Company Name Influences Stock Performance

June 23, 2006
Company Name Influences Stock Performance
According to researchers at Princeton University, companies with easily pronounced names and stock ticker symbols perform better in stock markets in the days following the initial public offering (IPO). Credit: Nicolle Rager, National Science Foundation

The ease of pronouncing the name of a company and its stock ticker symbol influences how well that stock performs in the days immediately after its initial public offering, two Princeton University psychologists have found.

A new study of initial public offerings (IPOs) on two major American stock exchanges shows that people are more likely to purchase newly offered stocks that have easily pronounced names than those that do not, according to Princeton's Adam Alter and Danny Oppenheimer. The effect extends to the ease with which the stock's ticker code, generally a few letters long, can be pronounced -- indicating that, all else being equal, a stock with the symbol BAL should outperform one with the symbol BDL in the first few days of trading.

"This research shows that people take mental shortcuts, even when it comes to their investments, when it would seem that they would want to be most rational," said Oppenheimer, an assistant professor of psychology. "These findings contribute to the notion that psychology has a great deal to contribute to economic theory."

Oppenheimer and Alter, a graduate student in Oppenheimer's lab and the study's lead author, will publish their work in the May 30 issue of the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The two researchers were initially looking for a different effect when they stumbled upon the relationship between ease of pronounceability and performance. They asked a group of students to estimate how well a series of fabricated stocks would perform based only on the stocks’ names.

"We gave them the list of company names and essentially asked, 'How well do you think the stock would perform?'" Oppenheimer said. "At the time, we were primarily interested in studying whether we could manipulate how people interpret the feeling that information is easy to process. We weren't trying to study markets or companies initially; stocks were just an interesting domain of inquiry."

However, the relationship was very strong -- regardless of Alter and Oppenheimer’s attempts to manipulate students’ interpretations, the students still believed that the easily pronounceable stocks would perform best.

When they noticed how strongly name pronounceability influenced predictions of performance, the researchers moved beyond the lab and investigated the relationship between the variables in two large U.S. stock markets -- the New York Stock Exchange and the American Exchange. The effect held in the real world: the more "fluent" a stock’s name or symbol, the more likely the stock was to perform well initially.

"We looked at intervals of a day, a week, six months and a year after IPO," Alter said. "The effect was strongest shortly after IPO. For example, if you started with $1,000 and invested it in companies with the 10 most fluent names, you would earn $333 more than you would have had you invested in the 10 with the least fluent."

Alter said the pair of scientists had been careful to address the possibility that other factors were at play in the study.

"We thought it was possible that larger companies might both adopt more fluent names and attract greater investment than smaller companies," he said. "But the effect held regardless of company size. We also showed that the effect held when we controlled for the influence of industry, country of origin and other factors."

Oppenheimer cautioned that while the findings might seem highly significant to the investing public, they do not tell the whole story about how a stock might perform after its IPO, nor are they reliable indicators of its performance in the long run.

“Despite the implications of these findings, investors as a group tend to correct themselves in the presence of new information about how the markets operate," he said. "You shouldn't make changes to your stock portfolio based on our findings. The primary contribution of this paper is to add a piece to the jigsaw of understanding how markets operate.”

What the findings did offer, Oppenheimer said, was another piece of evidence that markets -- and therefore the large groups of people who invest in them -- are not the rationally-functioning entities that some experts believe them to be.

"This is not the only factor that plays a role in stock performance," he said. "A number of other economic and psychological factors undoubtedly play a role as well. This study does not argue that psychology is more important than economics, but rather that one cannot ignore psychological variables when constructing models of stock performance."

Source: Princeton University

Explore further: Second phase of dama gazelle study will focus on social interactions

Related Stories

Cosmology looks beyond the standard model

July 8, 2015

What are the mysterious dark matter and dark energy that seem to account for so much of our Universe? Why is the Universe expanding? For the past 30 years, most cosmologists have looked to the 'standard model' to answer ...

Recommended for you

Can genes make us liberal or conservative?

August 4, 2015

Aristotle may have been more on the money than he realised in saying man is a political animal, according to research published Wednesday linking genes with liberal or conservative leanings.

Model shows how surge in wealth inequality may be reversed

July 30, 2015

(Phys.org)—For many Americans, the single biggest problem facing the country is the growing wealth inequality. Based on income tax data, wealth inequality in the US has steadily increased since the mid-1980s, with the top ...

Earliest evidence of reproduction in a complex organism

August 3, 2015

Researchers led by the University of Cambridge have found the earliest example of reproduction in a complex organism. Their new study has found that some organisms known as rangeomorphs, which lived 565 million years ago, ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.