Advertisement

Lucky lots and unlucky investors

  • Tao Chen
  • Andreas Karathanasopoulos
  • Stanley Iat-Meng KoEmail author
  • Chia Chun Lo
Original Research

Abstract

The number 8 is considered lucky under the Chinese culture. This paper tries to examine whether investors hold such superstitious belief in the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Using the transaction level data, we first show that more intense net buying occurs at 8-ending lots. Next, we seek favorable evidence in support of financial complexity hypothesis and informed trading hypothesis, both of which are effective in expounding the prevalence of this biased trading behavior. Finally, we find that traders’ learning by means of information acquisition is able to alleviate the lucky-8 effect on superstitious traders.

Keywords

Lot sizes Lucky numbers Trading biases Learning effects 

JEL Classification

G12 G40 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Cheng-Few Lee (Editor) and anonymous referees for their helpful comments and suggestions. Chen acknowledges the Start-up Research Grant (SRG2018-00115-FBA) support from University of Macau. Ko thanks the financial support of the Multi-Year Research Grant (MYRG2017-00086-FBA) to University of Macau. All errors remain our own responsibility.

References

  1. Auer B (2015) Superstitious seasonality in precious metals markets? Evidence from GARCH models with time-varying skewness and kurtosis. Appl Econ 47:2844–2859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber B, Odean T (2000) Trading is hazardous to your wealth: the common stock investment performance of individual investors. J Finance 55:773–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barber B, Odean T (2001) Boys will be boys: gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. Q J Econ 116:261–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barclay M, Hendershott T (2003) Price discovery and trading after hours. Rev Financ Stud 16:1041–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barclay M, Warner J (1993) Stealth trading and volatility: Which trades move prices? J Financ Econ 34:281–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhattacharya U, Holden C, Jacobsen S (2012) Penny wise, dollar foolish: buy-sell imbalances on and around round numbers. Manag Sci 58:413–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhattacharya U, Kuo W, Lin T, Zhao J (2018) Do superstitious traders lose money? Manag Sci 64:3772–3791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang C, Chen S, Hsieh S (2017) Asymmetric reinforcement learning and conditioned responses during the 2007–2009 global financial crisis: evidence from Taiwan. Rev Pac Basin Financ Mark Policies 20:1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choi J, Laibson D, Madrian B, Metrick A (2009) Reinforcement learning and savings behavior. J Finance 64:2515–2534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chung R, Darrat A, Li B (2014) Chinese superstition in US commodity trading. Appl Econ Lett 21:171–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Da Z, Engelberg J, Gao P (2011) In search of attention. J Finance 66:1461–1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drake M, Roulstone D, Thornock J (2012) Investor information demand. J Account Res 50:1001–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fama E, MacBeth J (1973) Risk, return, and equilibrium: empirical tests. J Polit Econ 81:607–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fortin N, Hill A, Huang J (2014) Superstition in the housing market. Econ Inq 52:974–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glosten L, Harris L (1988) Estimating the component of the bid-ask spread. J Financ Econ 21:123–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodman J, Irwin J (2006) Special random numbers: beyond the illusion of control. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 99:161–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grinblatt M, Keloharju M (2009) Sensation seeking, overconfidence, and trading activity. J Finance 64:549–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haggard K (2015) Stock returns in Chinese markets and lucky numbered days. Manag Finance 41:925–939Google Scholar
  19. Hasbrouck J (1991) Measuring the information content of stock trades. J Finance 46:179–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. He J, Liu H, Sing T, Song C, Wong W (2016) Superstition, conspicuous spending, and housing markets: evidence from Singapore. Working Paper, Social Science Research NetworkGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirshleifer D (2001) Investor psychology and asset pricing. J Finance 56:1533–1597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hirshleifer D, Lim S, Teoh S (2009) Driven to distraction: extraneous events and underreaction to earnings news. J Finance 64:2289–2325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hirshleifer D, Jian M, Zhang H (2018) Superstition and financial decision making. Manag Sci 64:235–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Humphreys B, Nowak A, Zhou Y (2019) Superstition and real estate prices: transaction-level evidence from the US housing market. Appl Econ.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2018.1558361 Google Scholar
  25. Ke W, Chen H, Lin H, Liu Y (2017) The impact of numerical superstition on the final digit of stock price. N Am J Econ Finance 39:145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kong D, Lin C, Liu S (2019) Does information acquisition alleviate market anomalies? Categorization bias in stock splits. Rev Finance 23:245–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kumar A (2009a) Who gambles in the stock market? J Finance 64:1889–1933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kumar A (2009b) Hard-to-value stocks, behavioral biases, and informed trading. J Financ Quant Anal 44:1375–1401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuo W, Lin T, Zhao J (2015) Cognitive limitation and investment performance: evidence from limit order clustering. Rev Financ Stud 28:838–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levitt S, List J (2007) What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? J Econ Perspect 21:153–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. List J (2003) Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? Q J Econ 118:41–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. List J (2011) Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? The case of exogenous market experience. Am Econ Rev 101:313–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Massa M, Simonov A (2006) Hedging, familiarity, and portfolio choice. Rev Financ Stud 19:633–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Massey C, Thaler R (2013) The loser’s curse: decision making and market efficiency in the national football league draft. Manag Sci 59:1479–1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meng L, Verousis T, Gwilym O (2013) A substitution effect between price clustering and size clustering in credit default swaps. J Int Financ Mark Inst Money 24:139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitton T, Vorkink K (2007) Equilibrium underdiversification and the preference for skewness. Rev Financ Stud 20:1255–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ng T, Chong T, Du X (2010) The value of superstitions. J Econ Psychol 31:293–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rehm M, Chen S, Filippova O (2018) Prices and superstition among ethnic Chinese and non-Chinese homebuyers in Auckland, New Zealand. Int J Hous Mark Anal 11:34–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosch E (1975) Cognitive reference points. Cogn Psychol 7:532–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shefrin H, Statman M (1985) The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: theory and evidence. J Finance 40:777–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shum M, Sun W, Ye G (2014) Superstition and “lucky” apartments: evidence from transaction-level data. J Comp Econ 42:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wells R (2017) Choice of order size and price discovery: the last digit puzzle. Working Paper, Social Science Research NetworkGoogle Scholar
  43. Weng P (2018) Lucky issuance: the role of numerological superstitions in irrational return premiums. Pac Basin Finance J 47:79–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wong W, Abdullah N, Lim H (2017) The value of Chinese superstitions in Malaysia: evidence from car plate auctioning. Singap Econ Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217590817430081 Google Scholar
  45. Wright D (2016) Superstitious behavior in financial decision-making. Soc Sci Res Net.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2811965 Google Scholar
  46. Wu W, Gau Y (2017) Home bias in portfolio choices: social learning among partially informed agents. Rev Quant Finance Account 48:527–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wu C, Zhang W (2002) Trade disclosure, information learning and securities market performance. Rev Quant Finance Account 18:21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang Z (2011) “Lucky” numbers, unlucky consumers. J Socio-Econ 40:692–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Finance and Business Economics, Faculty of Business AdministrationUniversity of MacauMacauChina
  2. 2.Dubai Business SchoolUniversity of DubaiDubaiUAE
  3. 3.Prince Mohammad Bin Salman College (MBSC)King Abdullah Economic CityKingdom of Saudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations