Experimental Economics

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 223–240 | Cite as

Experimental asset markets with endogenous choice of costly asymmetric information

  • Jürgen Huber
  • Martin Angerer
  • Michael KirchlerEmail author


Asymmetric distribution of information, while omnipresent in real markets, is rarely considered in experimental financial markets. We present results from experiments where subjects endogenously choose between five information levels (four of them costly). We find that (i) uninformed traders earn the highest net returns, while average informed traders always perform worst even when information costs are not considered; (ii) over time traders learn to pick the most advantageous information levels (full information or no information); and (iii) market efficiency decreases with higher information costs. These results are mostly in line with the theoretical predictions of Grossman and Stiglitz (Am. Econ. Rev. 70:393–408, 1980) and provide additional insights that studies with only two information levels cannot deliver.


Information costs Asset markets Experiment Value of information Asymmetric information 

JEL Classification

C91 D82 G1 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Copeland, T., & Friedman, D. (1992). The market value of information: experimental results. Journal of Business, 65, 241–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. Journal of Finance, 45, 383–417. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Greiner, B. (2004). Forschung und wissenschaftliches Rechnen 2003. In GWDG Bericht: Vol. 63. An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments (pp. 79–93). Goettingen: Gesellschaft fuer Wissenschaftliche Datenverarbeitung. Google Scholar
  5. Grossman, S. J. (1976). On the efficiency of competitive stock markets where traders have diverse information. Journal of Finance, 31, 573–585. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grossman, S. J., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1980). On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets. The American Economic Review, 70, 393–408. Google Scholar
  7. Hellwig, M. (1982). Rational expectation equilibrium with conditioning on past prices, a mean-variance example. Journal of Economic Theory, 26, 279–312. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huber, J. (2007). ‘j’-shaped returns to timing advantage in access to information—experimental evidence and a tentative explanation. Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 31, 2536–2572. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kirchler, M. (2010). Partial knowledge is a dangerous thing—on the value of asymmetric fundamental information in asset markets. Journal of Economic Psychology, 21, 643–658. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rothkopf, M. H., Teisberg, T. J., & Kahn, E. P. (1990). Why are Vickrey auctions rare? The Journal of Political Economy, 98(1), 94–109. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schredelseker, K. (2001). Is the usefulness approach useful? Some reflections on the utility of public information. In S. McLeay & A. Riccaboni (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Accounting Regulation (pp. 135–153). Norwell: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  12. Stöckl, T., Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2010). Bubble measures in experimental asset markets. Experimental Economics, 13, 284–298. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Stöckl, T., & Kirchler, M. (2010). Trading strategies and trading profits in experimental asset markets with cumulative information. Working paper available at:
  14. Sunder, S. (1992). Market for information: experimental evidence. Econometrica, 60(3), 667–695. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vickrey, W. (1961). Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8–37. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jürgen Huber
    • 1
  • Martin Angerer
    • 1
  • Michael Kirchler
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Banking and FinanceUniversity of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria
  2. 2.Centre for FinanceUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations