IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/hbhfxx/v23y2022i1p73-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral Heterogeneity in the Stock Market Revisited: What Factors Drive Investors as Fundamentalists or Chartists?

Author

Listed:
  • Leon Li
  • Peter Miu

Abstract

This paper reexamines the issue of behavioral heterogeneity in the stock market. In contrast to previously documented contemporaneous results, we test the issue by identifying and testing four new determinants of the proportion of fundamentalists and chartists in the stock market. Our empirical results are consistent with the following notions. First, the proportion of fundamentalists increases for stocks with incremental information involved in accounting reporting as proxied by discretionary accruals. Second, the proportion of fundamentalists is positively related to the degree of dispersion in financial analysts' forecasts, which implies that stock investors care more about the intrinsic value of firms obtained with fundamental analysis when encountering information asymmetry or uncertainty. Third, the proportion of fundamentalists increases for stocks with higher volatility in prices. For the proportion of chartists, the reverse of these arguments holds true. Fourth, the proportion of chartists versus fundamentalists is related to the investment horizon. Investors give more weights to technical analysis when considering short-term investments. For long-term investments, investors increase the weighting given to the fundamental analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Leon Li & Peter Miu, 2022. "Behavioral Heterogeneity in the Stock Market Revisited: What Factors Drive Investors as Fundamentalists or Chartists?," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 73-91, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:hbhfxx:v:23:y:2022:i:1:p:73-91
    DOI: 10.1080/15427560.2020.1841767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/15427560.2020.1841767
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/15427560.2020.1841767?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:hbhfxx:v:23:y:2022:i:1:p:73-91. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/hbhf .

    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.