IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v13y2025i7p127-d1692540.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stock Market Hype: An Empirical Investigation of the Impact of Overconfidence on Meme Stock Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Mawulawoe Ahadzie

    (Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 84, Hobart 7001, TAS, Australia)

  • Peterson Owusu Junior

    (Department of Finance, School of Business, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast 00233, Ghana
    School of Construction Economics & Management, Faculty of Engineering & the Built Environment, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa)

  • John Kingsley Woode

    (Department of Finance, School of Business, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast 00233, Ghana)

  • Dan Daugaard

    (Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 84, Hobart 7001, TAS, Australia)

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between overconfidence and meme stock valuation, drawing on panel data from 28 meme stocks listed from 2019 to 2024. The analysis incorporates key financial indicators, including Tobin’s Q ratio, market capitalization, return on assets, leverage, and volatility. A range of overconfidence proxies is employed, including changes in trading volume, turnover rate, changes in outstanding shares, and alternative measures of excessive trading. We observe a significant positive relationship between overconfidence (as measured by changes in trading volume) and firm valuation, suggesting that investor biases contribute to notable pricing distortions. Leverage has a significant negative relationship with firm valuation. In contrast, market capitalization has a significant positive relationship with firm valuation, implying that meme stock investors respond to both speculative sentiment and traditional firm fundamentals. Robustness checks using alternative proxies reveal that turnover rate and changes in the number of shares are negatively related to valuation. This shows the complex dynamics of meme stocks, where psychological factors intersect with firm-specific indicators. However, results from a dynamic panel model estimated using the Dynamic System Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) show that the turnover rate has a significantly positive relationship with firm valuation. These results offer valuable insights into the pricing behavior of meme stocks, revealing how investor sentiment impacts periodic valuation adjustments in speculative markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Mawulawoe Ahadzie & Peterson Owusu Junior & John Kingsley Woode & Dan Daugaard, 2025. "Stock Market Hype: An Empirical Investigation of the Impact of Overconfidence on Meme Stock Valuation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:13:y:2025:i:7:p:127-:d:1692540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/13/7/127/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/13/7/127/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas W. Diamond & Zhiguo He, 2014. "A Theory of Debt Maturity: The Long and Short of Debt Overhang," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 719-762, April.
    2. Soleman Alsabban & Omar Alarfaj, 2020. "An Empirical Analysis of Behavioral Finance in the Saudi Stock Market: Evidence of Overconfidence Behavior," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 10(1), pages 73-86.
    3. Barberis, Nicholas & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert, 1998. "A model of investor sentiment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 307-343, September.
    4. Aloosh, Arash & Choi, Hyung-Eun & Ouzan, Samuel, 2023. "The tail wagging the dog: How do meme stocks affect market efficiency?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 68-78.
    5. Biljana N. Adebambo & Xuemin (Sterling) Yan, 2018. "Investor Overconfidence, Firm Valuation, and Corporate Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 5349-5369, November.
    6. Terrance Odean, 1999. "Do Investors Trade Too Much?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1279-1298, December.
    7. Jiayu Huang & Yifan Wang & Yaojun Fan & Hexuan Li, 2022. "Gauging the effect of investor overconfidence on trading volume from the perspective of the relationship between lagged stock returns and current trading volume," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 103-123, April.
    8. Yung, Kenneth & Jian, Yi, 2017. "Effects of the shareholder base on firm behavior and firm value in China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 370-385.
    9. Flannery, Mark J, 1994. "Debt Maturity and the Deadweight Cost of Leverage: Optimally Financing Banking Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 320-331, March.
    10. Sadok El Ghoul & Omrane Guedhami & Yongtae Kim, 2017. "Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(3), pages 360-385, April.
    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. Esra Alp Coşkun & Hakan Kahyaoglu & Chi Keung Marco Lau, 2023. "Which return regime induces overconfidence behavior? Artificial intelligence and a nonlinear approach," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-34, December.
    2. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    3. K.S. Muehlfeld & G.U. Weitzel & A. van Witteloostuijn, 2012. "Fight or freeze? Individual differences in investors’ motivational systems and trading in experimental asset markets," Working Papers 12-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    4. Anatoli Segura & Javier Suarez, 2017. "How Excessive Is Banks’ Maturity Transformation?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 30(10), pages 3538-3580.
    5. Subrahmanyam, Avanidhar, 2009. "Optimal financial education," Review of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-9, January.
    6. Devdeepta Bose & Henning Cordes & Sven Nolte & Judith Christiane Schneider & Colin Farrell Camerer, 2022. "Decision Weights for Experimental Asset Prices Based on Visual Salience," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(11), pages 5094-5126.
    7. Schwert, G. William, 2003. "Anomalies and market efficiency," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 15, pages 939-974, Elsevier.
    8. Cimadomo, Jacopo & Claeys, Peter & Poplawski-Ribeiro, Marcos, 2016. "How do experts forecast sovereign spreads?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 216-235.
    9. Pedersen, Lasse Heje, 2022. "Game on: Social networks and markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(3), pages 1097-1119.
    10. Caliendo, Frank & Huang, Kevin X.D., 2008. "Overconfidence and consumption over the life cycle," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1347-1369, December.
    11. Yu-Nan Tai, 2014. "Investor Overreaction in Asian and US Stock Markets: Evidence from the 2008 Financial Crisis," The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 8(3), pages 71-93.
    12. Daniel, Kent & Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2002. "Investor psychology in capital markets: evidence and policy implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 139-209, January.
    13. Choi, Jaewon & Hackbarth, Dirk & Zechner, Josef, 2021. "Granularity of Corporate Debt," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 1127-1162, June.
    14. Lei, Qin & Wu, Guojun, 2005. "Time-varying informed and uninformed trading activities," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 153-181, May.
    15. Baltzer, Markus & Jank, Stephan & Smajlbegovic, Esad, 2019. "Who trades on momentum?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 56-74.
    16. Anatoli Segura & Javier Suarez, 2017. "How Excessive Is Banks’ Maturity Transformation?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 30(10), pages 3538-3580.
    17. Zhiguo He & Wei Xiong, 2012. "Rollover Risk and Credit Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(2), pages 391-430, April.
    18. Daniele SCHILIRÒ, 2013. "Bounded Rationality: Psychology, Economics And The Financial Crises," Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields, ASERS Publishing, vol. 4(1), pages 97-108.
    19. Tarek A. Hassan & Thomas M. Mertens, 2017. "The Social Cost of Near-Rational Investment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1059-1103, April.
    20. Zaheer Ahmed & Umara Noreen & Suresh A.L. Ramakrishnan & Dewi Fariha Binti Abdullah, 2021. "What explains the investment decision-making behaviour? The role of financial literacy and financial risk tolerance," Afro-Asian Journal of Finance and Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jrisks:v:13:y:2025:i:7:p:127-:d:1692540. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.