industrials,hardly a group of small firms! Once future earnings turn out to be better than the unreasonablygloomy forecasts, the price adjusts.


Werner De Bondt – Wikipedia

Consistent with degondt overreaction hypothesis, evidence of weak-form market inefficiency is found. Instead, we will concentrate on an empiricaltest of the overreaction hypothesis. New citations to this author. Similar proceduresapply for the residuals of the loser portfolio. JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Winner portfolios, on the other hand, earn about 5. In order to check whether the choice affects the results, some of the empirical tests use May as the portfolio formation month. An equally weighted arithmetic average rate of return on all CRSP listed securities serves as the market index.

EconPapers: Does the Stock Market Overreact?

The PIE ratio is presumed to be a proxy for some omitted factor which, if included in the “correct”equilibrium valuation model, would eliminate the anomaly.

Section II describes the results. Table I confirms the prediction of the overreaction hypothesis. Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: Our own findings raise new questions with respect to this hypothesis.

First, if in early January selling pressure disappears and prices “rebound”to equilibriumlevels, why does the loser portfolio-even while it outperformsthe market-“rebound” once again in the second January of the test period? Clearly,the successive 46 yearly selections are not independent.

Combiningthe results with Kleidon’s [18] findings that stock price movements are strongly correlatedwith the following year’s earnings changes suggests a clear pattern of overreaction.

Journal of Financial Economics 12 June ,