Up Close and Personal: Investor Sophistication and the Disposition Effect
Abstract
This paper analyzes the trading records of a major discount brokerage house to investigate the disposition effect, the tendency to sell stocks that have appreciated in price (winners) sooner than stocks that trade below the purchase price (losers). In contrast to previous research that has demonstrated the disposition effect by aggregating across investors, our main objective is to identify differences in the disposition bias across individuals and explain this in terms of underlying investor characteristics. Building on the findings in experimental economics and social psychology, we hypothesize that differences in investor literacy about financial markets and trading frequency are responsible in part for the variation in individual disposition effect. Using demographic and socioeconomic variables as proxies for investor literacy, we find empirical evidence that wealthier individuals and individuals employed in professional occupations exhibit a lower disposition effect. Consistent with experimental economics, trading frequency also tends to reduce the disposition effect. We provide guidelines for investment advisors, regulators, and investment communities to utilize our findings and help investors make better decisions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Persistent evidence of irrationality has been identified, such as overreaction and the disposition effect.
“However, persistent evidence of irrationality has been identified, such as overreaction (Bondt & Thaler, 1985) and the disposition effect (Dhar & Zhu, 2006; Grinblatt & Keloharju, 2001; Shefrin & Statman, 1985).”
From Bridging the divide in financial market forecasting: machine learners vs. financial economists (2016) · cites this paper as Dhar & Zhu, 2006
Proxies for financial sophistication used in the literature include income and wealth, age, educational attainment, professional status, and IQ.
“Corresponding proxies for financial sophistication used in the literature include (disposable) income and wealth (Dhar and Zhu 2006;Vissing-Jorgensen 2003;Calvet et al. 2007Calvet et al. , 2009) ) as well as age (Calvet et al. 2007(Calvet et al. , 2009;;Georgarakos and Pasini 2011), educational attainment (Christiansen et al. 2008;Calvet et al. 2007Calvet et al. , 2009)), professional status (Calv”
From Financial literacy, financial advice, and financial behavior (2017) · cites this paper as Dhar and Zhu 2006
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524 · see citing works
Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors
Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2000) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00226 · Cited by 3,955 · see citing works
Odean, T. (1999) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.89.5.1279 · Cited by 2,247 · see citing works
Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?
List, J. A. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/00335530360535144 · Cited by 1,183 · see citing works
Patterns of behavior of professionally managed and independent investors
Shapira, Z., & Venezia, I. (2001) · Journal of Banking & Finance · doi:10.1016/s0378-4266(00)00139-4 · Cited by 699 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Do retail trades move markets?
Barber, B. M., Odean, T., & Zhu, N. (2009) · Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhn035 · Cited by 903 · see citing works
Self-citationFinancial literacy, financial advice, and financial behavior
Stolper, O. A., & Walter, A. (2017) · Journal of Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11573-017-0853-9 · Cited by 471 · see citing works
“Similarly, Disney et al. (2015) recently analyze the decision of indebted consumers in the U.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBridging the divide in financial market forecasting: machine learners vs. financial economists
Hsu, M.-W., Lessmann, S., Sung, M.-C., Ma, T., & Johnson, J. E. V. (2016) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.05.033 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Striking Out: Biases and Losses of Retail Option Traders
Pitkäjärvi, A., & Vacca, M. (2024) · SSRN Working Paper · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4848713 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dhar, R., & Zhu, N.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 726-740
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2125884277
- Cited by
- 840
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 27 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 60 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 48
- FWCI
- 42.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Management Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
- Keywords
- disposition effect, investor sophistication, trading frequency, wealth, professions, investor behavior, investment advisers
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review