Fundamental Value Trajectories and Trader Characteristics in an Asset Market Experiment

Abstract

We report results from an asset market experiment, in which we investigate how the time path of the fundamental value trajectory affects the level of adherence to fundamentals. In contrast to previous experiments with long-lived assets, there is a phase in which fundamental values are constant before the onset of a trend. The trend is either increasing or decreasing, depending on the treatment. We compare the level of mispricing between the decreasing and increasing fundamental value trajectories. Before the market begins, risk aversion, loss aversion, and cognitive reflection protocols are administered to traders. We find evidence for closer adherence to fundamental values when the trajectory follows a decreasing, than when it has an increasing, trend. Greater average risk aversion on the part of traders in the market predicts lower market prices. The greater the level of loss aversion of the trader cohort, the lower the quantity traded. The greater the average cognitive reflection test score, the smaller the differences between market prices and fundamental values. The variation between groups in risk aversion, loss aversion, and CRT score, explains 45% and 18% of the cohort-level variation in price level and mispricing, respectively.

It is Not Just Confusion! Strategic Uncertainty in an Experimental Asset Market

“…Brañas-Garza et al (2012 reported that subjects with higher CRT scores on average, chose numbers closer to the Nash equilibrium in beauty contest games. Corgnet et al (2013) and Breaban and Noussair (2014) reported that subjects with higher CRT scores tended to realise higher profit margins than those with low CRT scores in experimental asset markets. Here we are interested in the correlation between the CRT score (CRTS) and the magnitude of the initial forecast deviation.…”

Investment Horizons and Price Indeterminacy in Financial Markets

“…In standard finance theory, the amount of liquidity should not affect prices, as it does not change the security's fundamentals. However, ample experimental evidence suggests that liquidity significantly affects security prices: prices can be higher when liquidity is higher either through initial cash endowments or conditions which influence the C/A-ratio (Ackert et al 2006, Breaban and Noussair 2014, Caginalp et al 1998, Caginalp et al 2001, Caginalp and Ilieva 2008, Deck et al 2012, Haruvy and Noussair 2006, King et al 1993, Kirchler et al 2012, Noussair et al 2012, Porter and Smith 1995. We explore whether the amount of liquidity, measured by the C/A ratio, influences the price levels and price deviations from fundamentals in our markets.…”

An Experimental Study of Bond Market Pricing

“…By varying either coupon payments, the face value of the bond or the default probability function, different paths of (equilibrium) fundamental values can be achieved. This flexibility is important as the slope of an asset's fundamental value over time plays an important role in the experimental asset market literature (see Noussair et al, 2001, Kirchler, 2009, Noussair and Powell, 2010, Breaban and Noussair, 2014, Giusti et al, 2014, and Stöckl et al, 2014. 9…”