IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prices of State Contingent Claims with Insider Traders, and the Favourite-Longshot Bias


  • Shin, Hyun Song


This paper examines the pricing of state contingent claims in the presence of insider traders. The specific setting is the market for bets in a horse race in which bookmakers compete in prices in anticipation of betting from a group of bettors, some of whom have insider information. The author identifies a condition which is necessary and sufficient for the so called "favorite-bias" in which, the prices on the favorites understate the winning changes of these horses relatively less than the prices on the longshots. The robustness of this result is examined in a more general framework, and the bias is shown to survive in a generalized form. Copyright 1992 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Shin, Hyun Song, 1992. "Prices of State Contingent Claims with Insider Traders, and the Favourite-Longshot Bias," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(411), pages 426-435, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:102:y:1992:i:411:p:426-35

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See for details.

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Slovic, Paul & Kahneman, Daniel, 1990. "The Causes of Preference Reversal," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 204-217, March.
    3. Sarah Lichtenstein & Paul Slovic, 1973. "Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in las vegas," Framed Field Experiments 00169, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1987. "Some implications of a more general form of regret theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-287, April.
    5. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    6. Jones-Lee, M W & Hammerton, M & Philips, P R, 1985. "The Value of Safety: Results of a National Sample Survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(377), pages 49-72, March.
    7. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. "An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
    8. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. "Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Babatunde Buraimo & David Peel & Rob Simmons, 2013. "Systematic Positive Expected Returns in the UK Fixed Odds Betting Market: An Analysis of the Fink Tank Predictions," International Journal of Financial Studies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(4), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Glenn Boyle, 2008. "Do Financial Incentives Affect The Quality of Expert Performance? Evidence from the Racetrack," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 43-59, September.
    3. Dixon, Mark J. & Pope, Peter F., 2004. "The value of statistical forecasts in the UK association football betting market," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 697-711.
    4. Feess, Eberhard & Müller, Helge & Schumacher, Christoph, 2016. "Estimating risk preferences of bettors with different bet sizes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1102-1112.
    5. Jullien, Bruno & Salanié, Bernard, 2005. "Empirical Evidence on the Preferences of Racetrack Bettors," IDEI Working Papers 178, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    6. Hassett, Kevin & Zhong, Weifeng, 2017. "On the Observational Implications of Knightian Uncertainty," MPRA Paper 82998, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Ioannis Asimakopoulos & John Goddard, 2004. "Forecasting football results and the efficiency of fixed-odds betting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 51-66.
    8. Charles Moul & Joseph Keller, 2014. "Time to Unbridle U.S. Thoroughbred Racetracks? Lessons from Australian Bookies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(3), pages 211-239, May.
    9. Parimal Kanti Bag & Bibhas Saha, 2010. "Betting in the Shadow of Match-Fixing," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 011, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    10. Schnytzer, Adi & Lamers, Martien & Makropoulou, Vasiliki, 2010. "The impact of insider trading on forecasting in a bookmakers' horse betting market," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 537-542, July.
    11. McAlvanah, Patrick & Moul, Charles C., 2013. "The house doesn’t always win: Evidence of anchoring among Australian bookies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 87-99.
    12. Williams, Leighton Vaughan & Paton, David, 1997. "Why Is There a Favourite-Longshot Bias in British Racetrack Betting Markets?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(440), pages 150-158, January.
    13. Michael A. Smith & David Paton & Leighton Vaughan-Williams, 2004. "Costs, biases and betting markets: new evidence," Working Papers 2004/5, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham Business School, Economics Division.
    14. John Peirson, 2008. "Expert Analysis and Insider Information in Horse Race Betting: Regulating Informed Market Behaviour," Studies in Economics 0819, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    15. Bag, Parimal Kanti & Saha, Bibhas, 2011. "Match-fixing under competitive odds," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 318-344.
    16. Stefan Winter & Martin Kukuk, 2008. "Do horses like vodka and sponging? - On market manipulation and the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 75-87.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • B23 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Econometrics; Quantitative and Mathematical Studies
    • F65 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Finance


    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:ecj:econjl:v:102:y:1992:i:411:p:426-35. 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.