{"title":"Feedback trading in global stock markets under uncertainty of COVID-19","authors":"E. Coşkun","doi":"10.1108/rbf-08-2021-0154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeAlthough some research has been carried out on feedback trading in different asset classes, there have been few empirical investigations that consider both major and emerging stock markets (Koutmos, 1997; Antoniou et al., 2005; Kim, 2009) stock index futures (Salm and Schuppli, 2010). In this study, the author examines positive/negative feedback trading in both developed-emerging-frontier-standalone (51) stock markets for 2010–2020 and sub-periods including COVID-19 period.Design/methodology/approachThe hypothesis “feedback trading behaviour led the price boom/bust in the stock markets during the first quarter of COVID-19 pandemic” is tested by employing the Sentana and Wadhwani (1992) framework and using asymmetrical GARCH models (GJRGARCH, EGARCH) in accordance with the empirical literature.FindingsThe following conclusions can be drawn from the present study; (1) There is no evidence to support a significant distinction between developed, emerging, frontier or standalone markets or high/upper middle, lower middle income economies in the case of feedback trading. It is more likely to be a general phenomenon reflecting the outcomes of general human psychology (2) in the long term (2010–2020) based on the feedback trading results Asian stock markets appear to be far from efficiency.Research limitations/implicationsStock markets are selected based on data availability.Practical implicationsSeveral inferences can be drawn about overall results. First, investors and portfolio managers should beware of their investment decisions during bearish market conditions where volatility is on the rise and also when there is a strong reaction to bad news/negative shocks in the market. Moreover, investing in Asia stock markets may require more attention since those markets are reputed to be more “idiosyncratic”, less reliant on economic and corporate fundamentals in their pricing. Moreover, the impact of foreign investors on stock market volatility and returns and weaker implementation of regulations also affect the efficiency of the markets (Lipinsky and Ong, 2014).Originality/valueTo the best of the author’s knowledge, most studies in the field of feedback trading in stock markets have only focused on a small sample of countries and second, the effect of COVID-19 uncertainty on the stock markets have not been addressed in the literature with respect to feedback trading. This paper fills these literature gaps. This study is expected to provide useful insights for understanding the instabilities in stock markets particularly under conditions of high uncertainty and to fill the gap in the literature by comparing the results for a large sample of countries both in the long term and in the pandemic.Highlights for reviewThis study has shown that feedback trading is more prevalent in Asian stock markets in the long run in Europe, America or Middle East for the period 2010–2020.Positive feedback traders generally dominated most of the stock markets during the early period of COVID-19 pandemic.Another major finding was that the stock markets in Malaysia, Japan, the Philippines, Estonia, Portugal and Ukraine are dominated by negative feedback traders which may be interpreted as “disposition effect” meaning that they sell the “past winners”.In Indonesia, New Zealand, China, Austria, Greece, UK, Finland, Spain, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Poland, Turkey, Chile and Argentina neither positive nor negative feedback trading exists even under uncertain conditions.","PeriodicalId":44559,"journal":{"name":"Review of Behavioral Finance","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Behavioral Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rbf-08-2021-0154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
PurposeAlthough some research has been carried out on feedback trading in different asset classes, there have been few empirical investigations that consider both major and emerging stock markets (Koutmos, 1997; Antoniou et al., 2005; Kim, 2009) stock index futures (Salm and Schuppli, 2010). In this study, the author examines positive/negative feedback trading in both developed-emerging-frontier-standalone (51) stock markets for 2010–2020 and sub-periods including COVID-19 period.Design/methodology/approachThe hypothesis “feedback trading behaviour led the price boom/bust in the stock markets during the first quarter of COVID-19 pandemic” is tested by employing the Sentana and Wadhwani (1992) framework and using asymmetrical GARCH models (GJRGARCH, EGARCH) in accordance with the empirical literature.FindingsThe following conclusions can be drawn from the present study; (1) There is no evidence to support a significant distinction between developed, emerging, frontier or standalone markets or high/upper middle, lower middle income economies in the case of feedback trading. It is more likely to be a general phenomenon reflecting the outcomes of general human psychology (2) in the long term (2010–2020) based on the feedback trading results Asian stock markets appear to be far from efficiency.Research limitations/implicationsStock markets are selected based on data availability.Practical implicationsSeveral inferences can be drawn about overall results. First, investors and portfolio managers should beware of their investment decisions during bearish market conditions where volatility is on the rise and also when there is a strong reaction to bad news/negative shocks in the market. Moreover, investing in Asia stock markets may require more attention since those markets are reputed to be more “idiosyncratic”, less reliant on economic and corporate fundamentals in their pricing. Moreover, the impact of foreign investors on stock market volatility and returns and weaker implementation of regulations also affect the efficiency of the markets (Lipinsky and Ong, 2014).Originality/valueTo the best of the author’s knowledge, most studies in the field of feedback trading in stock markets have only focused on a small sample of countries and second, the effect of COVID-19 uncertainty on the stock markets have not been addressed in the literature with respect to feedback trading. This paper fills these literature gaps. This study is expected to provide useful insights for understanding the instabilities in stock markets particularly under conditions of high uncertainty and to fill the gap in the literature by comparing the results for a large sample of countries both in the long term and in the pandemic.Highlights for reviewThis study has shown that feedback trading is more prevalent in Asian stock markets in the long run in Europe, America or Middle East for the period 2010–2020.Positive feedback traders generally dominated most of the stock markets during the early period of COVID-19 pandemic.Another major finding was that the stock markets in Malaysia, Japan, the Philippines, Estonia, Portugal and Ukraine are dominated by negative feedback traders which may be interpreted as “disposition effect” meaning that they sell the “past winners”.In Indonesia, New Zealand, China, Austria, Greece, UK, Finland, Spain, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Poland, Turkey, Chile and Argentina neither positive nor negative feedback trading exists even under uncertain conditions.
期刊介绍:
Review of Behavioral Finance publishes high quality original peer-reviewed articles in the area of behavioural finance. The RBF focus is on Behavioural Finance but with a very broad lens looking at how the behavioural attributes of the decision makers influence the financial structure of a company, investors’ portfolios, and the functioning of financial markets. High quality empirical, experimental and/or theoretical research articles as well as well executed literature review articles are considered for publication in the journal.