IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investor Inattention and the Underreaction to Stock Recommendations


  • Roger K. Loh


"Investors' reaction to stock recommendations is often incomplete so that there is a predictable postrecommendation drift. I investigate investor inattention as a plausible explanation for this drift by using prior turnover as a proxy for attention. I find that low-attention stocks react less to stock recommendations than high-attention stocks around the three-day event window. Subsequently, the recommendation drift of firms with low attention is more than double in magnitude when compared to firms with high attention. Similar conclusions are reached with alternative proxies for attention. The evidence supports investor inattention as a source of the stock recommendation drift." Copyright (c) 2010 Financial Management Association International.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger K. Loh, 2010. "Investor Inattention and the Underreaction to Stock Recommendations," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 1223-1252, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:finmgt:v:39:y:2010:i:3:p:1223-1252

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:kap:jfsres:v:52:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10693-016-0258-x is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kucheev, Yury O. & Sorensson, Tomas, 2016. "The origin of outperformance for stock recommendations by sell-side analysts," INDEK Working Paper Series 2016/13, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics and Management.
    3. Alexander Kerl & Carolin Schürg & Andreas Walter, 2014. "The impact of Financial Times Deutschland news on stock prices: post-announcement drifts and inattention of investors," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 28(4), pages 409-436, November.
    4. Zhu, Hui, 2014. "Implications of limited investor attention to customer–supplier information transfers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 405-416.
    5. Rongsheng Shi & Zhi Xu & Zhengrong Chen & Jing Huang, 2012. "Does attention affect individual investors' investment return?," China Finance Review International, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 143-162, April.
    6. repec:eee:ecofin:v:43:y:2018:i:c:p:19-29 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Yezegel, Ari, 2015. "Why do analysts revise their stock recommendations after earnings announcements?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 163-181.
    8. Jiang, George J. & Zhu, Kevin X., 2017. "Information Shocks and Short-Term Market Underreaction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 43-64.
    9. Jeon, Jin Q. & Lee, Cheolwoo & Nasser, Tareque & Via, M. Tony, 2015. "Multiple lead underwriter IPOs and firm visibility," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 128-149.
    10. Altınkılıç, Oya & Hansen, Robert S. & Ye, Liyu, 2016. "Can analysts pick stocks for the long-run?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 371-398.
    11. repec:eee:pacfin:v:45:y:2017:i:c:p:211-223 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Michaely, Roni & Rubin, Amir & Vedrashko, Alexander, 2016. "Are Friday announcements special? Overcoming selection bias," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 65-85.
    13. Chris Stivers & Licheng Sun, 2013. "Market Cycles and the Performance of Relative Strength Strategies," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 42(2), pages 263-290, June.
    14. Kucheev, Yury O. & Ruiz, Felipe & Sorensson, Tomas, 2015. "Star sell-side analysts listed by Institutional Investor, The Wall Street Journal and StarMine. Whose recommendations are most profitable?," INDEK Working Paper Series 2015/11, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics and Management.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:bla:finmgt:v:39:y:2010:i:3:p:1223-1252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.