This study examines drivers of investment probability in equity-based crowdfunding using a hand-collected and comprehensive data set from a well-established platform. The analysis confirms several effects that have been reported in the recent literature on other crowdfunding markets. Extending recent research, we study moderators of local preferences of investors. Novel to the literature, we find that (1) local preferences are more pronounced in campaigns of younger ventures, (2) herding-like behaviour is stronger in local campaigns and (3) local investors are more responsive to updates posted by entrepreneurs, compared to non-locals. Our results suggest that investors allocate more attention to campaigns for which they have information advantages, such as local campaigns, due to their limited capacity to process information. Such behaviour may eventually amplify information asymmetry and local preferences. Our findings have practical implications for entrepreneurs, investors and platforms.
This study examines interdependencies between investments of equity crowdfunders. Based on hand-collected data from a well-established equitycrowdfunding platform, we find strong indication that investors observe previous investments to determine their willingness to pay for equity shares. Furthermore, the investment behavior of predecessors may lead investors to deviate from average investment behavior. In particular, investors are willing to pay more than the average investment, when the focal campaign is hot or there have been many large investments in the campaign. Remarkably, a high number of all previous investments over the entire period of the campaign as well as co-financing by presumably sophisticated investors negatively influence willingness to pay. This suggests that crowd investors are subject to partial crowding-out. These findings are different on the platform level, which suggests that investors' behavior is rather information than sentiment-driven.
This study investigates signal validity in equity-based crowdfunding by examining whether signals that increase crowd participation are associated with higher post-offering success. Post-offering success is measured as the probability of survival. We use a hand-collected data set of 88 campaigns with over 64,000 investments and 742 updates from a well-established and leading German equity-based crowdfunding platform, Companisto. We find that indicating that the chief executive officer holds a university degree and a higher number of business-related updates are associated with a lower risk of failure, which is in line with recent research on offering success. The number of updates on external certification, promotions, and the team is associated with a higher risk of failure. In contrast to recent findings on offering success, we find that the equity share offered is positively related to post-offering success, whereas a high number of large investments or updates on campaign development are accompanied by a higher probability of failure. Our results provide guidance for entrepreneurs and investors regarding which signals are worth sending or using. Furthermore, these results suggest that investors are partly using wrong signals and challenge the rationality and wisdom of the crowd.
This study investigates stock recommendations from the three largest finance subreddits on Reddit: wallstreetbets, investing and stocks. A simple strategy that buys recommended stocks weighted by the number of posts per day yields a portfolio with higher average returns at the expense of higher risks than the market for all holding periods, i.e., unfavorable Sharpe ratios. Furthermore, the strategy leads to positive (insignificant) short-term and negative (significant) long-term alphas when considering common risk factors. This is consistent with the idea of “meme stocks”, meaning that the recommended stocks are artificially inflated in the short term when they are recommended, and that the posts contain no information about long-term success. However, it is likely that Reddit users, especially on the subreddit wallstreetbets, have preferences for bets which are not captured by the mean–variance framework. Therefore, we draw on cumulative prospect theory (CPT). We find that the CPT-valuations of the Reddit portfolio exceed those of the market, which may explain the persistent attractiveness for investors to follow social media stock recommendations despite the unfavorable risk-return ratio.
Price-taking behavior seems to contradict rationality if a price effect is to be expected. This paper identifies a strategic effect between price-takers and non-price-takers on financial markets. It results from the liquidity reduction non-price-taking induces. Thus, a trade-off between the benefits of calculating price impacts correctly and market liquidity exists. It is shown that price-takers may benefit more from trading than their fully rational counterparts do. Moreover, it is demonstrated that when the choice of behavior is unobservable and decision costs exist an investor would profit more as a non-price-taker when his trading potential is large, and more as a price-taker when it is small. However, when the choice of behavior is observable it is the other way around. If various rounds of trading take place, an investor’s terminal endowment converges to his risk tolerance share. Thus, an efficient allocation is obtained. Furthermore, a paradox concerning the endogenous choice of manners of calculation is identified.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.