European Financial and Accounting Journal 2017, 12(4):83-96 | DOI: 10.18267/j.efaj.202

The Effect of Preceding Sequences on Stock Returns

Andrey Kudryavtsev
Economics and Management Department, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley Academic College, Emek Yezreel 19300, Israel.

This study explores the effect of the gambler's fallacy on stock returns. I hypothesize that if during a number of consecutive trading days, a stock's return is positive (negative), then due to the gambler's fallacy, at least some of the investors may believe that the stock's price "has" to subsequently fall (rise), and thus, to increase their willingness to sell (buy) the stock, resulting in negative (positive) abnormal market-adjusted stock returns. Employing a large sample of daily stock price data, I was able to document that following relatively long sequences of positive (negative) stock returns, abnormal stock returns are on average significantly negative (positive), indicating the existence of the price pressure towards the return sign reversal. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect is stronger for longer return sequences. The effect is found to be more pronounced for smaller and more volatile stocks, and is robust to other relevant company - and stock-specific factors.

Keywords: Abnormal Stock Returns, Gambler's Fallacy, Investment Decisions, Price Reversals, Stock Return Sequences
JEL classification: G11, G12, G19

Published: February 1, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kudryavtsev, A. (2017). The Effect of Preceding Sequences on Stock Returns. European Financial and Accounting Journal12(4), 83-96. doi: 10.18267/j.efaj.202
Download citation

References

  1. Ayton, P., Fischer, I., 2004. The hot hand fallacy and the gambler's fallacy: Two faces of subjective randomness? Memory and Cognition 32, 1369-1378. DOI: 10.3758/BF03206327. Go to original source...
  2. Baker, M., Wurgler, J., 2006. Investor sentiment and the cross-section of stock returns. Journal of Finance 61, 1645-1680. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00885.x. Go to original source...
  3. Clotfelter, C., Cook, P., 1991. Lotteries in the real world. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4, 227-232. DOI: 10.1007/BF00114154. Go to original source...
  4. Clotfelter, C., Cook, P., 1993. The gambler's fallacy in lottery play. Management Science 39, 1521-1525. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.39.12.1521. Go to original source...
  5. Croson, R., Sundali, J., 2005. The gambler's fallacy and the hot hand: Empirical data from casinos. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 30, 195-209. DOI: 10.1007/s11166-005-1153-2. Go to original source...
  6. Estes, W., 1964. Probability learning. In A.W. Melton (ed.), Categories of Human Learning, Academic Press. New York.
  7. Gal, I., Baron, J., 1996. Understanding repeated simple choices. Thinking and Reasoning 1, 81-98. DOI: 10.1080/135467896394573. Go to original source...
  8. Goetzmann, W. N., Kumar, A., 2008. Equity portfolio diversification. Review of Finance 12, 433-463. DOI: 10.1093/rof/rfn005. Go to original source...
  9. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., 1972. Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology 3, 430-454. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3. Go to original source...
  10. Kliger, D., Kudryavtsev, A., 2010. The availability heuristic and investors' reaction to company-specific events. Journal of Behavioral Finance 11, 50-65. DOI: 10.1080/15427561003591116. Go to original source...
  11. Kudryavtsev, A., Cohen, G., Hon-Snir, S., 2013. "Rational" or "intuitive": Are behavioral biases correlated across stock market investors? Contemporary Economics 7, 31-53. DOI: 10.5709/ce.1897-9254.81. Go to original source...
  12. Laplace, P. S., 1951. A philosophical essay on probabilities. Dover, New York. (Original work published in 1796).
  13. Lee, W., 1971. Decision theory and human behavior. Wiley, New York.
  14. Metzger, M., 1984. Biases in betting: An application of laboratory findings. Psychological Reports 56, 883-888. DOI: 10.2466/pr0.1985.56.3.883. Go to original source...
  15. Sundali, J., Croson, R., 2006. Biases in casino betting: The hot hand and the gambler's fallacy. Judgment and Decision Making 1, 1-12. Go to original source...
  16. Terrell, D., 1994. A test of the gambler's fallacy: Evidence from pari-mutuel games. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 8, 309-317. DOI: 10.1007/BF01064047. Go to original source...
  17. Terrell, D., 1998. Biases in Assessments of Probabilities: New Evidence from Greyhound Races. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17, 151-166. Go to original source...
  18. Terrell, D., Farmer, A., 1996. Optimal betting and efficiency in pari-mutuel betting markets with information costs. The Economic Journal 106, 846-868. Go to original source...
  19. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D., 1971. Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin 76, 105-110. DOI: 10.1037/h0031322. Go to original source...
  20. Zielonka, P., 2004. Technical analysis as the representation of typical cognitive biases. International Review of Financial Analysis 13, 217-225. DOI: 10.1016/j.irfa.2004.02.007. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.