IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2405.08822.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Despite Absolute Information Advantages, All Investors Incur Welfare Loss

Author

Listed:
  • Zongxia Liang
  • Qi Ye

Abstract

This paper delves into financial markets that incorporate a novel form of heterogeneity among investors, specifically in terms of their beliefs regarding the reliability of signals in the business cycle economy model, which may be biased. Unlike most papers in this field, we not only analyze the equilibrium but also examine welfare using objective measures while investors aim to maximize their utility based on subjective measures. Furthermore, we introduce passive investors and use their utility as a benchmark, thereby revealing the phenomenon of double loss sometimes. In the analysis, we examine two effects: the distortion effect on total welfare and the advantage effect of information and highlight their key factors of influence, with a particular emphasis on the proportion of investors. We also demonstrate that manipulating investors' estimation towards the economy can be a way to improve utility and identify an inner connection between welfare and survival.

Suggested Citation

  • Zongxia Liang & Qi Ye, 2024. "Despite Absolute Information Advantages, All Investors Incur Welfare Loss," Papers 2405.08822, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2405.08822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2405.08822
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pietro Veronesi, 2000. "How Does Information Quality Affect Stock Returns?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(2), pages 807-837, April.
    2. Harjoat S. Bhamra & Raman Uppal, 2014. "Asset Prices with Heterogeneity in Preferences and Beliefs," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(2), pages 519-580.
    3. Basak, Suleyman & Cuoco, Domenico, 1998. "An Equilibrium Model with Restricted Stock Market Participation," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(2), pages 309-341.
    4. Yurii Fedyk & Christian Heyerdahl-Larsen & Johan Walden, 2013. "Market Selection and Welfare in a Multi-asset Economy," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 17(3), pages 1179-1237.
    5. Ehling, Paul & Gallmeyer, Michael & Heyerdahl-Larsen, Christian & Illeditsch, Philipp, 2018. "Disagreement about inflation and the yield curve," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(3), pages 459-484.
    6. Basak, Suleyman & Croitoru, Benjamin, 2000. "Equilibrium Mispricing in a Capital Market with Portfolio Constraints," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 715-748.
    7. Andrea Buraschi & Alexei Jiltsov, 2006. "Model Uncertainty and Option Markets with Heterogeneous Beliefs," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(6), pages 2841-2897, December.
    8. Leonid Kogan & Stephen A. Ross & Jiang Wang & Mark M. Westerfield, 2006. "The Price Impact and Survival of Irrational Traders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(1), pages 195-229, February.
    9. Daniel Andrei & Bruce Carlin & Michael Hasler, 2019. "Asset Pricing with Disagreement and Uncertainty About the Length of Business Cycles," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2900-2923, June.
    10. Hongjun Yan, 2008. "Natural Selection in Financial Markets: Does It Work?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1935-1950, November.
    11. Hongjun Yan, 2008. "Natural Selection in Financial Markets: Does It Work?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1935-1950, November.
    12. Wang, Hailong & Hu, Duni, 2020. "Disagreement with procyclical beliefs and asset pricing," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    13. Roman Muraviev, 2013. "Market selection with learning and catching up with the Joneses," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 273-304, April.
    14. Julien Cujean & Michael Hasler, 2017. "Why Does Return Predictability Concentrate in Bad Times?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(6), pages 2717-2758, December.
    15. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4724 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Alexander David, 2008. "Heterogeneous Beliefs, Speculation, and the Equity Premium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 41-83, February.
    17. He, Xue-Zhong & Shi, Lei, 2017. "Index portfolio and welfare analysis under heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 64-79.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Andrei & Bruce Carlin & Michael Hasler, 2019. "Asset Pricing with Disagreement and Uncertainty About the Length of Business Cycles," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2900-2923, June.
    2. He, Xue-Zhong & Shi, Lei, 2017. "Index portfolio and welfare analysis under heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 64-79.
    3. Panageas, Stavros, 2020. "The Implications of Heterogeneity and Inequality for Asset Pricing," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 12(3), pages 199-275, November.
    4. Shi, Lei, 2016. "Consumption-based CAPM with belief heterogeneity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 30-46.
    5. Gao, George P. & Lu, Xiaomeng & Song, Zhaogang & Yan, Hongjun, 2019. "Disagreement beta," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 96-113.
    6. Wang, Hailong & Hu, Duni, 2024. "Heterogeneous beliefs with information processing capacity constraints and asset pricing in a monetary economy," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    7. Wang, Hailong & Hu, Duni, 2021. "Heterogeneous beliefs with herding behaviors and asset pricing in two goods world," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    8. Hu, Duni & Wang, Hailong, 2024. "Heterogeneous beliefs with preference interdependence and asset pricing," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 1-37.
    9. Adem Atmaz & Suleyman Basak, 2018. "Belief Dispersion in the Stock Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(3), pages 1225-1279, June.
    10. Wang, Hailong & Hu, Duni & Ma, Chaoqun & Cheng, Fengchao, 2020. "Disagreements with noisy signals and asset pricing," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    11. Arthur Beddock & Elyès Jouini, 2021. "Live fast, die young: equilibrium and survival in large economies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(3), pages 961-996, April.
    12. Bernstein, Asaf & Billings, Stephen B. & Gustafson, Matthew T. & Lewis, Ryan, 2022. "Partisan residential sorting on climate change risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(3), pages 989-1015.
    13. Wei Xiong & Hongjun Yan, 2010. "Heterogeneous Expectations and Bond Markets," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(4), pages 1433-1466, April.
    14. Hansen, Simon Lysbjerg, 2015. "Cross-sectional asset pricing with heterogeneous preferences and beliefs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 125-151.
    15. Harjoat S. Bhamra & Raman Uppal, 2014. "Asset Prices with Heterogeneity in Preferences and Beliefs," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(2), pages 519-580.
    16. Hui Chen & Scott Joslin & Ngoc-Khanh Tran, 2012. "Rare Disasters and Risk Sharing with Heterogeneous Beliefs," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(7), pages 2189-2224.
    17. Dindo, Pietro, 2019. "Survival in speculative markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 1-43.
    18. Ma, Chaoqun & Wang, Hailong & Cheng, Fengchao & Hu, Duni, 2018. "How money illusions and heterogeneous beliefs affect asset prices," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 167-192.
    19. Wei Xiong, 2013. "Bubbles, Crises, and Heterogeneous Beliefs," NBER Working Papers 18905, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Adem Atmaz & Huseyin Gulen & Stefano Cassella & Fangcheng Ruan, 2024. "Contrarians, Extrapolators, and Stock Market Momentum and Reversal," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(9), pages 5949-5984, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2405.08822. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.