[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rfinst/v29y2016i11p3068-3107..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospect Theory and Stock Returns: An Empirical Test

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholas Barberis
  • Abhiroop Mukherjee
  • Baolian Wang
Abstract
We test the hypothesis that, when thinking about allocating money to a stock, investors mentally represent the stock by the distribution of its past returns and then evaluate this distribution in the way described by prospect theory. In a simple model of asset prices in which some investors think in this way, a stock whose past return distribution has a high (low) prospect theory value earns a low (high) subsequent return, on average. We find empirical support for this prediction in the cross-section of stock returns in the U.S. market, and also in a majority of forty-six other national stock markets. (JEL D03)Received November 19, 2014; accepted May 20, 2016, by Editor Stefan Nagel.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholas Barberis & Abhiroop Mukherjee & Baolian Wang, 2016. "Prospect Theory and Stock Returns: An Empirical Test," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(11), pages 3068-3107.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:29:y:2016:i:11:p:3068-3107.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rfs/hhw049
    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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles

    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:oup:rfinst:v:29:y:2016:i:11:p:3068-3107.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfsssea.html .

    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.