Feedback trading in global stock markets under uncertainty of COVID-19
Esra Alp Coşkun
Review of Behavioral Finance, 2022, vol. 15, issue 5, 750-778
Abstract:
Purpose - Although some research has been carried out on feedback trading in different asset classes, there have been few empirical investigations that consider both major and emerging stock markets (Koutmos, 1997; Antoniouet al., 2005; Kim, 2009) stock index futures (Salm and Schuppli, 2010). In this study, the author examines positive/negative feedback trading in both developed-emerging-frontier-standalone (51) stock markets for 2010–2020 and sub-periods including COVID-19 period. Design/methodology/approach - The hypothesis “feedback trading behaviour led the price boom/bust in the stock markets during the first quarter of COVID-19 pandemic” is tested by employing the Sentana and Wadhwani (1992) framework and using asymmetrical GARCH models (GJRGARCH, EGARCH) in accordance with the empirical literature. Findings - The following conclusions can be drawn from the present study; (1) There is no evidence to support a significant distinction between developed, emerging, frontier or standalone markets or high/upper middle, lower middle income economies in the case of feedback trading. It is more likely to be a general phenomenon reflecting the outcomes of general human psychology (2) in the long term (2010–2020) based on the feedback trading results Asian stock markets appear to be far from efficiency. Research limitations/implications - Stock markets are selected based on data availability. Practical implications - Several inferences can be drawn about overall results. First, investors and portfolio managers should beware of their investment decisions during bearish market conditions where volatility is on the rise and also when there is a strong reaction to bad news/negative shocks in the market. Moreover, investing in Asia stock markets may require more attention since those markets are reputed to be more “idiosyncratic”, less reliant on economic and corporate fundamentals in their pricing. Moreover, the impact of foreign investors on stock market volatility and returns and weaker implementation of regulations also affect the efficiency of the markets (Lipinsky and Ong, 2014). Originality/value - To the best of the author’s knowledge, most studies in the field of feedback trading in stock markets have only focused on a small sample of countries and second, the effect of COVID-19 uncertainty on the stock markets have not been addressed in the literature with respect to feedback trading. This paper fills these literature gaps. This study is expected to provide useful insights for understanding the instabilities in stock markets particularly under conditions of high uncertainty and to fill the gap in the literature by comparing the results for a large sample of countries both in the long term and in the pandemic.Highlights for reviewThis study has shown that feedback trading is more prevalent in Asian stock markets in the long run in Europe, America or Middle East for the period 2010–2020.Positive feedback traders generally dominated most of the stock markets during the early period of COVID-19 pandemic.Another major finding was that the stock markets in Malaysia, Japan, the Philippines, Estonia, Portugal and Ukraine are dominated by negative feedback traders which may be interpreted as “disposition effect” meaning that they sell the “past winners”.In Indonesia, New Zealand, China, Austria, Greece, UK, Finland, Spain, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Poland, Turkey, Chile and Argentina neither positive nor negative feedback trading exists even under uncertain conditions.
Keywords: Feedback trading; Asymmetric GARCH models; Stock markets; COVID-19; Uncertainty; G15; G41; N20 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:rbfpps:rbf-08-2021-0154
DOI: 10.1108/RBF-08-2021-0154
Access Statistics for this article
Review of Behavioral Finance is currently edited by Professor Gulnur Muradoglu
More articles in Review of Behavioral Finance from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().