IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bir/birmec/23-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Automatic vs Manual Investing: Role of Past Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Said Kaawach

    (University of Huddersfield)

  • Oskar Kowalewski

    (IESEG School of Management)

  • Oleksandr Talavera

    (University of Birmingham)

Abstract

Using unique data from a leading peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platform, we investigate the link between past investment performance and choice of auto-investing tool. Our results suggest that investors with poorly performing loan portfolios are more likely to switch automatically. This negative relationship can be explained by algorithmic aversion or investor inattention. In other words, the results suggest that good-performing investors who pay close attention to their loan portfolios or are not interested in using automated services are more likely to rely on themselves in manual mode. These results are robust to alternative specifications.

Suggested Citation

  • Said Kaawach & Oskar Kowalewski & Oleksandr Talavera, 2023. "Automatic vs Manual Investing: Role of Past Performance," Discussion Papers 23-04, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    • Handle: RePEc:bir:birmec:23-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.cal.bham.ac.uk/pdf/23-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neal M. Stoughton & Youchang Wu & Josef Zechner, 2011. "Intermediated Investment Management," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(3), pages 947-980, June.
    2. Gervais, Simon & Odean, Terrance, 2001. "Learning to be Overconfident," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27.
    3. Guo, Yanhong & Zhou, Wenjun & Luo, Chunyu & Liu, Chuanren & Xiong, Hui, 2016. "Instance-based credit risk assessment for investment decisions in P2P lending," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 417-426.
    4. Rajkamal Iyer & Asim Ijaz Khwaja & Erzo F. P. Luttmer & Kelly Shue, 2016. "Screening Peers Softly: Inferring the Quality of Small Borrowers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1554-1577, June.
    5. Duan, Yang & Hsieh, Tien-Shih & Wang, Ray R. & Wang, Zhihong, 2020. "Entrepreneurs' facial trustworthiness, gender, and crowdfunding success," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Terrance Odean., 1996. "Volume, Volatility, Price and Profit When All Trader Are Above Average," Research Program in Finance Working Papers RPF-266, University of California at Berkeley.
    7. Lusardi, Annamaria & Tufano, Peter, 2015. "Debt literacy, financial experiences, and overindebtedness," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 332-368, October.
    8. Gogoll, Jan & Uhl, Matthias, 2018. "Rage against the machine: Automation in the moral domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 97-103.
    9. Martin G. Kocher & Julius Pahlke & Stefan T. Trautmann, 2013. "Tempus Fugit : Time Pressure in Risky Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2380-2391, October.
    10. David Easley & David Michayluk & Maureen O’Hara and Tālis & J Putniņš, 2021. "The Active World of Passive Investing [Mutual fund’s R2 as predictor of performance]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 25(5), pages 1433-1471.
    11. D’Hondt, Catherine & De Winne, Rudy & Ghysels, Eric & Raymond, Steve, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence Alter Egos: Who might benefit from robo-investing?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 278-299.
    12. Zhang, Jing & Zhang, Wei & Li, Yuelei & Caglayan, Mustafa, 2021. "Decision time and investors' portfolio strategies," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    13. Ruyi Ge & Zhiqiang (Eric) Zheng & Xuan Tian & Li Liao, 2021. "Human–Robot Interaction: When Investors Adjust the Usage of Robo-Advisors in Peer-to-Peer Lending," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 774-785, September.
    14. Robert F. Stambaugh, 2014. "Investment Noise and Trends," NBER Working Papers 20072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Francesco D’Acunto & Nagpurnanand Prabhala & Alberto G Rossi, 2019. "The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-Advising," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(5), pages 1983-2020.
    16. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    17. Jon Kleinberg & Himabindu Lakkaraju & Jure Leskovec & Jens Ludwig & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2018. "Human Decisions and Machine Predictions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(1), pages 237-293.
    18. Menkveld, Albert J., 2013. "High frequency trading and the new market makers," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 712-740.
    19. Li Liao & Zhengwei Wang & Jia Xiang & Hongjun Yan & Jun Yang & LaurenCohen, 2021. "User Interface and Firsthand Experience in Retail Investing," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4486-4523.
    20. D'Acunto, Francesco & Ghosh, Pulak & Jain, Rajiv & Rossi, Alberto G., 2022. "How costly are cultural biases?," LawFin Working Paper Series 34, Goethe University, Center for Advanced Studies on the Foundations of Law and Finance (LawFin).
    21. Stephen Foerster & Juhani T. Linnainmaa & Brian T. Melzer & Alessandro Previtero, 2017. "Retail Financial Advice: Does One Size Fit All?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1441-1482, August.
    22. Chen, Xiao & Huang, Bihong & Ye, Dezhu, 2020. "Gender gap in peer-to-peer lending: Evidence from China," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    23. Caglayan, Mustafa & Talavera, Oleksandr & Zhang, Wei, 2021. "Herding behaviour in P2P lending markets," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 27-41.
    24. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:6:p:1887-1934 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Merkle, Christoph, 2017. "Financial overconfidence over time: Foresight, hindsight, and insight of investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 68-87.
    26. Robert F. Stambaugh, 2014. "Presidential Address: Investment Noise and Trends," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(4), pages 1415-1453, August.
    27. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    28. Jiang, Jiajun & Liu, Yu-Jane & Lu, Ruichang, 2020. "Social heterogeneity and local bias in peer-to-peer lending – evidence from China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 302-324.
    29. Nicolae Gârleanu & Lasse Heje Pedersen, 2022. "Active and Passive Investing: Understanding Samuelson’s Dictum [A noisy rational expectations equilibrium for multi-asset securities markets]," The Review of Asset Pricing Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 389-446.
    30. Jefferson Duarte & Stephan Siegel & Lance Young, 2012. "Trust and Credit: The Role of Appearance in Peer-to-peer Lending," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(8), pages 2455-2484.
    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. Li, Jianwen, 2023. "MSMEs meet FinTech: Chance or challenge?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    2. Li, Jianwen & Zhang, Bo & Jiang, Mingming & Hu, Jinyan, 2023. "Homophilous intensity in the online lending market: Bidding behavior and economic effects," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    3. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.
    4. D'Acunto, Francesco & Ghosh, Pulak & Jain, Rajiv & Rossi, Alberto G., 2022. "How costly are cultural biases?," LawFin Working Paper Series 34, Goethe University, Center for Advanced Studies on the Foundations of Law and Finance (LawFin).
    5. Alexia GAUDEUL & Caterina GIANNETTI, 2023. "Trade-offs in the design of financial algorithms," Discussion Papers 2023/288, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    6. Jianwen Li & Jinyan Hu, 2022. "Migrants and default: Evidence from China," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 472-505, September.
    7. Chugunova, Marina & Sele, Daniela, 2022. "We and It: An interdisciplinary review of the experimental evidence on how humans interact with machines," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Chen, Xiao & Guo, Gangxing, 2024. "Air pollution and online lender behavior: Evidence from Chinese peer-to-peer lending," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    9. Back, Camila & Morana, Stefan & Spann, Martin, 2023. "When do robo-advisors make us better investors? The impact of social design elements on investor behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. Dongwoo Kim, 2023. "Can investors’ collective decision-making evolve? Evidence from peer-to-peer lending markets," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1323-1358, June.
    11. Bianchi, Milo & Brière, Marie, 2021. "Human-Robot Interactions in Investment Decisions," TSE Working Papers 21-1251, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2024.
    12. Mahmud, Hasan & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Ahmed, Syed Ishtiaque & Smolander, Kari, 2022. "What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    13. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    14. Christoph Keding, 2021. "Understanding the interplay of artificial intelligence and strategic management: four decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 91-134, February.
    15. Scott Schanke & Gordon Burtch & Gautam Ray, 2021. "Estimating the Impact of “Humanizing” Customer Service Chatbots," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 736-751, September.
    16. Brunner, Fabian & Gamm, Fabian & Mill, Wladislaw, 2023. "MyPortfolio: The IKEA effect in financial investment decisions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    17. Zhang, Xiaotao & Liang, Junpeng & He, Feng, 2019. "Private information advantage or overconfidence? Performance of intraday arbitrage speculators in the Chinese stock market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    18. Qizhi Tao & Yizhe Dong & Ziming Lin, 2017. "Who can get money? Evidence from the Chinese peer-to-peer lending platform," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 425-441, June.
    19. Andreas Fügener & Jörn Grahl & Alok Gupta & Wolfgang Ketter, 2022. "Cognitive Challenges in Human–Artificial Intelligence Collaboration: Investigating the Path Toward Productive Delegation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 678-696, June.
    20. Bannier, Christina E. & Neubert, Milena, 2016. "Actual and perceived financial sophistication and wealth accumulation: The role of education and gender," CFS Working Paper Series 528, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    FinTech; Peer-to-Peer Lending; Investor Switching; Automatic Bidding;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G40 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - General
    • G51 - Financial Economics - - Household Finance - - - Household Savings, Borrowing, Debt, and Wealth
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    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:bir:birmec:23-04. 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: Oleksandr Talavera (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/debhauk.html .

    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.