Week 4 Flashcards

Decision Heuristics (Part 2)

1
Q

How can the reversal effect anomaly be explained by representativeness?

A
  • Investors believe past performance REPRESENTATIVE of future performance –> i.e. ‘winner’ stocks wrongly perceived to perform well in future so overvalued; ‘loser’ stocks wrongly believed to perform poorly in the future so undervalued –> investors OVERREACT to past performance info.
  • Eventually overreaction corrected leading to reversal effect where prior ‘losers’ outperform prior ‘winners’ as ‘winner’ stock prices decrease & ‘loser’ stock prices increase –> profitable strategy to buy prior ‘losers’ & sell prior ‘winners.’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

How can the value effect anomaly be explained by representativeness?

A
  • Investors believe past earnings growth performance REPRESENTS future earnings growth performance.
  • ‘Growth’ stocks w high historical earnings growth (high MTB ratios) incorrectly perceived to keep growing rapidly in future so overvalued; ‘value’ stocks w low historical earnings growth (low MTB ratios) incorrectly perceived to keep growing slowly in future so undervalued –> investors OVERREACT to past records of firms’ earnings growth.
  • Eventually overreaction corrected leading to value effect where ‘value’ stocks outperform ‘growth’ stocks as ‘growth’ stock prices decrease & ‘value’ stock prices increase –> profitable strategy to buy ‘value’ stocks & sell ‘growth’ stocks.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

How can the momentum effect anomaly be explained by conservatism?

A
  • Investors UNDERREACT to info about past performance due to conservatism.
  • Investors in past stock ‘winners’ fail to fully incorporate this +ve info into stock prices & so undervalue stocks; investors in past stock ‘losers’ fail to fully incorporate this -ve info into stock prices & so overvalue stocks.
  • Eventually underreaction corrected leading to momentum effect where past ‘winners’ outperform past ‘losers’ as prices of ‘loser’ stocks decrease & ‘winner’ stocks increase –> profitable strategy to buy ‘winners’ & sell ‘losers’.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

How can PEAD be explained by conservatism?

A
  • Investors initially UNDERREACT to news e.g. earnings announcements –> fail to fully incorporate earnings announcement info into stock prices.
  • Eventually underreaction corrected in following period leading to PEAD –> stocks w good news of earnings announcement see prices continuously rising after initial +ve reactions, earning +ve returns in period after announcement –> for stocks w bad news of earnings announcement, prices continuously decrease after initial -ve reactions, earning -ve returns in period after announcement.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Compare representativeness & conservatism?

A
  • Representativeness leads to overreaction to info (influenced too much by latest info) BUT conservatism leads to underreaction to info (latest info not fully taken into consideration).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

How is representativeness & conservatism explained by Barber’s et al. (1968)?

A
  • Investors first exhibit conservatism & underreact to new info in short run when receiving news about firm –> after investors repeatedly faced w similar news so overreact to info due to representativeness.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

How can the size effect anomaly be explained by representativeness?

A
  • Investors OVERREACT to info e.g. by extrapolating from past performance –> investors believe firm size REPRESENTATIVE of future performance –> larger firms perceived to perform better so over-valued whereas smaller firms under-valued.
  • Eventually overreaction corrected leading to size effect where small firms outperform large firms as prices of large firms decreases & prices of small firms increases –> profitable strategy to buy small firms’ shares & sell large firms’ shares.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly