IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/digfin/v5y2023i2d10.1007_s42521-023-00084-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial recommendations on Reddit, stock returns and cumulative prospect theory

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Reichenbach

    (Technische Universität Berlin)

  • Martin Walther

    (Technische Universität Berlin)

Abstract

This study investigates stock recommendations from the three largest finance subreddits on Reddit: wallstreetbets, investing and stocks. A simple strategy that buys recommended stocks weighted by the number of posts per day yields a portfolio with higher average returns at the expense of higher risks than the market for all holding periods, i.e., unfavorable Sharpe ratios. Furthermore, the strategy leads to positive (insignificant) short-term and negative (significant) long-term alphas when considering common risk factors. This is consistent with the idea of “meme stocks”, meaning that the recommended stocks are artificially inflated in the short term when they are recommended, and that the posts contain no information about long-term success. However, it is likely that Reddit users, especially on the subreddit wallstreetbets, have preferences for bets which are not captured by the mean–variance framework. Therefore, we draw on cumulative prospect theory (CPT). We find that the CPT-valuations of the Reddit portfolio exceed those of the market, which may explain the persistent attractiveness for investors to follow social media stock recommendations despite the unfavorable risk-return ratio.

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Reichenbach & Martin Walther, 2023. "Financial recommendations on Reddit, stock returns and cumulative prospect theory," Digital Finance, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 421-448, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:digfin:v:5:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42521-023-00084-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s42521-023-00084-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42521-023-00084-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42521-023-00084-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vicki Wei Tang, 2018. "Wisdom of Crowds: Cross‐Sectional Variation in the Informativeness of Third‐Party‐Generated Product Information on Twitter," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 989-1034, June.
    2. Marc Oliver Rieger & Mei Wang & Thorsten Hens, 2017. "Estimating cumulative prospect theory parameters from an international survey," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 567-596, April.
    3. Tolga Buz & Gerard de Melo, 2021. "Should You Take Investment Advice From WallStreetBets? A Data-Driven Approach," Papers 2105.02728, arXiv.org.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Bali, Turan G. & Cakici, Nusret & Whitelaw, Robert F., 2011. "Maxing out: Stocks as lotteries and the cross-section of expected returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 427-446, February.
    6. Jia, Weishi & Redigolo, Giulia & Shu, Susan & Zhao, Jingran, 2020. "Can social media distort price discovery? Evidence from merger rumors," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1).
    7. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    8. Amaya, Diego & Christoffersen, Peter & Jacobs, Kris & Vasquez, Aurelio, 2015. "Does realized skewness predict the cross-section of equity returns?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 135-167.
    9. Martin Walther & Markus Münster, 2021. "Conditional Risk Premiums and the Value Function of Prospect Theory," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 74-83, January.
    10. Ivo Welch, 2022. "The Wisdom of the Robinhood Crowd," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(3), pages 1489-1527, June.
    11. Wang, Junbo & Wu, Chunchi & Zhong, Xiaoling, 2021. "Prospect theory and stock returns: Evidence from foreign share markets," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. Daniel Bradley & Jan Hanousek & Russell Jame & Zicheng Xiao, 2021. "Place your bets? The market consequences of investment advice on Reddit’s Wallstreetbets," MENDELU Working Papers in Business and Economics 2021-76, Mendel University in Brno, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    13. Nicholas Barberis & Abhiroop Mukherjee & Baolian Wang, 2016. "Prospect Theory and Stock Returns: An Empirical Test," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(11), pages 3068-3107.
    14. Nicholas Barberis & Lawrence J. Jin & Baolian Wang, 2021. "Prospect Theory and Stock Market Anomalies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(5), pages 2639-2687, October.
    15. Fong, Wai Mun & Toh, Benjamin, 2014. "Investor sentiment and the MAX effect," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 190-201.
    16. Lyócsa, Štefan & Baumöhl, Eduard & Výrost, Tomáš, 2022. "YOLO trading: Riding with the herd during the GameStop episode," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PA).
    17. Xue Dong He & Xun Yu Zhou, 2011. "Portfolio Choice Under Cumulative Prospect Theory: An Analytical Treatment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 315-331, February.
    18. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 2015. "A five-factor asset pricing model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 1-22.
    19. Eraker, Bjørn & Ready, Mark, 2015. "Do investors overpay for stocks with lottery-like payoffs? An examination of the returns of OTC stocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 486-504.
    20. Werner Antweiler & Murray Z. Frank, 2004. "Is All That Talk Just Noise? The Information Content of Internet Stock Message Boards," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1259-1294, June.
    21. Todd Mitton & Keith Vorkink, 2007. "Equilibrium Underdiversification and the Preference for Skewness," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 20(4), pages 1255-1288.
    22. Alok Kumar, 2009. "Who Gambles in the Stock Market?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1889-1933, August.
    23. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2011. "When Is a Liability Not a Liability? Textual Analysis, Dictionaries, and 10‐Ks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(1), pages 35-65, February.
    24. Hailiang Chen & Prabuddha De & Yu (Jeffrey) Hu & Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, 2014. "Wisdom of Crowds: The Value of Stock Opinions Transmitted Through Social Media," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(5), pages 1367-1403.
    25. Farrell, Michael & Green, T. Clifton & Jame, Russell & Markov, Stanimir, 2022. "The democratization of investment research and the informativeness of retail investor trading," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 616-641.
    26. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2020. "Lottery-Related Anomalies: The Role of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 473-501, January.
    27. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan & Titman, Sheridan, 1993. "Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(1), pages 65-91, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, December.
    2. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning analysis of stock market anomalies under prospect stochastic dominance," Working Papers unige:134101, University of Geneva, Geneva School of Economics and Management.
    3. Chen, Dongxu & Wu, Ke & Zhu, Yifeng, 2022. "Stock return asymmetry in China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    4. Zhong, Angel & Gray, Philip, 2016. "The MAX effect: An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 76-90.
    5. Xu, Zhongxiang & Chevapatrakul, Thanaset & Li, Xiafei, 2019. "Return asymmetry and the cross section of stock returns," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 93-110.
    6. Sun, Kaisi & Wang, Hui & Zhu, Yifeng, 2023. "Salience theory in price and trading volume: Evidence from China," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 38-61.
    7. Jun Yuan & Qi Xu & Ying Wang, 2023. "Probability weighting in commodity futures markets," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(4), pages 516-548, April.
    8. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    9. Hu, Shiyang & Xiang, Cheng & Quan, Xiaofeng, 2023. "Salience theory and mutual fund flows: Empirical evidence from China," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    10. Baars, Maren & Mohrschladt, Hannes, 2021. "An alternative behavioral explanation for the MAX effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 868-886.
    11. Jiang, Xue & Han, Liyan & Yin, Libo, 2019. "Can skewness predict currency excess returns?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 628-641.
    12. Lin, Mei-Chen, 2023. "Analyst coverage and the idiosyncratic skewness effect in the Taiwan stock market," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Kwon, Kyung Yoon & Min, Byoung-Kyu & Sun, Chenfei, 2022. "Enhancing the profitability of lottery strategies," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 166-184.
    14. Goto, Shingo & Yamada, Toru, 2023. "What drives biased odds in sports betting markets: Bettors’ irrationality and the role of bookmakers," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 252-270.
    15. Ohk, Seungbin & Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2021. "Capitalizing on prospect theory value: The Asian developed stock markets," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    16. Lu, Jing & Ho, Keng-Yu & Ho, Po-Hsin & Ko, Kuan-Cheng, 2023. "CEO overconfidence, lottery preference and the cross-section of stock returns," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    17. Liu, Chang & Sun, Peng & Zhu, Dongming, 2023. "Lottery preference, short-sale constraint, and the salience effect: Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    18. Mo, Xuan & Su, Zhi & Yin, Libo, 2019. "Can the skewness of oil returns affect stock returns? Evidence from China’s A-Share markets," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    19. Nartea, Gilbert V. & Kong, Dongmin & Wu, Ji, 2017. "Do extreme returns matter in emerging markets? Evidence from the Chinese stock market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 189-197.
    20. Wang, Cheng & Han, Jing, 2023. "Prospect theory and mutual fund flows: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Behavioral finance; Prospect theory; Reddit; Social media; Stock return;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:digfin:v:5:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42521-023-00084-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.