thesis on investor sentiment

DSpace JSPUI

Dspace preserves and enables easy and open access to all types of digital content including text, images, moving images, mpegs and data sets.

• Newcastle University eTheses
• Newcastle University
• Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
• Newcastle University Business School

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

• < Previous

Home > ETD > OPEN_ACCESS_THESES > 69

Open Access Theses

Investor sentiment in the stock market.

Bayram Veli Salur , Purdue University Follow

Date of Award

Degree type, degree name.

Master of Science in Industrial Engineering (MSIE)

Industrial Engineering

First Advisor

Yuehwern Yih

Committee Chair

Committee member 1.

Mehmet Deniz Yavuz

Committee Member 2

Classical finance theories neglect the impact of investor sentiment on stock returns. These theories assume that investors are rational and make decisions in a way that maximizes their wealth. However, a vast amount of research shows that investors' decisions are affected by their psychological biases and feelings. These findings suggest that investor sentiment may have an impact on stock returns. This hypothesis is the main motivation of this study. First, this study examines whether there is correlation among investor sentiment indicators, and whether sentiment indicators have an impact on stock returns in the US and other countries. Second, this study investigates whether a global sentiment exists in developed and emerging countries. Additionally, it examines the relationship between investor sentiment and anomalies. Finally, this study investigates a method that helps investors use sentiment information during trading process.

The results of this study suggest that there is correlation among sentiment indicators in the US. In addition to this, several US investment indicators have a significant relationship with the S&P 500 index. Similar findings are found in Japan, Germany, China and Turkey. Moreover, this study finds that local (country) sentiment indicators are significantly correlated. It seems there is a global sentiment which impacts many countries. This global sentiment is stronger in the years between 2008 and 2012 than in the years between 1985 and 1990 due to increased economic ties among countries. Additionally, countries' stock market indices are significantly correlated. Furthermore, this study suggests that size, book-to-market and momentum anomalies can be explained by investor sentiment. Finally, the last chapter of this study proposes a sentiment rating system for individual stocks. In this system, stocks are assigned to different rating groups based on their sensitivity to sentiment changes. For example, a stock with very limited susceptibility to sentiment changes has AAA rating. An AAA rating means that a particular stock is not affected by sentiment driven mispricing and unexpected macroeconomic news. Therefore, the rating information can be used by individual investors to understand stock' behavior under sentiment changes. In addition, it is found that stock groups, which have negative correlation with sentiment changes, may have differences in terms of risk and size.

Recommended Citation

Salur, Bayram Veli, "Investor Sentiment in the Stock Market" (2013). Open Access Theses . 69. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_theses/69

Since March 10, 2015

Included in

Finance and Financial Management Commons , Industrial Engineering Commons

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Purdue Libraries
• Purdue University Press Open Access Collections

Links for Authors

• Policies and Help Documentation
• Collections
• Disciplines

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• Open access
• Published: 05 July 2022

Investor sentiments and stock markets during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Emre Cevik 2 ,
• Buket Kirci Altinkeski 1 ,
• Emrah Ismail Cevik   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8155-1597 1 &
• Sel Dibooglu 1 , 3  

Financial Innovation volume  8 , Article number:  69 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

41 Citations

Metrics details

This study examines the relationship between positive and negative investor sentiments and stock market returns and volatility in Group of 20 countries using various methods, including panel regression with fixed effects, panel quantile regressions, a panel vector autoregression (PVAR) model, and country-specific regressions. We proxy for negative and positive investor sentiments using the Google Search Volume Index for terms related to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. Using weekly data from March 2020 to May 2021, we document significant relationships between positive and negative investor sentiments and stock market returns and volatility. Specifically, an increase in positive investor sentiment leads to an increase in stock returns while negative investor sentiment decreases stock returns at lower quantiles. The effect of investor sentiment on volatility is consistent across the distribution: negative sentiment increases volatility, whereas positive sentiment reduces volatility. These results are robust as they are corroborated by Granger causality tests and a PVAR model. The findings may have portfolio implications as they indicate that proxies for positive and negative investor sentiments seem to be good predictors of stock returns and volatility during the pandemic.

Introduction

After the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a global pandemic in March 2020, many countries implemented strict quarantine policies that exerted profound effects on economic activity worldwide. Lockdowns have negatively affected all economic sectors, including financial markets, leading to a severe economic crisis (Smales 2021 ). For example, the total loss in the S&P 500 index, a benchmark stock market index, was 35% in March 2020. Azimli ( 2020 ) put the loss in global financial markets in excess of 20% due to COVID-19, and Hashmi et al. ( 2021 ) noted that emerging stock markets have been more affected by the global pandemic than developed stock markets.

The effects of the global pandemic on economic activity and financial markets have been examined from various perspectives (Hossain 2021 ; Sharif et al. 2020 ; Albulescu 2021 ; Wei and Han 2021 ). For instance, Kou et al. ( 2021 ) indicated that the use of technology and innovation has increased considerably after the global pandemic to overcome the challenges caused by numerous precautions taken by governments, such as strict quarantine policies. Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ) noted that sharp declines in stock markets are not only due to the lockdowns that restrict economic activities but also due to changes in investor sentiment; as such, there is a growing body of literature that examines the relationship between investor sentiment and stock market behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. It should be noted that the review of the effects of investor sentiment on the stock market did not start with COVID-19, but such studies gained momentum during the global pandemic. For example, Dergiades ( 2012 ) found that changes in investor sentiment help predict returns in the United States. Brown and Cliff ( 2004 ) showed that while there is a strong contemporaneous correlation between stock market returns and investor sentiment, such sentiment may contribute little to the prediction of future stock market returns.

The principal objective of the current study is to examine the effects of investor sentiment and mood (positive and negative) on major stock markets during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although a significant body of empirical work examines investor sentiment driven by COVID-19, these studies tend to focus only on negative investor sentiment. Hence, the current study contributes to the existing literature by examining the impact of both negative and positive sentiments due to COVID-19 on stock markets.

Behavioral finance studies show that investors’ emotions and anxiety affect their investment decisions in stock markets; this finding is related to the mood sensitivity hypothesis. However, a problem arises in measuring emotions or investor sentiments because these cannot be observed directly. As such, several proxies have been considered in measuring investor sentiments in the literature. Since the work of Da et al. ( 2011 ), the Google Search Volume Index (GSVI) data have been used frequently in the literature to measure investor interest or sentiment. For example, Barber and Odean ( 2001 ) noted that the internet has become an essential tool for investors buying and selling decisions in financial markets. Hence, the internet offers investors a vital platform on which they can access comprehensive information for investment decision-making. If an internet search query is considered an indication of direct interest, searching for information on a particular topic on the internet is a clear indication of an individual’s interest in the topic. Da et al. ( 2011 ) suggested that investors tend to invest in companies that attract their attention in financial markets. Da et al. ( 2011 ) and Fang et al. ( 2014 ) examined the effects of internet search volumes on stock returns. Furthermore, Da et al. ( 2011 ) indicated that the GSVI data allow us to ascertain investor attention more quickly, as observed during the global pandemic. Similarly, Smales ( 2021 ) noted that the GSVI provides a direct and timely measurement of the retrieval of available information. In addition, Costola et al. ( 2021 ) emphasized that the GSVI data can successfully gauge investor attention during episodes of diseases, such as the Middle East respiratory syndrome, chickenpox, and flu.

Numerous studies have shown that internet search volumes can be used as a proxy for investor sentiment, highlighting significant relationships between investor sentiment and investment decisions in financial markets (Kamstra et al. 2003 ; Kaplanski and Levy 2010 ; Da et al. 2015 ). Moreover, the effects of investor sentiment on stock market returns have been extensively examined in the literature (Andrei and Hasler 2015 ; Aouadi et al. 2013 ; Hirshleifer et al. 2011 ; Padungsaksawasdi et al. 2019 ; Chen et al. 2020a ; Chemmanur and Yan 2019 ; Chen 2017 ; Wen et al. 2019 ; Han et al. 2018 ; Smales 2021 ). In the finance literature, the GSVI is widely used to predict stock returns and volatility (Vlastakis and Markellos 2012 ; Kim et al. 2019 ; Heyman et al. 2019 ).

Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ) showed that “coronavirus” became a trending online query after the COVID-19 outbreak, especially after the WHO declared it a pandemic in March 2020. Volatility in financial markets has increased considerably owing to the longer-than-expected COVID-19 pandemic (Mazur et al. 2021 ; Zhang et al. 2020 ; Cheng 2020 ). Smales ( 2021 ) indicated that the continuing uncertainty about the global pandemic is increasing the information needs and news interest of investors, with investor interest playing a key role in the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on stock markets. To date, there is a significant body of empirical work in which investor sentiment driven by COVID-19 is measured by the GSVI (Chen et al. 2020b ; Lyocsa et al. 2020 ; Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil 2021 ; Smales 2021 ; Szczygielski et al. 2021 ).

Given the panic and fear associated with COVID-19, it is not surprising that internet search queries related to COVID-19 have been used to construct a fear index; hence, empirical studies have mostly examined the effects of negative investor sentiment on stock markets using the GSVI related to COVID-19. Meanwhile, Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ) emphasized that focusing on negative investor sentiment is a limitation of these studies. They noted that some sectors, such as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology have been positively affected by the global pandemic, but it is not easy to distinguish between positive and negative sentiments during this pandemic. For example, Nofsinger ( 2005 ) focused on the relationship between investors’ social mood and trading activity and found that an optimistic social mood is related to increases in investment and business activity. Similarly, Shu ( 2010 ) found that equity and T-bill prices correlate positively with investor mood, with a good mood leading to an increase in asset prices, which exert a greater effect on equity markets than on the T-bill market. However, this raises the question as to how the good mood of investors related to COVID-19 can be measured given the lack of direct measurement. In the current study, we propose and use internet search queries for COVID-19 vaccines and the names of companies producing these vaccines as a proxy for the good mood of investors because COVID-19 vaccine news in traditional and social media is generally about the development and effectiveness of vaccines; hence, these developments can provide a proxy for positive sentiments related to overcoming the global pandemic. For example, Sattar and Arifuzzaman ( 2021 ) and Yousefinaghani et al. ( 2021 ) examined tweets on social media and found that the incidence of positive sentiments about COVID-19 vaccines is higher than that of negative sentiments.

We present a Google search for the terms “COVID-19” and “COVID-19 Vaccine” in Fig.  1 . The results in Fig.  1 clearly show that the internet search for COVID-19 reached its highest value in March 2020, and remained relatively high. This indicates that the anxiety about COVID-19 is still high and that there is a high demand for information about COVID-19. However, the Google search for COVID-19 vaccines was not high until the end of 2020, but it has significantly increased thereafter.

Google Search Volume Index for “COVID-19” and “COVID-19 Vaccine” Terms. Note The left axis measures the search volume for “COVID-19” whereas the right axis measures “COVID-19 Vaccine” terms

This study contributes to the literature on the effect of investor sentiment (positive and negative) on stock markets in G20 countries by using various estimation methods. We focus on G20 stock markets because G20 countries include major developed and emerging countries and account for approximately 85% of the gross world product and 80% of world trade in goods and services. In addition, the G20 group includes the countries worst affected by COVID-19 in terms of total cases and deaths . First, we focus on the Google search for not only COVID-19 but also COVID-19 vaccines to examine negative and positive sentiments related to COVID-19. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to explore the effects of positive investor sentiment related to COVID-19 on stock markets. Second, we use the panel quantile estimation method suggested by Machado and Silva ( 2019 ) because the relationship between investor sentiment and stock markets may vary over different return and volatility episodes. We also use a panel vector autoregression (PVAR) model to examine the dynamic relationship between positive and negative investor sentiments and stock markets.

To preview our results, we find significant relationships between investor sentiments and stock market returns and volatility. The panel regression model results show that positive and negative investor sentiments affect stock market returns and volatility. Specifically, increases in positive investor sentiments increase stock returns while increases in negative investor sentiments decrease stock returns at lower quantiles according to the panel quantile regression model. The effect of investor sentiment on volatility is consistent across the distribution: negative sentiment increases volatility, whereas positive sentiment reduces volatility. Finally, these results are robust as they are corroborated by the PVAR and time series models.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a brief literature review. Section 3 presents the econometric framework. Section 4 discusses the data and empirical results. Section 5 details the conclusions.

Literature review

Studies on the impact of the global pandemic have gained significant momentum since the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic in March 2020. The pandemic has adversely affected financial markets by increasing global financial risk (Al-Awadhi et al. 2020 ; Baker et al. 2020 ; Cao et al. 2021 ; Gil-Alana and Claudio-Quiroga 2020 ; Gormsen and Koijen 2020 ; Harjoto et al. 2021 ; Liu et al. 2020b ; Phan and Narayan 2020 ). In addition, empirical studies have found that stock returns have decreased significantly during this period due to the increasing uncertainty caused by the global pandemic (Al-Awadhi et al. 2020 ; Ambros et al. 2021 ; Mishra et al. 2020 ; Topcu and Gulal 2020 ). Another strand of literature focuses on volatility in financial markets, and the results present clear evidence that the global pandemic has increased volatility in equity markets (Corbet et al. 2020 ; Haroon and Rizvi 2020a , 2020b ; Sharma 2020 ; Zaremba et al. 2020 ).

Studies can be classified into three groups. The first group examines the impact of government intervention on economic activity in the wake of the COVID-19 global pandemic. For example, Phan and Narayan ( 2020 ) evaluated the effects of government responses to COVID-19 on financial markets. They documented a possible overreaction of stock markets to the pandemic and market corrections over time. Narayan et al. ( 2021a ) examined the impact of government interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as lockdowns, stimulus packages, and travel bans, on stock markets in G7 countries. The empirical results show that lockdowns, stimulus packages, and travel bans positively impact stock markets and that the impact of lockdowns is greater than that of the other responses.

Similarly, Bannigidadmath et al. ( 2021 ) examined the effects of government policies on stock markets in 25 countries during the global pandemic. They found no significant reaction of stock returns to stimulus packages, lockdowns, or travel bans in Italy, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Austria, and Sweden. Moreover, they noted that the effects of these policies on stock returns were negative in approximately half of the countries and that stock returns were the least affected by travel bans. Padhan and Prabheesh ( 2021 ) surveyed the literature on the impact of the global pandemic on global economic activity. The most effective policies to reduce the adverse effects of the global pandemic are a combination of monetary, macroprudential, and public finance policies. Zaremba et al. ( 2020 ) investigated the relationship between government interventions aimed at curbing the spread of COVID-19 and stock market volatility in 67 countries. The results show that non-pharmaceutical interventions significantly increase stock market volatility. Liu et al. ( 2020a ) examined the responses of macro-financial variables in China to COVID-19 by using time–frequency analysis. They found that business and financial cycles were close to recessions before the COVID-19 outbreak. They also indicated that business cycles in China decoupled from global financial cycles after 2015, putting China at an advantage relative to other emerging countries in combating the global pandemic.

The second group of studies in the literature focuses on the relationship between investor sentiment and stock market performance. For example, Wen et al. ( 2019 ) examined the impact of retail investor attention, which is measured using the Baidu index as the search frequency, on stock price collapse risk in China. Their empirical results show that an increase in retail investor attention leads to a reduction in future stock price crash risk. Lopez-Cabarcos et al. ( 2017 ) investigated the differences between the social media activities of technical and nontechnical investors and their impact on risk in the market. The empirical results indicate that while technical investors’ social media activities have no impact on the perceived risk in the market, the sentiment of nontechnical investors affects market risk. This impact varies according to investors’ profiles, including experience, holding period, and a number of followers. Donadelli et al. ( 2017 ) examined the impact of investor sentiment driven by the WHO warnings and media news about dangerous infectious diseases on the stock prices of pharmaceutical companies in the United States. They found that disease-related news positively affected the stock prices of pharmaceutical companies from 2003 to 2014 and that the impact was more substantial on the portfolio of small-capitalization stocks. Ichev and Marinč ( 2018 ) examined the relationship between the media coverage of the 2014–2016 Ebola pandemic-related events and the stock prices in the United States in terms of geographical proximity. They found that the impact of the Ebola pandemic was more pronounced on the stock prices of companies operating in West African countries and the United States.

Haroon and Rizvi ( 2020a ) analyzed the relationship between investor sentiment driven by media news related to COVID-19 and the volatility of stock markets. They found that COVID-19-related news causes increased uncertainty in financial markets and increased volatility in stock markets. Ambros et al. ( 2021 ) investigated the impact of COVID-19-related news on eight stock market indices. Their empirical results show that while stock returns were not affected by changes in the volume of COVID-19-related news, the volatility of the European stock markets significantly increased due to such news. Iyke and Ho ( 2021 ) measured investor attention using Google search terms related to COVID-19 and examined the relationship between investor attention and stock market indices in 14 African countries. They found that investor attention is an important determinant of stock returns, with increases in investor attention decreasing the stock returns in Botswana, Nigeria, and Zambia. Meanwhile, there is a positive relationship between investor attention and stock returns in Ghana and Tanzania. Using word searches from 45 popular newspaper articles, Narayan et al. ( 2021b ) constructed six different global sentiment indicators for COVID-19, namely, COVID, medical, vaccine, travel, uncertainty, and aggregate sentiment. They suggested these indicators provide a good measure for examining the impact of the global pandemic. Piñeiro-Chousa et al. ( 2022 ) analyzed the stock market reaction of Pfizer and Moderna, which developed the first vaccines against COVID-19, before and during the pandemic. They considered the impact of the technological market index, market volatility, and investor sentiment on Pfizer and Moderna’s stock returns. They observed that market volatility and investor sentiment exert an asymmetric impact on stock returns. In addition, there is a contagion effect between the stock returns of Pfizer and Moderna and the technological market during the COVID-19 pandemic. Li et al. ( 2021 ) suggested a new approach for determining cluster structures for financial data. They showed that the proposed approach performs well in obtaining a reasonable number of cluster structures and in detecting anomalies in financial variables.

Several studies have proxied the effect of the pandemic on stock markets using the total number of cases and deaths due to COVID-19. For example, Al-Awadhi et al. ( 2020 ) used panel data analysis to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on companies traded in the Chinese stock market. They found that the daily increases in total cases and total deaths caused by COVID-19 exerted significant negative effects on the stock returns of all companies considered. Haroon and Rizvi ( 2020b ) investigated the impact of the global pandemic on the liquidity of stock markets in 23 emerging countries. While the decrease in the number of COVID-19 cases positively affects liquidity in financial markets, the increase in cases reduces liquidity. Topcu and Gulal ( 2020 ) investigated the impact of COVID-19 on emerging stock markets by using COVID-19 cases and found that although the initial impact of the global pandemic on emerging stock markets was negative, this effect has gradually decreased over time. Cao et al. ( 2021 ) analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on 14 stock markets by using panel data with the total number of cases as a proxy for the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. The empirical results show a significantly negative relationship between stock market returns and the total number of cases. Gil-Alana and Claudio-Quiroga ( 2020 ) examined the impact of the global pandemic on stock markets in China, Japan, and South Korea. Using fractional integration methods, they found temporary effects of the pandemic on the Japanese stock index but permanent effects on the Chinese and South Korean stock markets. Harjoto et al. ( 2021 ) investigated the impact of the global pandemic on stock markets by using an event study approach and found that the global pandemic exerts a greater negative impact on emerging stock markets than on developed stock markets.

The third group of studies in the literature focus on examining COVID-19 vaccine-related sentiments by using data from social media. Sattar and Arifuzzaman ( 2021 ) analyzed 1.2 million tweets about COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter to ascertain the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine. In general, they found that the sentiments related to COVID-19 vaccines were positive. Similarly, Yousefinaghani et al. ( 2021 ) analyzed approximately 4.5 million tweets to understand the public sentiments and thoughts about COVID-19 vaccines. Their content analysis revealed that positive sentiments about COVID-19 vaccines were dominant. Kwok et al. ( 2021 ) analyzed 31,100 tweets, including keywords related to COVID-19 vaccines, by using machine learning methods to determine the effects of COVID-19 vaccine sentiments in Australia. The number of tweets expressing a positive public opinion on COVID-19 vaccines constituted approximately two-thirds of the total tweets. Hussain et al. ( 2021 ) analyzed posts about COVID-19 vaccines on social media by using an artificial intelligence approach to ascertain public attitude and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom and the United States. They concluded that the overall mood of vaccine-related tweets and Facebook posts in the two countries were positive.

The empirical results in the literature show that investor sentiment affects the stock market. Therefore, we examine the relationship between investor sentiment (positive and negative) and the stock market on the basis of the following hypotheses:

There is a significant and negative (positive) relationship between negative (positive) investor sentiment and stock returns.

There is a significant and positive (negative) relationship between negative (positive) investor sentiment and stock market volatility.

The effects of investor sentiment on returns and volatility are heterogeneous across the distribution of returns and volatility.

Econometric framework

Model specification.

Behavioral finance studies have shown that investors’ emotions and anxiety affect their investment decisions in stock markets; this finding is related to the mood sensitivity hypothesis. As such, the literature has extensively focused on the relationship between investor sentiment and stock returns and volatility (e.g., Dergiades 2012 ; Brown and Cliff 2004 ; Da et al. 2011 ; Fang et al. 2014 ; Smales 2021 ). In this context, Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ) noted that sharp declines in stock markets during the COVID-19 pandemic are not only due to lockdowns that restrict economic activity but also due to changes in investor sentiment. On the basis of behavioral finance, we examine the effects of investor sentiment on stock returns and volatility by using the following panel regression models:

where CAR and VOL are the cumulative abnormal returns and realized volatility, respectively; COV19 and VAC are the GSVIs for the COVID-19- and COVID-19 vaccine-related terms, respectively; and X is the vector of the control variables. Footnote 1 To estimate Eqs. ( 1 ) and ( 2 ), we use a fixed effect regression model with Driscoll and Kraay standard errors that produce robust standard errors in the case of cross-sectional dependence (CD) and autocorrelation.

Panel quantile regression model

Note that the results of the fixed effect panel regression model provide only the mean effects of investor sentiment on returns and volatility; however, these effects may be heterogeneous across the entire distribution of returns and volatility. The quantile regression model suggested by Koenker and Bassett ( 1978 ) is preferred in examining the heterogeneous effects of investor sentiments. Since the report of Koenker and Bassett ( 1978 ), the quantile regression model has been widely used in the empirical literature because it allows for examining the effect of the exogenous variables on the conditional mean of the dependent variable at different quantiles. In addition, quantile regressions provide more robust estimation results in the case of outliers and non-normal data. In this study, we use panel quantile estimation methods with fixed effects; namely, the method of moments quantile regression (MMQR) suggested by Machado and Silva ( 2019 ).

Controlling for unobserved individual heterogeneity is the most important issue in estimating the quantile model for panel data; hence, the fixed effects panel quantile regression is widely used in considering unobserved individual heterogeneity. Machado and Silva ( 2019 ) emphasized that the most important advantage of the MMQR approach is that it provides additional information on how explanatory variables affect the entire conditional distribution of the dependent variable. This is in contrast to other methods in the literature, such as that by Koenker ( 2004 ) and Canay ( 2011 ), in which the estimated coefficients of independent variables provide an idea about the conditional mean response of the dependent variable. Therefore, the MMQR approach allows for examining the effects of individual heterogeneity on the entire distribution. Additionally, the MMQR approach can be used when there are endogenous variables on the right-hand side.

Given the data \(\left\{ {\left( {Y_{it} ,X_{it}^{\prime } } \right)^{\prime } } \right\}\) from a panel of n entities i  = 1, …, n over T periods, t  = 1, …, T , the estimation of the conditional quantiles \(Q_{y} \left( {\tau \backslash X} \right)\) for a location-scale model of the form can be presented as follows:

where \(Pr\left\{ {\delta_{it} + Z_{it}^{^{\prime}} \gamma > 0} \right\} = 1\) and \(\left( {\alpha \beta^{\prime}\delta \gamma^{\prime}} \right)\) are the estimated parameters. Individual fixed effects are represented by \(\left( {\alpha_{i} ,\delta_{i} } \right)\) , i  = 1, …, n . X it is strictly exogenous i.i.d. for any fixed i and is independent across i . U it is i.i.d. across individuals ( i ) through time ( t ), orthogonal to X it , and normalized to satisfy the moment conditions given in the work of Machado and Silva ( 2019 ). Z is a vector of the identified components of X , which are differentiable transformations with element l given by

Equation ( 4 ) can be represented as follows:

where \(X_{it}^{^{\prime}}\) is a vector of independent variables and \(Q_{y} \left( {\tau \backslash X_{it} } \right)\) is the quantile distribution of the dependent variable Y it , which is conditional on the location of the independent variables. Note that \(\alpha_{i} \left( \tau \right) \equiv \alpha_{i} + \delta_{i} q\left( \tau \right)\) is the scalar coefficient, which is indicative of the quantile-τ fixed effect for the individual I and \(q\left( \tau \right)\) is the τ - th sample quantile.

Panel VAR Model

The fixed effects panel regression model and fixed effects panel quantile regression allow us to examine the static relationship between investor sentiment and stock markets; however, the relationship may be dynamic. To account for this possibility, we use a PVAR model to examine the dynamic relationship between investor sentiment and stock markets. Abrigo and Love ( 2016 ) put forth the following homogenous PVAR of order p with panel-specific effects for k variables:

where Y it is a vector of endogenous variables, X it is a vector of exogenous covariates, and u i and e it are vectors of dependent variable-specific panel fixed effects and idiosyncratic errors, respectively. A and B are parameter matrices. The properties of residuals can be described as \(E\left( {e_{it} } \right) = 0\) , \(\sum = E\left( {e_{it}^{^{\prime}} e_{it} } \right)\) and \(E\left( {e_{it}^{^{\prime}} e_{it} } \right) = 0\) for all t  >  s .

Abrigo and Love ( 2016 ) suggested using fixed effects in estimation to account for cross-sectional heterogeneity. Note that Eq. ( 6 ) cannot be estimated using ordinary least squares because the presence of lagged dependent variables on the right-hand side of the system of equations may yield biased results when N is large. Abrigo and Love ( 2016 ) suggested that generalized method of moments (GMM) estimations provide consistent estimates for the PVAR model when T is fixed and N is large. The most important issue in GMM estimation is avoiding the over-identification problem. Abrigo and Love ( 2016 ) indicated that the J test suggested by Hansen ( 1982 ) can be used to ascertain over-identifying restrictions for instrumental variables.

As in the time series VAR model, selecting the optimal lag length is the most important task in the PVAR model. There are three popular model selection criteria: the Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), and Hannan–Quinn information criterion (HQIC). Similarly, Abrigo and Love ( 2016 ) suggested a panel version of the three model selection criteria, namely, modified AIC (MAIC), modified BIC, and modified HQIC; this version depends on the J -statistic to determine optimal lag lengths.

Data and empirical results

In this study, we examine the effects of investor sentiment on G20 stock markets (minus the aggregate European Union) by using weekly data from March 13, 2020, to May 21, 2021. Footnote 2 We consider five-day cumulative abnormal returns and realized volatility as indicators of stock market performance. We calculate the realized variance for each stock market index using the sum of squared daily returns. We consider the changes in COVID-19 cases to gauge the impact of the global pandemic. We also follow the work of Hood and Malik (2003), Humpe and McMillan (2009), Jain and Biswal ( 2016 ), and Ma et al. ( 2021 ) and use the 10-year government bond yield, logarithmic changes in the foreign exchange rate, Footnote 3 and logarithmic changes in the gold price Footnote 4 as control variables that affect stock market returns and volatility. The data for the stock market index, gold price, and foreign exchange rate are obtained from Refinitiv Eikon Datastream. The data for investor sentiment are derived from Google Trends, and the COVID-19 cases data are collected from the Our World in Data database. Footnote 5

In this study, we use cumulative abnormal returns rather than returns because Gao et al. ( 2017 ) emphasized that using the former removes market-wide effects. As in Liu et al. ( 2020b ), we first calculate expected returns by using the following market model:

where R it is the daily log return for each country and R mt is the daily log return for the market. In this study, we consider the MSCI World Index as a benchmark and employ recursive rolling estimation with a rolling window of 252 to obtain the following time-varying abnormal returns:

where AR is the daily abnormal return. Finally, we calculate the weekly cumulative abnormal returns ( CAR ) as the sum of the five-day abnormal returns over one week.

As in Lyocsa et al. ( 2020 ), Chen et al. ( 2020b ), Szczygielski et al. ( 2021 ), and Smales ( 2021 ), we consider country-specific Google search terms “COVID-19,” “Coronavirus,” “Pandemic,” “SARS-CoV,” and “SARSCoV-2” to proxy for negative investor attention to the global pandemic. In addition to the COVID-19 vaccine-related terms, we include the names of the companies producing COVID-19 vaccines to construct country-specific positive investor sentiment. Hence, “COVID-19 Vaccine,” “BioNTech,” “Pfizer,” “Moderna,” “AstraZeneca,” “Johnson & Johnson,”, “Sputnik V,” “Sinovac Biotech,” “Novavax,” and “CanSino Biologics” are used as the Google search terms to proxy for positive investor attention related to COVID-19. The weekly aggregate index is calculated as the sum of the search terms for each week.

Note that we use the Google search volume for the COVID-19 terms to proxy for negative investor sentiment and the Google search volume for COVID-19 vaccine terms to proxy for positive investor sentiment.

We present the definition of the variables in Table 1 .

Empirical results

Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2 . According to the results in Table 2 , the weekly mean of cumulative abnormal returns is negative during the COVID-19 pandemic. The highest abnormal return occurs in the Argentinean stock market, whereas the lowest one occurs in the Brazilian stock market during the sample. Note that the mean of positive investor sentiment is higher than that of negative investor sentiment and that Brazil has the highest Google search volume for COVID-19 terms. The mean of the changes in the total number of COVID-19 cases is positive during the sample period. In addition, the mean foreign exchange returns and mean gold returns are positive, indicating that the foreign exchange rate and gold provide positive yields during the pandemic.

The Pearson correlation coefficients are presented in Table 3 . Realized volatility, negative investor sentiment, gold returns, and bond yields are negatively and significantly correlated with stock returns. On the contrary, the correlation between stock returns and positive investor sentiment is positive and statistically significant. While the correlation between realized volatility and negative investor sentiment is positive and significant, the relationship between realized volatility and positive investor sentiment is negative. These findings suggest that the Google search for COVID-19-related terms leads to negative investor sentiment because there is a negative (positive) relationship between stock market returns (volatility) and the GSVI. This result is consistent with the literature because as noted above, the Google search volume for COVID-19 has been used to construct a “fear index.” Meanwhile, the positive (negative) and statistically significant relationship between the GSVI for COVID-19 vaccine-related terms and stock market return (volatility) indicates that the Google search for COVID-19 vaccine-related terms can be used as a proxy for positive investor sentiment.

We begin our empirical analysis by first investigating the presence of CD within the panel. To this end, we use the CD test suggested by Pesaran ( 2015 ). The CD test results are essential for selecting appropriate panel unit root tests. First-generation unit root tests are known to have low power in rejecting the null hypothesis when CD exists across panel members. Hence, we use both the first- and second-generation panel unit root tests such as Levin-Lin-Chu (LLC) and cross-sectional augmented Im-Pesaran-Shin (CIPS) suggested by Levin et al. ( 2002 ) and Pesaran ( 2007 ), respectively. According to the test results in Table 4 , the null hypothesis of weak CD is rejected at the 1% significance level for all variables, implying strong CD across the countries in the panel. Moreover, the panel unit root test results in Table 4 show that the null hypothesis of a unit root can be rejected at the 1% significance level, indicating that all the variables are stationary.

After confirming stationarity, we use a fixed-effects panel regression model with Driscoll–Kraay standard errors and present the model results in Table 5 . Footnote 6 According to the results in Table 5 , an increase in negative investor sentiment significantly decreases stock returns; this relationship is consistent with those described in established studies (Chen et al. 2020b ; Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil, 2021 ; Smales, 2021 ; Szczygielski et al., 2021 ). The estimated coefficient for positive investor sentiment is positive and statistically significant at the 10% level. Hence, it can be said that the Google search index for COVID-19 vaccine-related terms significantly affects stock market returns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Interestingly, we find no statistically significant relationship between COVID-19 cases and stock market returns. However, an increase in gold returns and bond yields decreases stock market returns. In addition, foreign exchange returns positively affect stock market returns.

Looking at the results for stock market volatility, an increase in negative investor sentiment increases volatility in stock markets; this relationship is consistent with the results in Lyocsa et al. ( 2020 ), Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ), and Smales ( 2021 ). On the other hand, positive investor sentiment significantly reduces stock market volatility. Moreover, stock market volatility reacts positively to the number of COVID-19 cases, where an increase in COVID-19 cases leads to an increase in volatility. It should be noted that the impact of investor sentiment on stock market volatility is stronger than the effect on stock market returns because the coefficients for positive and negative investor sentiments are statistically significant at the 1% level in the stock market volatility model. Therefore, stock market volatility seems to be more sensitive to the volume of Google search terms related to COVID-19.

The panel regression model results show that positive and negative investor sentiments affect stock market returns and volatility. Meanwhile, the mean effects of investor sentiment may be heterogeneous across the distribution of returns and volatility. To account for this possibility, we use a fixed-effects panel quantile regression model and present the results in Table 6 , where the results for stock market returns and volatility are shown in Panels A and B, respectively. While the results in the “Location” column in Table 6 give the mean effect of independent variables on the dependent variable, the results in the “Scale” column show the effect of independent variables on the dispersion of the dependent variable. The estimated coefficients for positive and negative investor sentiments are statistically significant in both models per the “Location” and are consistent with the results in Table 5 . According to the results in Panel A, the measure for negative investor sentiment has a positive impact on the scale, implying that an increase in negative sentiment leads to an increase in the dispersion of stock returns. On the contrary, the negative coefficient for positive sentiment indicates that an increase in positive investor sentiment is accompanied by a decrease in the dispersion of stock returns. In addition, while positive investor sentiment does not seem to exert a significant impact on volatility dispersion, negative investor sentiment increases volatility dispersion.

The results in Panel A show that while the impact of negative and positive investor sentiments on stock market returns is statistically significant between the 1st and 5th quantiles, it is not significant at the higher quantiles, except for the 9th quantile. Thus, an increase in positive (negative) investor sentiment leads to an increase (decrease) in stock returns up to the median of stock returns. The lack of a significant relationship at higher quantiles implies that the effect of investor sentiment on stock returns is significant only on the left-hand side of the distribution. This implies that investor sentiment has a strong impact on stock returns under bad market conditions. This result is consistent with Ma et al. ( 2018 ), who used a different proxy for investor sentiment and showed that investor sentiment contains significant information about the left tail of market returns.

Similarly, Li et al. ( 2017 ) documented Granger causality from investor sentiment to stock returns at low quantiles. Note that positive investor sentiment has a significant negative impact on stock returns at the highest quantile, which is consistent with the prospect theory suggested by Kahneman and Tversky ( 1979 ). Kahneman and Tversky ( 1979 ) indicated that losses are more important to people than gains. In this vein, Li et al. ( 2017 ) emphasized that investors tend to be prudent or hesitant in making investment decisions in expansionary market regimes because losses may be large if market conditions change. Therefore, investors may take short positions at the highest return levels even if they have positive sentiments. Hence, positive investor sentiment negatively affects stock returns.

The effect of the total number of COVID-19 cases on stock returns is statistically significant only at 1st and 2nd quantiles, suggesting that the impact of the total number of COVID-19 cases on stock returns is limited. While the effects of foreign exchange rates and gold returns on stock returns are statistically significant across all quantiles, the estimated coefficient for bond yields is not significant.

The model results in Panel B show that the effects of positive and negative investor sentiments on stock market volatility are consistent across all quantiles. Specifically, the estimated coefficients for negative investor sentiment are negative and statistically significant across all quantiles, where negative investor sentiment increases volatility. Note that the effect of negative investor sentiment on volatility increases slightly in higher quantiles. We find robust evidence that positive investor sentiment reduces volatility because the estimated coefficients for positive investor sentiment are negative and statistically significant across the quantiles. Moreover, our empirical findings show that increases in the total number of COVID-19 cases contribute to stock market volatility. We also find that foreign exchange rates, gold returns, and bond yields positively affect stock market volatility as their coefficients are all positive and statistically significant. These results highlight the importance of government policy responses. For example, Goel and Dash ( 2022 ) found that government policy responses, as measured by various pandemic response policies, play a moderating role in the relationship between investor sentiment and stock returns. It is also important for government health policies to rapidly communicate accurate information about COVID-19 to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on financial markets. To better illustrate the effects of positive and negative investor sentiments on stock market returns and volatility across quantiles, we present the estimated coefficients for positive and negative investor sentiments in Fig.  2 .

Impact of positive and negative investor sentiments on returns and volatility. Note The shaded areas are two standard deviation confidence intervals

Figure  2 clearly shows that the effect of investor sentiment on returns is statistically significant up to the median of returns with limited effects at higher return levels. The results in Panel B indicate that the impact of investor sentiment on stock market volatility is statistically significant across all quantiles. More interestingly, the negative and positive effects of investor sentiment on stock market volatility are stronger at higher volatility levels.

Robustness analysis

In this section, we employ two robustness checks. First, we use a PVAR model to ascertain the dynamic relationship between stock markets (returns and volatility) and investor sentiment. Second, we estimate a country-specific regression model to examine whether the relationship between stock market returns and investor sentiment varies by country.

PVAR model results

We first set the optimal lag length for the PVAR model. Footnote 7 We consider model information criteria and Hansen’s J test for overidentification; the MAIC model and Hansen’s highest J test suggest that one lag is sufficient. Therefore, we consider one lag in the PVAR estimation. Footnote 8

The dynamic relationships among the variables can be analyzed using Granger causality and impulse response analysis in the PVAR model. Therefore, we use the Wald test by imposing zero restrictions on the estimated autoregressive coefficients to analyze investor sentiment, stock market returns, and volatility. Table 7 presents the Granger causality test results. The results in Table 7 show unidirectional Granger causality from negative investor sentiment to stock returns. The null hypothesis of no causality between positive investor sentiment and stock returns can be rejected at the 5% significance level.

However, we cannot find causality from stock returns to negative investor sentiment. While unidirectional Granger causality exists only from negative investor sentiment to stock market volatility, bidirectional causality exists between positive investor sentiment and stock market volatility. Overall, the Granger causality test results show that investor sentiment plays an important role in predicting stock market returns and volatility during the COVID-19 pandemic which has important portfolio allocation implications.

The impulse response analysis results are shown in Fig.  3 . Footnote 9 Note that the results in Fig.  3 are the cumulative responses of returns and volatility to a one standard deviation shock in investor sentiment. According to the results in Panel A, stock returns react positively to a shock in positive investor sentiment and are statistically significant for up to 10 weeks. The responses of stock returns to negative investor sentiment shocks are negative and statistically significant. This finding is consistent with Granger causality where we find a causal link between investor sentiment and stock returns. These findings also have portfolio implications as measures of investor sentiment seem to have predictive power for stock returns and volatility during the pandemic.

Impulse Response Analysis Results. Note The figures show the cumulative orthogonalized impulse response functions. The shaded areas represent two standard deviation confidence intervals. Moreover, the shaded areas represent 95% confidence intervals. A Monte Carlo simulation with 1,000 draws is used to obtain the confidence intervals

The responses of stock market volatility to positive investor sentiment are negative and significant. Meanwhile, stock market volatility increases due to negative investor sentiment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The PVAR model results are consistent with those of the panel regression and quantile models presented above and tell a consistent story: the Google search volume for COVID-19-related terms negatively affects stock markets in the sample. At the same time, the Google search terms for COVID-19 vaccine-related terms and the prospect of an end to the pandemic positively affect stock markets in the G20 countries. Thus, Google search terms seem to be good proxies for investor sentiment.

Country-specific results

A country-specific regression analysis allows us to examine how each stock market responds to investor sentiment. The time-series results for stock market returns are presented in Table 8 . Footnote 10 The results in Table 8 show that while the impact of negative investor sentiment on stock market returns is negative for all countries, except for China, India, Japan, and Saudi Arabia, it is statistically significant for Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Meanwhile, the regression model results for positive investor sentiment are mixed. For example, stock returns seem to be negatively affected by positive investor sentiment in Australia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. However, the coefficient of positive investor sentiment is statistically significant at the 10% level only for Japan and Saudi Arabia. These results may be due to the low number of observations (i.e., 66 observations) for each country; hence, the estimated coefficients may be insignificant because of low degrees of freedom.

The results in Table 9 show that stock market volatility is positively and significantly affected by negative investor sentiment in all countries, except Brazil and Turkey. On the contrary, positive investor sentiment leads to decreased volatility in all countries, except Argentina, Japan, Russia, and South Korea. However, the estimated coefficient for positive investor sentiment is statistically significant only in Australia, France, Germany, India, Italy, Mexico, and the United Kingdom.

Country-specific regression results show that the mean effect of investor sentiment may be heterogeneous across the distributions of returns and volatility. To account for this possibility, we estimate the quantile regression models for each country and present the results for the stock market returns in Table 10 . The estimated coefficients for negative investor sentiment are negative and statistically significant at certain quantiles in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States. At the same time, the results in Table 10 indicate a positive and significant relationship between stock market returns and positive investor sentiment at the lowest quantiles in Argentina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Saudi Arabia.

Table 11 presents the results of the country-level quantile regression model for stock market volatility. According to the results in Table 11 , negative investor sentiment significantly increases stock market volatility at certain quantiles in all countries, except for Brazil and Turkey. We also find a negative and significant relationship between positive investor sentiment and stock market volatility at least in one quantile in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

Overall, the country-specific regression results are consistent with the panel data results, where the effect of negative and positive investor sentiments on stock market volatility is stronger than the effect on stock market returns. Therefore, stock market volatility seems to be sensitive to the Google search volume related to COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines; this result is consistent with the empirical findings of Ambros et al. ( 2021 ). In addition, developed stock markets are more affected by investor sentiment than emerging stock markets because the estimated coefficients for investor sentiment tend to be more significant for developed countries. This is similar to the empirical findings in the literature. For instance, Smales ( 2021 ) found that the stock market returns of G7 countries are more affected by investor sentiment than the stock market returns of emerging countries. Rouatbi et al. ( 2021 ) examined the impact of vaccinations on developed and emerging stock markets and found that an increase in vaccination has more effects on the former than the latter.

Conclusions

Behavioral finance research suggests that investors’ emotions and anxiety affect their investment decisions in stock markets. In this study, we use GSVI data to construct negative investor sentiment (proxied by COVID-19-related terms) and positive investor sentiment (proxied by COVID-19 vaccine-related terms). We investigate the relationship between positive and negative investor sentiments and G20 stock market returns and volatility by using various methods, including panel regression with fixed effects, quantile regressions, PVAR, and country-level time-series regressions. Using weekly data from March 2020 to May 2021, we find significant relationships between investor sentiment and stock market returns and volatility. Specifically, an increase in positive investor sentiment leads to an increase in stock returns while negative investor sentiment decreases stock returns on the left-hand side of the distribution. The effect of investor sentiment on volatility is consistent across the distribution: negative sentiment increases volatility, whereas positive sentiment reduces volatility. Finally, these results are robust as the Granger causality tests and PVAR model corroborate them.

Our empirical results are consistent with those of Lyocsa et al. ( 2020 ), Chundakkadan and Nedumparambil ( 2021 ), and Smale ( 2021 ). The panel data model results show that the impact of investor sentiment on stock market volatility is stronger than that on stock market returns. Therefore, stock market volatility seems to be more sensitive to the volume of Google search terms related to COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines; this result is consistent with the empirical findings of Ambros et al. ( 2021 ). The country-level regression results are mostly consistent with the panel data, and the effect of investor sentiment on stock market volatility is stronger than that on stock market returns. In addition, developed stock markets are more affected by investor sentiment than emerging stock markets because the estimated coefficients for investor sentiment are more significant in developed countries. Specifically, the results for European countries, such as Germany, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom stand out as their stock markets are significantly affected by investor sentiment. Although Russia and China are among the countries producing some COVID-19 vaccines, we cannot validate a significant relationship between positive investor sentiment and stock market returns or volatility for these countries based on quantile regressions.

The emergence of new variants of COVID-19 leads to high levels of uncertainty globally. Investor concerns about COVID-19 seem to have a negative impact on financial markets. However, developments and news about COVID-19 vaccines seem to be a good proxy for positive investor sentiment, which has a positive impact on financial markets. Although COVID-19 first emerged in China, we cannot find significant investor sentiment on Chinese stock market returns based on regression and quantile regression models. We also find that positive investor sentiment significantly reduces stock market return volatility in Germany and the United Kingdom, both of which produce COVID-19 vaccines.

The Google search volume for COVID-19 terms negatively affects stock markets during the ongoing COVID-19. Meanwhile, the Google search for COVID-19 vaccine-related terms and the prospect of an end to the pandemic positively affect stock markets in G20 countries. Thus, Google search terms seem to be good proxies for investor sentiments. The findings may have portfolio implications as the proxies for positive and negative investor sentiments seem to be good predictors of stock returns and volatility during the pandemic. Moreover, it is known that a lack of clarity from public health authorities on vaccine safety has allowed some false claims on the efficacy of vaccines and some conspiracy theories to take hold. Our results suggest the need to formulate a health policy that communicates rapid and accurate information about COVID-19 to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on financial markets. Finally, authorities should adopt policies that convey realistic data on the effects of vaccines on the efforts to end the pandemic. This is particularly important as there is some evidence that government policy response to the pandemic has a moderating role in the relationship between investor sentiment and stock returns.

Future research can extend the analysis by using more countries and different investor sentiment indices. In addition, the sample can be extended to include more data as the global pandemic unfolds, and econometric analyses that rely on high-frequency data can be used. Such analysis can be expected to yield more robust results.

We present detailed information on the variables in the next section.

There are several justifications for using weekly data. First, when we consider daily data, we could not find Google search data for the Covid-19 vaccine terms in some countries. Second, daily data for the stock market may cause a day of the week anomaly. Finally, using weekly data allows us to calculate realized volatility by using daily return data. Otherwise, calculating daily realized volatility requires intraday data which is difficult to obtain. We start the sample from March 2020 because there is no data on Google search volume for the Covid-19 vaccine before March 2020.

The foreign exchange rate is measured vis-a-vis the US dollar for all countries except for the US. We use the trade-weighted US dollar index for the US.

Gold price is calculated in national currency for all countries.

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

To examine the potential endogeneity issue between the stock market and Google indices, we also use an instrumental variable panel regression model. We find similar results with the fixed-effect panel regression model.

COV, VAC, CAR and VOL are considered as endogenous variables in the PVAR model. We treat CASES, FX, GOLD and Bond as exogenous variables.

We also test the stability of the PVAR model with one lag and find that the PVAR model satisfies the stability condition. The test results are available upon request.

The impulse-responses analysis is conducted using Cholesky decomposition where the order of variables is important. We order the variables as COV-19 → VAC → CAR (or LVOL) based on Granger causality test results.

To save space, we present model results for all variables in an Appendix.

Abrigo MRM, Love I (2016) Estimation of panel vector autoregression in Stata. Stand Genomic Sci 16(3):778–804

Google Scholar  

Al-Awadhi AM, Alsaifi K, Al-Awadhi A, Alhammadi S (2020) Death and contagious infectious diseases: Impact of the COVID-19 virus on stock market returns. J Behav Exp Financ 27:100326

Article   Google Scholar  

Albulescu CT (2021) COVID-19 and the United States financial markets’ volatility. Financ Res Lett 38:101699

Ambros M, Frenkel M, Huynh TLD, Kilinc M (2021) COVID-19 pandemic news and stock market reaction during the onset of the crisis: evidence from high-frequency data. Appl Econ Lett 28(19):1686–1689

Andrei D, Hasler M (2015) Investor attention and stock market volatility. Rev Financ Stud 28(1):33–72

Aouadi A, Arouri M, Teulon F (2013) Investor attention and stock market activity: evidence from France. Econ Model 35:674–681

Azimli A (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on the degree of dependence and structure of risk-return relationship: a quantile regression approach. Financ Res Lett 36:101648

Baker SR, Bloom N, Davis SJ, Kost KJ, Sammon MC, Viratyosin T (2020) The unprecedented stock market impact of COVID-19 (No. w26945). National Bureau of Economic Research

Bannigidadmath D, Narayan PK, Phan DHB, Gong Q (2021) How stock markets reacted to COVID-19? Evidence from 25 countries. Finance Research Letters 102161

Barber BM, Odean T (2001) The internet and the investor. J Econ Perspect 15(1):41–54

Brown GW, Cliff MT (2004) Investor sentiment and the near-term stock market. J Empir Financ 11(1):1–27

Canay IA (2011) A simple approach to quantile regression for panel data. Econom J 14(3):368–386

Cao KH, Li Q, Liu Y, Woo CK (2021) Covid-19’s adverse effects on a stock market index. Appl Econ Lett 28(14):1157–1161

Chemmanur TJ, Yan A (2019) Advertising, attention, and stock returns. Q J Financ 9(3):1950009

Chen C, Liu L, Zhao N (2020a) Fear sentiment, uncertainty, and bitcoin price dynamics: the case of COVID-19. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 56(10):2298–2309

Chen R, Qian Q, Jin C, Xu M, Song Q (2020b) Investor attention on internet financial markets. Financ Res Lett 36:101421

Chen T (2017) Investor attention and global stock returns. J Behav Financ 18(3):358–372

Cheng IH (2020) Volatility markets underreacted to the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Rev Asset Pricing Stud 10(4):635–668

Chundakkadan, R, Nedumparambil, E (2021) In search of COVID-19 and stock market behavior. Glob Financ J 100639

Corbet S, Larkin C, Lucey B (2020) The contagion effects of the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from gold and cryptocurrencies. Financ Res Lett 35:101554

Costola M, Iacopini M, Santagiustina CRMA (2021) Google search volumes and the financial markets during the COVID-19 outbreak. Financ Res Lett 42:101884

Da Z, Engelberg J, Gao P (2011) In search of attention. J Financ 66(5):1461–1499

Da Z, Engelberg J, Gao P (2015) The sum of all FEARS investor sentiment and asset prices. Rev Financ Stud 28(1):1–32

Dergiades T (2012) Do investors’ sentiment dynamics affect stock returns? Evidence from the US economy. Econ Lett 116(3):404–407

Donadelli M, Kizys R, Riedel M (2017) Dangerous infectious diseases: bad news for main street, good news for Wall Street? J Financ Markets 35:84–103

Fang X, Jiang Y, Qian Z (2014) The effects of individual investors’ attention on stock returns: Evidence from the ChiNext market. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 50(3):158–168

Gao GP, Moulton PC, Ng DT (2017) Institutional ownership and return predictability across economically unrelated stocks. J Financ Intermed 31:45–63

Gil-Alana LA, Claudio-Quiroga G (2020) The COVID-19 impact on the Asian stock markets. Asian Econ Lett 1(2):1–5

Goel G, Dash SR (2022) Investor sentiment and government policy interventions: evidence from COVID-19 spread. J Financ Econ Policy 14(2):242–267

Gormsen NJ, Koijen RS (2020) Coronavirus: impact on stock prices and growth expectations. Rev Asset Pricing Stud 10(4):574–597

Han L, Li Z, Yin L (2018) Investor attention and stock returns: international evidence. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 54(14):3168–3188

Hansen LP (1982) Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica 50(4):1029–1054

Harjoto MA, Rossi F, Paglia JK (2021) COVID-19: Stock market reactions to the shock and the stimulus. Appl Econ Lett 28(10):795–801

Haroon O, Rizvi SAR (2020a) COVID-19: Media coverage and financial markets behavior—a sectoral inquiry. J Behav Exp Financ 27:100343

Haroon O, Rizvi SAR (2020b) Flatten the curve and stock market liquidity–an inquiry into emerging economies. Emerg Markets Financ Trade 56(10):2151–2161

Hashmi SM, Chang BH, Rong L (2021) Asymmetric effect of COVID-19 pandemic on E7 stock indices: evidence from quantile-on-quantile regression approach. Res Int Bus Financ 58:101485

Heyman D, Lescrauwaet M, Stieperaere H (2019) Investor attention and short-term return reversals. Financ Res Lett 29:1–6

Hirshleifer D, Lim SS, Teoh SH (2011) Limited investor attention and stock market misreactions to accounting information. Rev Asset Pricing Stud 1(1):35–73

Hood M, Malik F (2013) Is gold the best hedge and a safe haven under changing stock market volatility? Rev Financ Econ 22(2):47–52

Hossain M (2021) The effect of the Covid-19 on sharing economy activities. J Clean Prod 280(1):124782

Humpe A, Macmillan P (2009) Can macroeconomic variables explain long-term stock market movements? A comparison of the US and Japan. Appl Financ Econo 19(2):111–119

Hussain A, Tahir A, Hussain Z, Sheikh Z, Gogate M, Dashtipour K, Sheikh A (2021) Artificial intelligence–enabled analysis of public attitudes on Facebook and Twitter toward Covid-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom and the United States: observational study. J Med Internet Res 23(4):e26627

Ichev R, Marinč M (2018) Stock prices and geographic proximity of information: Evidence from the Ebola outbreak. Int Rev Financ Anal 56:153–166

Iyke BN, Ho SY (2021) Investor attention on COVID-19 and African stock returns. MethodsX 8:101195

Jain A, Biswal PC (2016) Dynamic linkages among oil price, gold price, exchange rate, and stock market in India. Resour Policy 49:179–185

Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291

Kamstra MJ, Kramer LA, Levi MD (2003) Winter blues: a SAD stock market cycle. Am Econ Rev 93(1):324–343

Kaplanski G, Levy H (2010) Sentiment and stock prices: the case of aviation disasters. J Financ Econ 95(2):174–201

Kim N, Lučivjanská K, Molnár P, Villa R (2019) Google searches and stock market activity: evidence from Norway. Financ Res Lett 28:208–220

Koenker R (2004) Quantile regression for longitudinal data. J Multivar Anal 91(1):74–89

Koenker R, Bassett G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46(1):33–50

Kou G, Olgu Akdeniz Ö, Dinçer H, Yüksel S (2021) Fintech investments in European banks: a hybrid IT2 fuzzy multidimensional decision-making approach. Financ Innov 7(1):1–28

Kwok SWH, Vadde SK, Wang G (2021) Twitter speaks: an analysis of Australian Twitter users' topics and sentiments about COVID-19 vaccination using machine learning. J Med Internet Res 23(5):e26953

Levin A, Lin CF, Chu JCS (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Econom 108(1):1–24

Li H, Guo Y, Park SY (2017) Asymmetric relationship between investors’ sentiment and stock returns: evidence from a quantile non-causality test. Int Rev Financ 17(4):617–626

Li T, Kou G, Peng Y, Yu PS (2021) An integrated cluster detection, optimization and interpretation approach for financial data. IEEE Trans Cybern. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2021.3109066

Liu D, Sun W, Zhang X (2020a) Is the Chinese economy well positioned to fight the COVID-19 pandemic? The financial cycle perspective. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 56(10):2259–2276

Liu H, Manzoor A, Wang C, Zhang L, Manzoor Z (2020b) The COVID-19 outbreak and affected countries stock markets response. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(8):2800

López-Cabarcos MÁ, Piñeiro-Chousa J, Pérez-Pico AM (2017) The impact technical and non-technical investors have on the stock market: evidence from the sentiment extracted from social networks. J Behav Exp Financ 15:15–20

Lyocsa S, Baumöhl E, Výrost T, Molnár P (2020) Fear of the coronavirus and the stock markets. Financ Res Lett 36:101735

Ma C, Xiao S, Ma Z (2018) Investor sentiment and the prediction of stock returns: a quantile regression approach. Appl Econ 50:5401–5415

Ma R, Sun B, Zhai P, Jin Y (2021) Hedging stock market risks: Can gold really beat bonds? Financ Res Lett 42:101918

Machado JAF, Silva JMCS (2019) Quantiles via moments. J Econom 213(1):145–173

Mazur M, Dang M, Vega M (2021) COVID-19 and the March 2020 stock market crash. Evidence from S&P1500. Financ Res Lett 38:101690

Mishra AK, Rath BN, Dash AK (2020) Does the Indian financial market nosedive because of the COVID-19 outbreak, in comparison to after demonetisation and the GST. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 56(10):2162–2180

Narayan PK, Iyke BN, Sharma SS (2021a) New measures of the COVID-19 pandemic: a new time-series dataset. Asian Econ Lett 2(2):23491

Narayan PK, Phan DHB, Liu G (2021b) COVID-19 lockdowns, stimulus packages, travel bans, and stock returns. Financ Res Lett 38:101732

Nofsinger JR (2005) Social mood and financial economics. J Behav Financ 6(3):144–160

Padhan R, Prabheesh KP (2021) The economics of COVID-19 pandemic: a survey. Econ Anal Policy 70:220–237

Padungsaksawasdi C, Treepongkaruna S, Brooks R (2019) Investor attention and stock market activities: new evidence from panel data. Int J Financ Stud 7(2):30

Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Economet 22(2):265–312

Pesaran MH (2015) Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Economet Rev 34(6–10):1089–1117

Phan DHB, Narayan PK (2020) Country responses and the reaction of the stock market to COVID-19—a preliminary exposition. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 56(10):2138–2150

Piñeiro-Chousa J, López-Cabarcos MÁ, Quiñoá-Piñeiro L, Pérez-Pico AM (2022) US biopharmaceutical companies’ stock market reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the concept of the ‘paradoxical spiral’ from a sustainability perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Change 175:121365

Rouatbi W, Demir E, Kizys R, Zaremba A (2021) Immunizing markets against the pandemic: COVID-19 vaccinations and stock volatility around the world. Int Rev Financ Anal 77:101819

Sattar NS, Arifuzzaman S (2021) Covid-19 vaccination awareness and aftermath: public sentiment analysis on Twitter data and vaccinated population prediction in the USA. Appl Sci 11(13):6128

Sharif A, Aloui C, Yarovaya L (2020) COVID-19 pandemic, oil prices, stock market, geopolitical risk and policy uncertainty nexus in the US economy: fresh evidence from the wavelet-based approach. Int Rev Financ Anal 70:101496

Sharma SS (2020) A note on the Asian market volatility during the COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Econ Lett 1(2):17661

Shu HC (2010) Investor mood and financial markets. J Econ Behav Organ 76(2):267–282

Smales LA (2021) Investor attention and global market returns during the COVID-19 crisis. Int Rev Financ Anal 73:101616

Szczygielski JJ, Bwanya PR, Charteris A, Brzeszczyński J (2021) The only certainty is uncertainty: an analysis of the impact of COVID-19 uncertainty on regional stock markets. Financ Res Lett 43:101945

Topcu M, Gulal OS (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on emerging stock markets. Financ Res Lett 36:101691

Vlastakis N, Markellos RN (2012) Information demand and stock market volatility. J Bank Financ 36(6):1808–1821

Wei X, Han L (2021) The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on transmission of monetary policy to financial markets. Int Rev Financ Anal 74:101705

Wen F, Xu L, Ouyang G, Kou G (2019) Retail investor attention and stock price crash risk: evidence from China. Int Rev Financ Anal 65:101376

Yousefinaghani S, Dara R, Mubareka S, Papadopoulos A, Sharif S (2021) An analysis of COVID-19 vaccine sentiments and opinions on Twitter. Int J Infect Dis 108:256–262

Zaremba A, Kizys R, Aharon DY, Demir E (2020) Infected markets: novel coronavirus, government interventions, and stock return volatility around the globe. Financ Res Lett 35:101597

Zhang D, Hu M, Ji Q (2020) Financial markets under the global pandemic of COVID-19. Financ Res Lett 36:101528

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Tekirdag Namik Kemal Universitesi, Tekirdaǧ, Turkey

Buket Kirci Altinkeski, Emrah Ismail Cevik & Sel Dibooglu

Kırklareli University, Kırklareli, Turkey

University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Sel Dibooglu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emrah Ismail Cevik .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

See Appendix Tables

12 and 13 .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cevik, E., Kirci Altinkeski, B., Cevik, E.I. et al. Investor sentiments and stock markets during the COVID-19 pandemic. Financ Innov 8 , 69 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-022-00375-0

Download citation

Received : 11 September 2021

Accepted : 24 June 2022

Published : 05 July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-022-00375-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Investor sentiment
• Stock market returns

JEL classification

• Corpus ID: 167117180

Investor sentiment in the stock market

• Bayram Veli Salur
• Published 2013
• Business, Economics

Figures and Tables from this paper

2,364 Citations

Sensitivity to investor sentiment and stock performance of open market share repurchases, investor sentiment as a factor in an apt model: an international perspective using the fears index, essays in behavioral and corporate finance by tomás hernán reyes torres a dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy in business administration in the graduate division, does the u.s. president affect the stock market, the role of an aligned investor sentiment index in predicting bond risk premia of the u.s, margin requirements and the security market line, investor sentiment, anomalies, and macroeconomic conditions, journal of financial markets, the bright side of investor sentiment: evidence from real activities manipulation.

• Highly Influenced

Alphanomics: The Informational Underpinnings of Market Efficiency

57 references, measuring investor sentiment with mutual fund flows, fundamentals and stock returns in japan, an investor expectations stock price predictive model using closed‐end fund premiums, investor sentiment and asset valuation.

• Highly Influential

The Short of It: Investor Sentiment and Anomalies

Investor sentiment and corporate disclosure, cross-sectional performance and investor sentiment in a multiple risk factor model, efficient capital markets: ii, momentum investing and business cycle risk: evidence from pole to pole, the limits of arbitrage, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• < Previous

Home > Colleges and Schools > Business > Business Administration ETDs > 124

Theses and Dissertations in Business Administration

Two essays on investor attention, investor sentiment, and earnings pricing.

Qiuye Cai , Old Dominion University Follow

Date of Award

Summer 2019

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Program/Concentration

Business Administration-Finance

Committee Director

Kenneth Yung

Committee Member

Mohammad Najand

David Selover

This dissertation proposes novel direct measures for both firm-level and market-level investor attention and investor sentiment and provides new empirical evidence on the effects of investor attention and investor sentiment on earnings pricing.

The first essay proposes novel direct measures for both market-level and firm-level attention using user activity data from StockTwits.com. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first direct measure of market-level attention. By measuring market-level and firm-level attention separately, I am be able to not only distinguish between attention allocated on market level and firm level but also detach attention from equilibrium outcomes. I document that both market-level and firm-level attention is lower on non-trading days and days without macro- or micro news announcements. On earnings announcement days, investors are distracted by higher volume of concurrent competing earnings announcements or macro-news announcements. Investors pay less attention to earnings announced on Friday. Firm-level attention is negatively associated with market-level attention, suggesting that investors allocate their limited attention strategically between market-level and firm-level. I find that investors pay more attention to earnings news announced on days with important macro-news announcements, suggesting that firm-level attention is strengthened rather than weakened with concurrent market-level information shocks. I find that investors have more muted initial reactions to earnings announcements if they pay more attention to board market. On the other hand, higher firm-level investor attention and concurrent important macro-news enhances the immediate price reaction to a firm’s earnings surprise and alleviates the post-announcement drift (PEAD). I also find that drift occurs much later than documented in the prior literature.

The second essay develops direct measures for both market-level and firm-level sentiment using sentiment scores data from StockTwits.com. I examine both the impact of sentiment and the joint effect of sentiment and attention on earnings pricing. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first research about the joint effect of sentiment and attention on earnings pricing. I find that good news is actually punished when sentiment is bullish but bad news is punished significantly more when sentiment is bearish. Good news is rewarded the most when sentiment is bearish. The findings suggest that investors do not overreact to good news when sentiment is bullish but overreact to bad news when sentiment is bearish. I document that both firm-level and market-level sentiment are negatively associated with the immediate price reaction to earnings news. For the immediate response, I find that the immediate price reaction to earnings news is weaker when sentiment is bullish. For the drift, I find that the post-announcement drift is stronger following bullish sentiment. Taking into account investor attention, I find that good news is rewarded more with high attention when sentiment is either bullish or bearish, whereas the effect of attention is more pronounced when sentiment is bearish. Bad news is considerably punished with high attention when sentiment is bearish. The immediate price reaction is strengthened with high attention when sentiment is either bullish or bearish, whereas the effect of attention is more pronounced when sentiment is bearish. For the drift, I find that the post-announcement drift is weaker with high attention following bullish sentiment. It is worth noting that good news with bearish sentiment and high attention has both stronger immediate response and post-announcement drift.

In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).

10.25777/3m7s-vc52

9781392838020

Recommended Citation

Cai, Qiuye. "Two Essays on Investor Attention, Investor Sentiment, and Earnings Pricing" (2019). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, Finance, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/3m7s-vc52 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/businessadministration_etds/124

Since February 03, 2020

Included in

Accounting Commons , Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons , Finance and Financial Management Commons

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines
• Author Guidelines
• Strome College of Business
• Other Digital Collections
• ODU Libraries
• Old Dominion University

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• Latest Additions
• For Cardiff Authors
• User Area Login
• How to Add Research
• Your Research Thesis

Investor sentiment and cross-sectional stock returns

This thesis consists of three essays on investor sentiment and the cross-sections of stock returns. The first essay extends Deling, Shieifer abd Waldman's (1990) noise trader risk module into a module with multiple risky assets to show the asymmetric effect of sentiment in the cross-section. Guided by our module, we also find that the effect of investor sentiment can be decomposed into long and short run components. The empirical tests in the first essay of the thesis present a negative relationship between long-run sentiment component and subsequent stock returns and a positive association between the short run sentiment and contemporaneous stock returns. The second essay explores a previously unexamined sentiment channel through which technical analysis can add value. We construct a daily market TA sentiment indicator from a spectrum of commonly used technical trading strategies. We find that this indicator significantly correlates with other popular sentiment measures. An increase in TA sentiment indicator is accompanied by high contemporaneous returns and predicts high near-term returns, low subsequent returns and high crash risk in the cross-section. We also design trading strategies to explore the profitability of our new TA sentiment indicator. Our trading strategies generate remarkable and robust profits. The third essay focusses on exploring the profitability of trading strategies based on Implied Volatility indicator (VIX) from the sentiment perspective. Our trading strategies involve holding sentiment-prone stocks when VIX is low and sentiment-immune stocks when VIX is high. The shifting asset allocation strategies are based on Abreu and Brunnermeier’s (2003) delayed arbitrage theory and the asymmetric effect of investor sentiment in the cross-section. We find sentiment-prone stock have larger one-day forward retunes following high sentiment and vice versa. Our trading strategies generate substantial higher returns that benchmark portfolios, and the excess returns are not subsumed by well-known risk factors or transaction costs.

Cited times time in Google Scholar . View in Google Scholar

Cited times time in Web of Science . View in Web of Science .

Actions (repository staff only)

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

Investor Behaviour: An Examination of Investor Sentiment and Cognitive Dissonance

--> Guo, Jiaqi (2017) Investor Behaviour: An Examination of Investor Sentiment and Cognitive Dissonance. PhD thesis, University of Leeds.

This thesis seeks to examine the roles of investor sentiment and cognitive dissonance on investor behaviour. The objectives of this thesis are: first, to investigate the impact of the interaction of investor sentiment with culture on momentum and post-earnings-announcement-drift by way of cognitive dissonance in international markets; second, using investor sentiment and analyst recommendations to examine how cognitive dissonance affects institutional herding in the U.S. financial market. The effect of investor sentiment, culture as well as cognitive dissonance is examined for the two anomalies, momentum and post-earnings-announcement-drift. The investigation is carried out both across a wide range of countries and in two distinct culture groups. We investigate these issues by building on a specific behavioural model and by bringing together arguments from psychology and the cross-culture literature in relation to investor sentiment, culture and the notion of cognitive dissonance. We propose that cognitive dissonance will be evident when private or public news contradicts investors’ sentiment. This will cause a slow diffusion of such news being incorporated into stock prices, resulting in return continuation and people in different cultures experiencing different degrees of cognitive dissonance and in different situations. The empirical findings suggest that cognitive dissonance is a key driver in explaining these two anomalies across countries and in the two distinct cultures. The interaction of investor sentiment and analyst recommendations on institutional herding is investigated by using two commonly used herding measures in the micro-level in the U.S. It suggests that cognitive dissonance is an important driver for institutional herding by taking account of the interaction between the two factors. Cognitive dissonance will be evident when analyst recommendation revisions conflict with sentiment, causing institutions to herd differently in the current and subsequent periods. The two herding measures allow us to capture different aspects of herding in the two periods and to gain better insights into spurious and intentional herding.

--> Final eThesis - complete (pdf) -->

Filename: Guo_J_LUBS_PhD_2017.pdf

Description: Guo J AF PhD thesis

Embargo Date:

You do not need to contact us to get a copy of this thesis. Please use the 'Download' link(s) above to get a copy. You can contact us about this thesis . If you need to make a general enquiry, please see the Contact us page.

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

Investor Sentiment and Stock Prices: Explaining the Ups and Downs

May 9, 2012 • 10 min read.

Academics, traders and money managers are forever trying to figure out what makes stocks rise and fall. Some influences are clear, like the price gain after a company reports strong earnings. But other behaviors are mystifying. For example, why do shares of companies with fast asset growth sometimes do better than expected according to standard measures like earnings? And why do they sometimes do worse? New research by Wharton finance professor Robert F. Stambaugh and two colleagues shows that market-wide investor sentiment is a key influence in such stock return anomalies.

• Finance & Accounting

Academics, traders and money managers are forever trying to figure out what makes stocks rise and fall. Some influences are clear, like the price gain after a company reports surprisingly strong earnings. But as experts drill deeper, other behaviors are mystifying. Why do shares of companies with fast asset growth sometimes do better than expected according to standard measures like earnings? And why do they sometimes do worse? What explains the price patterns of stocks that share special features like return on assets, rates of total accruals and rates of net stock issues?

For years, two theories have tried to explain such anomalies in stock returns. The first says that investors may have reached a keen understanding of hard-to-detect risks associated with these special features. If so, unusually large price gains would reflect a risk premium — a larger gain to compensate for larger risks.

The second theory suggests that these unexpected gains and losses are a result of mispricing — that is, when investors, for some reason, pay too much or too little for a stock relative to the stock’s underlying fundamentals.

Now, new research by Wharton finance professor Robert F. Stambaugh and two colleagues has unearthed strong evidence for the mispricing theory, discovering that market-wide investor sentiment is a key influence. “Our study looks at investor sentiment as a potentially important source of mispricing,” Stambaugh says. “In other words, when investor sentiment is high, do things get overpriced? And if they do, can we see evidence of that influence?”

Stambaugh and his colleagues — Yu Yuan, a visiting professor at Wharton, and Jianfeng Yu of the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota — identified 11 features associated with stock price changes that defy easy explanation. One of these features (which the researchers refer to as “anomalies” in their paper) is a company’s growth in assets like plant equipment, fleets of vehicles, property and inventories — anything on the asset side of the balance sheet. Others include firms in financial distress, firms that issue new shares of stock, those with high accruals and those showing share-price momentum, as well as firms with gross profitability premium, and those distinguished by their return on assets and the ratio of investments to assets.

For instance, “companies that have grown their assets the most do, on average, produce lower subsequent returns on their stock, which presents a bit of a puzzle,” Stambaugh says. If the risk-based theory were true, companies with high rates of asset growth must be seen by investors as less risky than companies with low rates of asset growth. Investors would therefore settle for lower returns — a view that then is reflected in price changes.

But there is no obvious reason for investors to regard such firms as less risky, Stambaugh points out. “What gets this thing called an anomaly to begin with is that previous attempts by others to try to attribute these [price changes] to risks have not been successful.”

If risk is not the explanation, “the obvious alternative is that somehow the market misprices these things.” One potential cause? Investor sentiment — a mood — carries these stock prices up or down to a degree that cannot be explained by fundamentals like earnings and revenues.

Barriers to Short Selling

To examine this possibility, Stambaugh and his colleagues combined two concepts that researchers have investigated separately. “The first concept is that investor sentiment contains a market-wide component with the potential to influence prices on many securities in the same direction at the same time,” they write in their paper, “ The Short of It: Investor Sentiment and Anomalies ,” which was published in the May issue of the Journal of Financial Economics . This is what happens during bubbles, when investor exuberance pushes prices above the levels that can be justified by standard measures of value. A bust often follows, as pessimism drags prices too far down.

The second concept, according to the researchers, “is that impediments to short selling play a significant role in limiting the ability of rational traders to exploit overpricing.” “It is not as easy to short as it is to go out and buy a stock,” Stambaugh notes.

Combined, the two concepts suggest that when market sentiment is very positive, there are many overpriced stocks instead of just a few — as would be the case if markets operated efficiently. In an efficient market, investors quickly spot stocks that are overpriced or underpriced, selling the former and buying the latter. The reduced demand for overpriced stocks drags prices down until those stocks are no longer overpriced, while higher demand for underpriced stocks pushes prices up, eliminating the underpricing.

But because it is harder to sell stocks short to bet on a price drop than it is to buy stocks to bet on a gain, stocks could be more likely to be overpriced when enthusiasm is high than to be underpriced when it is low. If this proved to be true, stocks’ different price behavior following periods of high and low sentiment would show that investor sentiment is indeed a factor in pricing. Further, if the disparity could be detected in the stocks with anomalous pricing behavior, it would help explain why the anomalies happen.

Short selling is a trading technique for betting on a price drop. In effect, the investor borrows a block of shares from a securities firm and then sells them at the current price. If the price falls, the borrowed shares can be replaced with ones purchased for less, and the investor profits by having sold high and bought low.

But although the concept is simple, there are a number of impediments to betting on a price decline. Because the transaction involves a loan from a securities firm, the investor must set up a special account, which can require approvals and charges one does not encounter when simply buying a stock. In addition, many investors are reluctant to engage in short sales because these sales buck the market’s general upward trend over time. Many institutional investors, including most mutual funds, are barred from short selling.

Many investors are also unwilling to face the theoretically unlimited losses risked by short sellers if prices rise instead of fall, since there is no limit to how high a stock’s price can go.

In addition, Stambaugh notes, virtually anyone can buy stocks, or go long. One simply has to open an account and put in enough cash to meet the broker’s account minimum and cover the price of any purchases. Thus, if a stock looks appealing, there are vast numbers of potential investors to create demand to drive the price up. But there are not as many investors available to bet on a price decline, because sales would be limited to those who either already own the stock or have overcome the impediments to short selling.

The upshot: It is easier for a wave of positive sentiment to drive the price up than for negative sentiment to drive it down, making overpricing more likely than underpricing.

“Investors with the most optimistic views about a stock, relative to the views of other investors, exert the greatest effect on the stock’s price, because their views are not counterbalanced by the valuations of the relatively less optimistic investors,” Stambaugh and his colleagues write. The Internet-stock bubble of the late 1990s was an example, Stambaugh says. The optimists drove prices too high, because it was difficult for pessimists to counterbalance the enthusiasm.

Debunking the ‘Risk Story’

To test their theory, Stambaugh and his colleagues examined the real-world behavior of stocks representing the 11 feature “anomalies” the researchers identified. In each group, the researchers isolated the 10% of stocks that performed best and the 10% that performed worst. For each stock, they looked at a theoretical long-short investment strategy that purchased the high-performing stocks and shorted the low-performing ones. The results of this strategy were then studied in relation to the market’s overall sentiment at the time, based on an existing gauge which uses key factors, including: closed-end fund discounts, first-day returns on initial public offerings, turnover among stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange, the equity share in total new issues of stock and the dividend premium.

If optimistic sentiment is indeed a stronger force on prices than pessimistic sentiment, mispricing would be more likely during periods of strong positive sentiment. The short-sale side of the investment strategy should therefore be more profitable following periods of strong positive sentiment, because short selling is profitable when over-priced stocks fall to earth. Finally, profits on the long side of the strategy should be about the same regardless of investor sentiment, since the lack of impediments to stock purchases make underpricing unlikely. In other words, on the long side — a bet that prices will rise — prices are more likely to reflect fundamentals than sentiment.

“What we find is that these long-short spreads are much more profitable following high investor sentiment,” Stambaugh reports. This is because short sales become very profitable due to overpricing from high sentiment.

By looking at the behavior of the 11 anomalous stocks from 1965 to 2008, the researchers found that the long-short strategy would have produced profits of 1.22% per month following periods of high sentiment, compared to just 0.52% following periods of low sentiment. The 70 basis point difference, or 70 cents for every $100 invested in the long-short strategy, reflects the greater profit earned on short sales after periods of high sentiment pushed prices too high. Shorting is much less profitable after periods of low sentiment.

The results tease out the role of sentiment in the stock pricing anomalies. Among the firms with high asset growth, the effect was even stronger, with monthly gains of 1.18% following high sentiment, but only 0.13% after periods of low sentiment. However, the researchers note that their goal is not to “completely explain each of the anomalies considered…. We paint the set of anomalies with an intentionally broad brush, given our objective to consider the implications when market-wide sentiment interacts with short-sale impediments. Our objective is to explore the possibility that sentiment plays a pervasive role over time in affecting the degree of mispricing that arises in a broad range of specific contexts.”

The research, Stambaugh says, should help to resolve the debate over the roles of risk and sentiment in explaining pricing anomalies. “It becomes much harder to tell the risk-based story after reading our work than before it.”

Money managers may be able to use this new insight to tweak their long-short investing strategies, he adds. However, although it appears that investor sentiment is a key factor in these stock-pricing anomalies, it is not yet clear why sentiment has so much influence with firms that exhibit these particular features, Stambaugh and his coauthors write. “Certainly, more work lies ahead to develop a richer understanding of how sentiment plays a role in pricing financial assets.”

More From Knowledge at Wharton

How Carry Trade Exposure Impacts Asset Price Movements

How Low-income Households Can Secure Their Retirement Finances

What I’ve Learned: Olivia S. Mitchell

Looking for more insights.

Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.

JEPI: Why I Am Doubling Down On This 7% Yielding ETF At 52-Week Highs

• JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF offers a 7% yield and combines equity exposure with an option writing strategy for recurring income.
• With the U.S. economy growing and inflation receding, JEPI's NAV has strong growth potential in 2024, especially with AI-driven tech investments.
• JEPI outperforms alternatives like QYLD, boasting higher NAV returns and lower fees, making it a compelling choice for passive income investors.
• The ETF's bullish technical setup and favorable macroeconomic conditions suggest it could reach new highs, providing solid monthly dividend income.

Torsten Asmus

JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF ( NYSEARCA: JEPI ) has delivered strong total returns in 2024 and the backdrop continues to be favorable: The U.S. economy is still in good shape and the central bank is poised to provide a growth stimulus by slashing interest rates.

The exchange-traded fund is a top holding in my passive income portfolio and combines equity exposure with an option writing strategy that produces recurring income.

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF presently pays passive income investors a 7% yield on their invested capital, and the ETF’s NAV has room to grow in 2024.

My Rating History

I presented the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF as an attractive investment vehicle in November for passive income investors to hedge against a prolonged high-rate environment. But even in a low-rate environment, I think that the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF has substantial NAV growth potential.

Since the ETF is also using options to enhance its income, JEPI is a very solid equity-focused ETF that should appeal to those investors that need or want to generate passive income in 2024.

Receding Inflation And Pro-Cyclical Portfolio Positioning

Inflation amounted to 2.5% in August, reflecting a 0.4% decline compared to the prior month. Inflation has trended down for a while now and reached, in August 2024, its lowest point since February 2021.

Slowing inflation is making interest cuts much more probable at this month’s Fed meeting, with lower short-term interest rates being generally regarded as a positive for the economy.

Inflation (U.S. Bureau Of Labor Statistics)

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF is a diversified, equity-focused exchange-traded fund that, besides owning a portfolio consisting of major American companies, writes out-of-the-money S&P 500 Index call options in order to distribute portfolio income that gets paid to investors on a monthly basis.

The ETF’s top investments include Progressive Corp. ( PGR ) , Meta Platforms Inc. ( META ) , A mazon ( AMZN ), Mastercard ( MA ) and Microsoft ( MSFT ) , to name just a few here. The focus on fast growing technology companies with connection to the AI theme is something that, I think, should be regarded as particularly compelling for passive income investors.

Technology companies have been instrumental in driving stock indices to record highs this year, and companies like Nvidia Corp. ( NVDA ) have seen their valuations skyrocket as of late as companies shifted ever-increasing amounts of money into artificial intelligence developments. A portfolio breakdown for JEPI as of 09/12/2024 is provided below.

Top 10 Holdings (JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF)

Technical Analysis

In late 2023, the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF broke out to the upside as investors started to anticipate that the central bank would cut its short-term interest rates. The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF has produced an 11.4% NAV return so far this year as stock markets performed well, partially because of strong demand for artificial intelligence products in the Information Technology sector.

From a technical angle, the JEPI is very much in a promising setup, as the ETF recovered the 50-day moving average in August and has since moved into striking distance of new 52-week highs as well. The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF is presently selling above the 20-day, 50-day and 200-day moving averages, which creates a bullish backdrop for investors.

With stocks rebounding broadly from the August selloff, I think that JEPI could continue to be a promising momentum investment for passive income investors.

On the flip side, if the 50-day moving average line were to break, then the ETF would have immediate downside to $54.85 which is where the 200-day moving average line runs at the present moment.

Relative Strength Index (Stockcharts.com)

JEPI Versus QYLD

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF has a four-star performance rating from Morningstar, making it a strong performance candidate for passive income investors, and has produced more than 13% annualized NAV returns since inception in 2020.

NAV Return (JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF)

An alternative to JEPI is the Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF ( QYLD ) which also sells calls to supplement its income. The QYLD, however, is much less popular than JEPI and has a poorer investment record: The Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF produced a three-year annualized NAV return of only 4.4% compared to 7.2% for JEPI.

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF is also much bigger, with assets under management of $35 billion (compared to just $8.0 billion for QYLD). JEPI’s bigger size and stronger NAV returns also allow the ETF to charge much less (0.35%) than the Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF, which charges its investors 0.61% of assets.

Tiny Discount To NAV For JEPI

Exchange-traded funds like the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF are to be valued on a NAV since the underlying components, the ETF’s equity holdings, are marked-to-market. The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF’s net asset value as of 09/12/2024 was $58.53 which means the ETF is presently valued at a discount to NAV of 0.04% at the time of writing.

Taking into account that the U.S. economy is growing and inflation is receding, I think that the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF has a good chance to see robust growth in its underlying NAV in 2024.

Further employment gains and rate cuts could provide fuel to the U.S. economy, which then further tilts the odds for upside in JEPI’s underlying NAV.

A core focus on technology companies with AI exposure is also a factor why the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income could be a good investment for long-term passive income investors.

Why The Investment Thesis Has More Risk

Equity markets are doing quite well right now, and the S&P 500 reached a large number of consecutive all-time highs so far in 2024. The central bank announcement in December 2023 that a Fed shift was soon in the cards also boosted investor sentiment and made stock investments compelling. The central bank is poised to lower short-term interest rates soon, which could give the stock market another shot into the arm.

Since the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF is an equity-dominated exchange-traded fund, JEPI likely won’t do well in a recession or if the U.S. economy were to see a major inflation flare-up.

My Conclusion

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF is a highly attractive passive income vehicle for investors that seek durable dividend income from a diversified, equity-focused exchange-traded fund. The option selling strategy further enhances the ETF’s income appeal, and passive investors can presently lock in a 7% yield.

With the U.S. economy growing and inflation finally subsiding, I think that JEPI could enjoy NAV growth in 2024, particularly if the AI boom continues to elevate the stock index to new highs. The U.S. election may be another positive catalyst for the stock market.

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF presently provides passive income investors with a solid yield as well as monthly dividend income. Taking into account that the macro is looking quite good right now, I think JEPI could potentially march on to see new highs and build on its positive momentum. Buy.

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of JEPI either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Recommended For You

About jepi etf.

More on JEPI

Related stocks.

Trending Analysis

Trending news.