IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/oaefxx/v7y2019i1p1693678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes towards ambiguous information and stock returns

Author

Listed:
  • Ziyun Zhang

Abstract

This study examines whether investors’ attitudes toward ambiguity can explain cross-sectional stock returns by investigating the relationship between future stock returns and option-implied volatilities as well as implied third moments. We find that investors’ attitudes toward different levels of ambiguous stocks help explain cross-sectional variations of stock returns during the 1996–2010 period in the U.S. stock market. In this study, investors’ attitudes toward ambiguity are measured by stocks’ option-implied third moments. Negative-skewed quintiles represent ambiguity aversion and vice versa. Different levels of ambiguity for stocks are distinguished by stocks’ option-implied volatility. High volatility quintiles represent stocks with high information ambiguity. Independent two-dimension sorting results show that ambiguity averters are compensated for holding stocks with higher ambiguity. Meanwhile, ambiguity-loving investors are willing to give up some returns to hold stocks with lower levels of ambiguity. The results show that both types of ambiguity attitudes increase the factor model’s explanatory power. The estimated monthly premiums for ambiguity-aversion and ambiguity-loving factors are 0.38% and 1.28%, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziyun Zhang, 2019. "Attitudes towards ambiguous information and stock returns," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1693678-169, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:oaefxx:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:1693678
    DOI: 10.1080/23322039.2019.1693678
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23322039.2019.1693678
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23322039.2019.1693678?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:oaefxx:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:1693678. 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/OAEF20 .

    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.