Factors Influencing Individual Investor Behavior: The Case of the Karachi Stock Exchange

Chapter 1: Introduction

Significant sum of attending has been given by research workers to the behaviour and portfolio public presentation of institutional investors in the past whereas less attending has been given to the single investor behaviour ( Venter, 2006 ; Prowse, 1990 ) , ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ; Baker & A ; Haslem, 1974 ) .

This survey is an effort to give penetration into the behaviour of single investors i.e. which factors influence them to buy stocks as did by ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ; Merikas, Andreas, George & A ; Prasad, 2004 ; & amp ; Al-Tamimi, 2006 ) .

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Individual investors participate in the stock market by buying and selling different stocks and it is really of import to place assorted economic and behavioural motives that affect their buying determinations. Thus it is of import to place the factors which have the greatest influence on the single stock investor.The single investing determination in economic public-service corporation theory is viewed as a trade-off between instant ingestion and late ingestion. The single investor evaluates the benefits of devouring today against the benefits that would be gained by puting unconsumed financess in order to obtain greater ingestion in the hereafter. If the single chooses to detain ingestion he will choose the portfolio that will maximise his digesting satisfaction.

The kernel of the public-service corporation theory axiomated by ( Neumann & A ; Morgenstern, 1947 ) province that investors are wholly rational, cover with complex picks, are risk-averse and want to maximise their wealth. Harmonizing to public-service corporation theory single investors select the portfolio that increases their expected public-service corporation measured in expected return while lessenings their hazards or losingss. There are other theories ( Kahneman & A ; Tversky, 1979 ; Tversky & A ; Kahneman, 1986 ) which have made less rigorous guesss about how investors make picks. These theories argued that investors look for investings that maximize geometric return, are focused on avoiding “ awful ” results and they make investing determinations free of premises about public-service corporation maps or chances e.g. stochastic laterality in which one result can be as superior to another ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ) .Harmonizing to ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ) the literature on economic public-service corporation theory does non provide to the single investor ‘s determinations. Alternatively it focuses on macroeconomic theoretical accounts that explain aggregative market behaviour.

Therefore so in an economic public-service corporation theory the investing determinations are treated as a macroeconomic sum in which persons capitalize on their public-service corporation by wealth maximising standards ( Merikas, et Al. 2004 ) . But in a less than perfect universe, investors are bounded in their reason. They do non hold all relevant information, limitless cognitive and mathematical capacities, besides their cognition and experience is besides limited. ( Hoffmann, Eije, & A ; Jager, 2006 )Behavioral finance uses this organic structure of cognition, instead than disregarding these facts. Behavioral finance is the paradigm where fiscal markets are studied utilizing theoretical accounts that are less narrow than those given by ( Neumann & A ; Morgenstern, 1947 ) expected public-service corporation theory and arbitrage premises.

Behavioral finance is a response to the troubles faced by the traditional theoretical accounts in fiscal markets which argues that some fiscal phenomena can be understood utilizing theoretical accounts in which agents ( single investors ) are non to the full rational, either because of penchants or because of misguided beliefs. Behavioral finance focal points on how investors translate and act on information to take investing determinations. It besides examines the investor behaviour which leads to assorted market abnormalcies. It is a quickly turning field which focuses on the consequence of psychological science on the behaviour of fiscal practicians. The sub subject of behavioural finance included theories related with analysing the properties and attitudes of single investors and researching their picks under unsure conditions.

( Merikas, et Al. 2004 ; Al-Tamimi, 2006 )This survey aims at researching Pakistani investor ‘s behaviour, stand foring the first effort to be undertaken in Karachi, Pakistan. It will give an penetration to single local investors ; investing professionals/planners and companies listed in Karachi stock exchange.Understanding of behavioural procedures of investors is indispensable for fiscal contrivers because an apprehension of how investors by and large respond to market motions will assist investing advisers plan appropriate plus allotment schemes for their clients. Investing professionals who deal with retail clients may profit by integrating the factors which might turn out to be of import when gauging and turn toing single investor concerns.This survey will besides assist companies in doing their hereafter policies and schemes to pull investors with concentrating on those factors which influence them to put. Besides, it would besides give more support to market efficiency.

The above grounds presents the comparative importance of assorted economic and behavioural motives that affect investors buying determinations. Therefore this research attempts to happen out which factors influence their behaviour while buying stocks utilizing behavioural finance theory to determination devising.Chapter 2.1 discusses the background work of traditional finance, peculiarly, public-service corporation theory, its developments and its misdemeanors ; Chapter 2.2 discusses the development of behavioural finance while Chapter 2.3 gives the literature reappraisal on the work done by old research workers in the field of behavioural finance for single investors. Research Methods is presented in Chapter 3, Results in Chapter 4 while Decisions are given in Chapter 5.

Chapter 2.

1: Traditional finance: Utility theory, Evolution & A ; Criticism

The analysis of determination doing under uncertainness has been dominated by expected public-service corporation theory. The expected public-service corporation rule was originated in the eighteenth century by ( Bernoulli, 1738 ) , it was foremost axiomated by ( Neumann & A ; Morgenstern, 1947 ) and it was further developed by ( Savage, 1954 ) who included the impression of subjective chance into expected public-service corporation theory. The public-service corporation theory or expected public-service corporation theory has been used in economic sciences as a descriptive theory to explicate different phenomenon such as the purchase of insurance and the relationship between outgo and economy. Besides, public-service corporation theory has besides been used as a normative theory in determination analysis to find best possible determinations and policies ( Tversky, 1975 ) .

( Tversky & A ; Kahneman, 1986 ) There are four premises revealed by the self-evident analysis of the expected theory, cancellation, transitivity, laterality, and invariability, besides more proficient premises of comparison and continuity.The basic premise which is besides the foundation block of expected public-service corporation theory is the cancellation or exclusion of any province of the universe that gives the same consequence regardless of one ‘s pick. This thought has been captured by different formal belongingss such as the permutation premise of ( Neumann & A ; Morgenstern, 1947 ) , the drawn-out certain thing rule of ( Savage, 1954 ) and the independency status of ( Luce & A ; Krantz, 1971 ) .Transitivity of penchant is another basic premise in theoretical accounts of both hazardous and hazardous less pick. This status is necessary and adequate for the illustration of penchant by an ordinal public-service corporation graduated table U such that A is chosen over B whenever U ( A ) & gt ; U ( B ) . Therefore transitivity is accepted merely if it is possible to apportion a value to each option that does non depend on the other available options.

Transitivity is true when the options are assessed independently but non when the effects of an option depend on the other option to which it is compared for e.g. due to repent.The 3rd premise called laterality provinces that if one option is better than another in one status and at least every bit good in all other conditions, the dominant option should be selected.

Stochastic laterality, a somewhat stronger status emphasizes that for one dimensional hazardous chances, A is chosen over B if the cumulative distribution of A is to the right of the cumulative distribution of B. Dominance is both unsophisticated and more compelling than cancellation and transitivity, besides it besides serves as the basis of the normative theory of pick.The rule of invariability is an of import status for the normative theory of pick.

Even though the representations of the same options would be different but it should give the same penchant or in other words, penchant between options should be independent of their description. The determination shaper on contemplation of the different descriptions of options should prefer the same option even without the benefit of such contemplation. This rule of invariability or extensionality ( Arrow, 1982 ) is so cardinal that it does non necessitate to be stated as an maxim but is tacitly assumed during judgement. For illustration, determination theoretical accounts that describe the objects of pick as random variables all assume that alternate representations of the same random variables should be treated likewise. In short, invariance provinces that fluctuations of signifier that do non impact the existent results should non impact the pick.The four rules underlying expected public-service corporation theory can be arranged by their normative entreaty get downing from invariability and laterality which seem indispensable, transitivity which could be questioned and cancellation which has been rejected by old research workers ( Ellsberg, 1961 ) . Most of the theoretical accounts use transitivity, laterality, and invariability e.g.

( Hansson, 1975 ; Machina, 1982 ; Quiggin, 1982 ; Fishburn, 1983 ; Schmeidler, 1984 ; Luce & A ; Narens, 1985 ; Segal, 1984 ) . Other developments abandon transitivity but maintain invariability and laterality e.g. ( Bell, 1982 ; Fishburn, 1982, Loomes & A ; Sugden 1982 ) . These theoreticians responded to ascertained misdemeanors of cancellation and transitivity by weakening the normative theory in order to maintain its position as a descriptive theoretical account. However, this scheme can non be extended to the failures of laterality and invariability because invariability and laterality are normatively indispensable and descriptively invalid ; a theory of rational determination can non supply an equal description of pick behaviour.

The rule of invariability and laterality has been violated and the factors responsible for it are discussed by two descriptive illustrations. ( McNeil, Pauker, Sox, & A ; Tversky, 1982 ) First illustration is related to the survey of picks among medical interventions in which information related to two interventions of lung malignant neoplastic disease in footings of two frames, peculiarly, endurance and mortality frame was given to the respondents. The respondents so indicated their preferable intervention.In the a ) endurance frame in 1 ) Surgery intervention, out of 100 people who used surgery as a intervention, 90 people lived during the station operative stage, while 68 lived by the terminal of first twelvemonth and 34 lived at the terminal of 5 old ages. While in 2 ) Radiation therapy, out of 100 people all lived through the intervention, 77 lived at the terminal of first twelvemonth while 22 lived at the terminal of 5 old ages.

In the mortality frame in 1 ) Surgery, out of 100 people 10 died during surgery or through the station operative stage while 32 died at the terminal of the 1st twelvemonth while 66 died at the terminal of 5 old ages. Under 2 ) Radiation therapy in mortality frame, out of 100 people, no 1 died during the intervention but 23 died at the terminal of first twelvemonth and 78 died at the terminal of 5 old ages.The unimportant difference in the illustration preparation showed a clear consequence. The overall % of respondents who preferred radiation therapy grew from 18 % in the endurance frame, ( N=247 ) to 44 % in the mortality frame ( N=336 ) . The benefit of radiation therapy over surgery seems greater when it is given as a lessening in the hazard of sudden decease from 10 % to 0 % instead than as an addition from 90 % to 100 % in the endurance rate.In the following illustration determinations between combinations of hazardous chances with pecuniary results are evaluated. Each respondent made two picks, one between favourable chances and one between unfavourable chances ( Tversky & A ; Kahneman, 1981 ) . It was assumed that the two selected chances would be played individually.

Respondents examined two braces of coincident determinations presented to them and so indicated the options preferred. Decision one included 1 ) a certain addition of $ 240, 2 ) 25 % chance to derive $ 1000 and 75 % chance to derive nil, out of which respondents had to take one. While determination two included 1 ) a certain loss of $ 750 and 2 ) 75 % chance to lose $ 1000 and 25 % chance to lose nil, once more out of which respondents had to pick one.The per centum that chose each option in determination one are 1 ) 84 % , 2 ) 16 % while in determination two are 1 ) 13 % and 2 ) 87 % . The bulk of pick in determination one is risk averse, while the bulk of pick in determination two is hazard seeking. This is a common form where picks affecting additions are normally risk averse while picks refering losingss are normally risk seeking except when the chance of winning or losing is little ( Fishburn & A ; Kochenberger, 1979 ; Kahneman & A ; Tversky, 1979 ; Hershey & A ; Schoemaker, 1980 ) .

As the respondents considered both determinations at the same time they preferred the portfolio A and D over B and C. Conversely, the preferable portfolio is in fact dominated by the rejected portfolio. The combined options for portfolio A & A ; D were 25 % opportunity to win $ 240 and 75 % opportunity to lose $ 760 while B & A ; C were 25 % opportunity to win $ 250 and 75 % opportunity to lose $ 750. This clearly explains that when the options are presented in the aggregative signifier, the dominant option is chosen.In job two, 73 % respondents chose the combination A and D which was dominated, and option B and C was chosen by merely 3 % .

The difference among the two formats demonstrates the misdemeanor of invariability. These findings besides support that the failures of invariability besides generate misdemeanors to stochastic laterality and frailty versa. Clearly the respondents took the determinations individually in job 2 where they displayed the typical form of hazard seeking in losingss and hazard antipathy in additions. The respondents were astonished to happen out that the combination of two penchants that they thought were rather reasonable led them to take a dominated option.Therefore it can be said that fluctuations in the framing of determination jobs generate systematic misdemeanors of invariability and laterality which can non be defended on the footing of normative theoretical account.The rule of invariability would keep if all preparations of the same position were transformed to a standard canonical representation because so the different versions would wholly be assessed in the same manner.

For illustration in job two invariability and laterality would both keep if the consequences of the two determinations were combined prior to rating. In the same manner, the same pick would be made in both frames of the medical job if the consequences were given in one dominant frame e.g. rate of endurance. The above observed failures of invariability indicate that people do non aggregate coincident chances or change over all consequences into a common frame. Therefore normative theoretical accounts of pick which use invariability can non supply a sufficient descriptive account of pick behaviour. ( Tversky & A ; Kahneman, 1986 )( Tversky, 1975 ) To reason, there is significantly less conformance refering the descriptive cogency of the above mentioned maxims.

The experimental analysis of public-service corporation theory does non bring forth clear consequences. In rather a few surveies most maxims of public-service corporation theory are violated for illustration, fortunes under which transitivity is violated are described in ( Tversky, 1969 ; Raiffa, 1968 ) . However, other experimental surveies support public-service corporation theory, e.g. ( Mosteller & A ; Nogee, 1951 ; Tversky, 1967 ) . Thus it remains ill-defined that public-service corporation theory provides a sound estimation to the behaviour of persons under uncertainness or non( Tversky & A ; Kahneman, 1986 ) Different theoretical accounts of hazardous pick used to explicate the ascertained misdemeanors of public-service corporation theory have been developed in past ten old ages.Table 1 below gives a sum-up of the premises of public-service corporation theory, its empirical misdemeanors and explanatory theoretical accounts. Column one represents the premises of public-service corporation theory, column two represents their empirical misdemeanors and column three presents the theoretical accounts which explains these misdemeanors.

All the theoretical accounts are consistent with the misdemeanors of cancellation created by the certainty consequence. Besides, bivariate ( non transitive ) theoretical accounts are required to explicate ascertained in transitivities and merely prospect theory keep the ascertained misdemeanors of ( stochastic ) laterality and invariability.

Table 1: Summary of Empirical Misdemeanors and Explanatory Models

Summary of Empirical Violations and Explanatory Models
Empirical Misdemeanor
Explanatory ModelCancellation
Certainty consequence ( Kahneman and All theoretical accounts Tversky 1979 )
All theoretical accountsTransitivity
Lexicographic semi order ( Tversky 1969 )
Bivariate theoretical accounts
Preference reversals ( Slovic and Lichtenstein 1983 )
Contrasting hazard attitudes ( Problem 2 )
Prospect theoryInvariability
Framing effects ( Problem 1 )
Prospect theory

Chapter 2.

2: Behavioral finance

The kernel of the public-service corporation theory axiomated by ( Neumann & A ; Morgenstern, 1947 ) province that investors are wholly rational, cover with complex picks, are risk-averse and want to maximise their wealth. Utility theory besides assumes that investors select the portfolio that maximizes expected public-service corporation measured in expected return while minimising hazards or losingss ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ) . Efficient market hypothesis, one of the holistic theories of traditional finance besides states that worlds are rational when doing their determinations while behavioural finance efforts to happen out and understand psychological determination procedures for fiscal markets. The chief attack to behavioural finance is that investors are non rational and are under influence. Therefore it focuses on the demand for a new attack which does non disregard the determination processes of investors.A new fiscal bomber subject called behavioural finance has ignited a moving ridge in explicating the behavioural facets of investing determinations.

It examines pick under uncertainness. Behavioral finance takes into history the research that eliminates the traditional premises of expected public-service corporation maximization with rational investors in efficient markets. Rationality means that agents ( single investors ) update their beliefs right when they receive new information and they take normative determinations consistent with the impression of subjective expected public-service corporation ( SEU ) but it is hard to understand the facts about the aggregative stock market and single trading behaviour. Therefore behavioural finance is a response to the troubles faced by the traditional theoretical accounts in fiscal markets which argues that some fiscal phenomena can be understood utilizing theoretical accounts in which agents ( single investors ) are non to the full rational, either because of penchants or because of misguided beliefs.

It is assumed in behavioural finance that information construction and features of market participants influence person ‘s investing determinations in add-on to market outcomes. Harmonizing to behavioural finance, investor market behaviour is obtained from psychological rules of determination devising which explains why do people purchase or sell stocks. ( Al-Tamimi, 2006 )( Al-Tamimi, 2006 ) Behavioral finance focal points on how investors translate and act on information to take investing determinations. It besides examines the investor behaviour which leads to assorted market abnormalcies or abnormalities ( anomalousnesss ) . It is a quickly turning field which focuses on the consequence of psychological science on the behaviour of fiscal practicians. Behavioral finance gives light to issues related to investors who are able to crush the market even when grounds shows they can non, why is the stock market volatile and volume of trading in fiscal markets inordinate, why do investing analysts have trouble in placing under and overvalued stocks and why does bad intelligence under react stock monetary values.Behavioral finance is the paradigm where fiscal markets are studied utilizing theoretical accounts that are less narrow than those given by Neumann & A ; Morgenstern expected public-service corporation theory and arbitrage premises.

The two edifice blocks on which behavioural finance resides are cognitive psychological science and the bounds to arbitrage. Cognitive means the manner people think and that people make systematic mistakes in the mode in which they think for e.g. they are cocksure and set excessively much weight on recent experiences, etc. Their penchants besides create deceits. Behavioral finance uses this organic structure of cognition, instead than disregarding these facts. Limits to arbitrage refer to foretelling in what fortunes arbitrage forces will be effectual, and when they wo n’t be.

The sub subject of behavioural finance included theories related with analysing the properties and attitudes of single investors and researching their picks under unsure conditions ; viz. Prospect Theory, Heuristics and Regret Aversion ( Merikas et al. 2004 ) .The basis of prospect theory can be dated back to 1970 ‘s when psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky investigated how determination devising heuristics ( regulations of pollex ) bring prejudices in persons behavior, hence placing whether the rule of idealised reason is a utile estimate or non. The most important portion of their work, called chance theory, summarized consequences in a manner that can be seen as an option to public-service corporation theory ( Kahneman & A ; Tversky, 1979 ) . Prospect theory explains how persons make determinations under hazardous fortunes. It is an attempt to show several of the rules of perceptual experience and judgement which restrict the reason of pick. In recent times, surveies related to single pick behaviour has given attending to non merely choices refering hazardous options but besides picks which are made over clip, with surveies concentrating on strong irrational behaviours which lead to complexnesss of cunctation or ego control, like, increase in nest eggs and ingestion behaviour ( Laibson, 1997 ; Loewenstein & A ; Elster, 1992 and Thaler, 1987 )Prospect theory is of import because it identifies the lacks and misdemeanors of traditional finance and the manner it explains the behaviour of persons toward hazard on the footing of “rational human being” .

The rational investor choruss from hazard but will take hazards in exchange of more returns while prospect theory provinces that determination devising procedure is non wholly a rational one and persons are more inclined to take hazards to avoid losingss instead than to acquire high returns. ( Sevil, Sen, & A ; Yalama, 2007 ) found that investors are far from being rational and back up the hazard seeking inclination of investors with prospect theory ‘s frame work.Persons have the inclination of doing speedy judgements are called heuristics. These are simple schemes to cover with complex jobs and restrict the explanatory information.

Peoples are inclined to give higher chances to events which they are familiar with. ( Sevil, et Al, 2007 ) found that the greater companies investors know better are less hazardous than the little companies. Representative heuristics means that as the investors learn from past monetary value motions their future outlooks will be similar to their past experiences and they will non measure current information in its ain state of affairs.Regret is an emotional status which is related to information about the past pertaining to a determination in the yesteryear which lead to a worst result than an alternate determination or than a determination of person else.

( Statman, 1999 ) sorrow is besides defined as the defeat which occurs due to the effect of bad pick. The antonym of sorrow is satisfaction in positive ; both regret and satisfaction are of import. The desire for satisfaction and antipathy of regret consequences in the realisation of net incomes and deceleration of losingss. ( Sevil, et Al, 2007 ) found that the joy of satisfaction is non equal to the hurting of sorrow.

The hurting of sorrow is greater than the joy of satisfaction therefore investors avoid the hurting of sorrow would diminish their personal duty in their investing determinations.

Chapter 2.3: Literature Reappraisal

Empirical surveies of the behaviour of single investors foremost appeared in the 1970s, ( Lease, Lewellen, & A ; Schlarbaum, 1974 ) determined demographic features, investing scheme patterns, information beginnings, plus retentions, market attitudes and perceptual experiences, of the single investor. They found that securities ownership was to a great extent concentrated within the upper age bracket and income sections of the community and those single investors were male, married and had one-year income of $ 25,000. They worked in professional and managerial businesss, and more than half achieved their unmarried man ‘s grade. Their investing scheme forms asserted that they were cardinal analysts who perceived to keep a balanced and good diversified portfolio of income and capital grasp securities.

They claimed that they invested chiefly for the long tally and were prone to utilize market indexes as the benchmark by which they judged their personal investing public presentation consequences. Half the sample spent less than five hours a month and less than $ 15 a twelvemonth on roll uping information for and doing the determinations about the securities in their portfolios, therefore, conveyed an image of low engagement and low monitoring. They considered private messages they got from their history executives, and the public 1s from their diaries and newspapers. Their portfolio sums suggested predomination of equity capital under personal disposal. This group ‘s passion for direct market engagement was due to fun every bit good as net income. The respondents claimed to bask puting and felt that they would give their pleasance if they let establishments administrate their financess, and they besides planned on a larger comparative committedness to equity securities under personal direction in the hereafter.

( Baker & A ; Haslem, 1974 ) studied the factors that cause investors to differ in their sentiments of the attraction of specific common stocks and whether these factors are related to their socioeconomic and behavioural features. Their study contained 34 determination variables measured on a five point importance graduated table and an investor profile incorporating variables of a socioeconomic and behavioural nature. Factor analysis and stepwise multiple arrested development was applied, factor analysis revealed three important factors which were Dividends, Future Expectations and Financial Stability and they accounted for 23.7, 9.6, and 3.4 % of the entire sample discrepancy. These 3 factors have the greatest differences in perceptual experiences of importance among the investors.

Under multiple arrested development the relationships between 21 socioeconomic and behavioural variables surveyed and the three scored factors were examined. These findings suggested that investors were of two distinguishable types, one who seek dividends and the others who seek capital grasp. Investors concerned with income from dividends use determination variables represented by Factor 1 and Factor 3 i.e. Dividends and Financial Stability. Investors who gave importance to dividends were older, females, and hazard averse and therefore did non seek a big addition in the value of their stock. While the 2nd type of investors who were concerned with capital grasp used the determination variables represented by Factor 2, Future Expectations and therefore were willing to give current dividends for future monetary value grasp.( Cohn, Lewellen, Lease & A ; Schlarbaum, 1975 ) suggests a strong form of diminishing comparative hazard antipathy as investor wealth additions.

( Winsen, 1976 ) Efficient Market Hypothesis ( EMH ) asserts that stock market monetary values reflect all publically available information so that it is impossible to systematically achieve unnatural returns utilizing such information. That is, monetary values adjust rapidly and adequately to new information. Harmonizing to the hypothesis, fluctuations in a certain stock monetary value can be taken as indicants of the flow of publically available information into the stock market related to that specific stock. ( Winsen, 1976 ) studied whether investor behaviour is associated with such a flow of information or non. A additive theoretical account was formed to analyze the relationship between investor behaviour and fluctuations in the stock monetary value of a certain house. The relationship was investigated between a ) the error term stand foring behavior non adequately related to information flow and B ) publically available informations about the house which included four informations points, peculiarly, net incomes per portion, hard currency flow per portion, dividends per portion, and available for common per portion.

An association was identified which varied across publically available informations and across houses. The findings supported the statement that investors in some houses misunderstand and/or misuse certain publically available informations points which consequences in their behaviour non being an equal map of the flow of information coming in the stock market.( Falk & A ; Matulich, 1976 ) They examined the relationship between some personal features of a group of investors and a group of investing advisers, and the grade of hazard attributed by them to assorted types of fiscal investings. Personal features investigated included the investors ‘ age, instruction, investing experience, grade of concern for others, and the extent to which they use fiscal diaries. For both groups investigated, the grade of concern for others was significantly related to the grade of hazard attributed to investings. Age and experience by and large are non related to the grade of hazard attributed to investings and therefore no difference exists between immature and old advisers and investors in the grade of hazard attributed to assorted types of investings.

The correlativity analysis implies that risk attributed to investings does non increase with instruction. Investing advisers seem to put more trust on fiscal diaries than do investors, peculiarly when covering with unbarred investings. In the group of investors, a high correlativity exists between the respondents ‘ grade of concern for others and the hazard they attribute to an investing. The correlativity is strongest for unquoted unbarred investings and weakens as one move to secured investings.

In the advisers group, the greater the grade of concern the more extremely is the correlativity with negotiability of investings, with security a secondary consideration. The advisers ‘ grade of concern for others is uncorrelated with the linkage of an investing and negotiability is more of import to those who need investing advice than to those who can do their ain investing determinations.( Baker, Hargrove, & A ; Haslem, 1977 ) found that investors behave rationally, taking into history the investing ‘s risk/return trade-off.

There is a common quandary faced by the investors and portfolio directors sing the trade-off penchant between hazard and return. There is an understanding that by and large a positive relationship exists between hazard and expected return. Previously surveies have been conducted on ex station hazard return relationships of portfolio managed by institutional or professional investors.

His survey analyzes the ex ante hazard return penchants and outlooks of single common stock investors. The intent of his survey was to analyze the relationship between acceptable hazard degrees and expected one-year rates of return every bit good as examine the nature of this relationship between hazard and the constituents of entire return i.e. income from dividends and capital grasp. Chi square and Somer ‘s D trial ( +0.13 ) indicated a strong positive relationship between expected entire return and acceptable degree of hazard. When measuring separately ( Baker, et Al, 1977 ) found that highly strong relationship exists between acceptable degrees of hazard and dividend income indicated by qis square statistic while Somer ‘s D statistic ( -0.226 ) concludes that a strong but negative association exists between hazard and dividends.

It means that lower hazard investors consider high dividend paying stocks which are less hazardous than those growing oriented stocks paying little dividends. Besides, there is a strong relationship between acceptable degrees of hazard and capital grasp based on big qis square trial. The Somer ‘s D trial revealed that this strong relationship is positive ( +0.255 ) means that lower hazard investors have comparative inclination to seek lower capital grasp while there is stronger inclination for higher hazard investors to seek higher capital grasp.Therefore to sum it up the Somer ‘s D statistic for the risk-total return is positive but smaller than the statistic for risk-capital grasp relationship. It has been reduced by the negative Somer ‘s D statistic for the risk-dividends relationship. As dividends and capital grasp together sums to entire return therefore the presence of a positive risk-total returns relationship even after negative risk-dividends means that the positive association between hazard and expected return appears to be due to the impact of capital grasp in investor outlooks of entire return. Nonetheless it gives a patronage consequence which means that lower hazard investors seek high dividends while higher hazard investors seek higher capital grasp in growing stocks.

( Lewellen, Lease, & A ; Schlarbaum, 1977 ) gives importance to single investor because of the single investor ‘s backdown from the direct engagement from the American equity market even though which has been sufficiently documented but the causes of that discernible fact remain about wholly conjectural. Almost all the single investor ‘s state of affairss and determination procedures has been inferred from wide trading statistics, general security monetary value motions, or portfolio simulations. But it is of import to happen out the grounds to the backdown of single investor ‘s engagement from the market so that remedial stairss could be taken quickly to counter act before his backdown from the market. Strong indicants of systematic alterations in investing aims and hazard penchants across age brackets and, to milder extent, income categories are evident.

These are mirrored in differences in investing tactics, portfolio composing, and environmental attitudes. Though analytical manners are diverse, particularly between the genders, the ultimate ends and ensuing determinations have an implicit in harmoniousness. Therefore, age, sex, income and instruction affect investor penchants for capital additions, dividend output and overall return.( Barnewell, 1987 ) found that single investor behaviour can be anticipated by lifestyle features, business, hazard antipathy and control orientation. Barnwell characterized single investors as belonging to either two extremes- active or inactive in her lifestyle analysis.( LeBaron, Farrelly, & A ; Gula, 1992 ) argued that persons ‘ hazard antipathy is mostly a map of intuition instead than rational considerations.

Harmonizing to ( Warren, Stevens, & A ; McConkey, 1990 ) demographics are ever used to section the market for fiscal and economic services but lifestyle features can farther assist in placing single investor ‘s fiscal needs more exactly. Investors who are in the same income classs or age may hold wholly different investing demands, which can be more to the full analyzed with the aid of lifestyle analysis. Lifestyle dimensions do non merely assist distinguish between investor behaviour types ( active/passive ) , they may besides be utile in distinguishing between visible radiation and heavy investors in peculiar investings ( i.

e. , stocks and bonds ) . The analysis of the lifestyle dimensions revealed that two of the lifestyle features were associated with the degree of concentration in stocks and bonds. Respondents who had a light concentration of their investings in stocks and bonds could be described as voluntaries and as dress- witting. The inclination of heavy stock/bond investors non to acquire involved in community organisations and voluntary work may do them less accessible to the fiscal services seller.( Riley & A ; Chow, 1992 ) found that as wealth, income, instruction additions risk-aversion lessenings and it besides decreases with age but merely up to a certain point.

After 65 of age i.e. retirement, hazard antipathy maximizes with age.

( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 ) examined the factors that have the greatest influence on the single stock investor. 34 variables were evaluated based on their importance which was identified by extended testing as potentially act uponing equity investing determinations. The variables included some from the traditional domain ( e.g. expected dividends, perceived hazard, variegation demands ) while others addressed to more modern-day concerns ( house ‘s environmental record, perceived house moralss, etc. ) . Their findings suggested that classical wealth maximization standards are of import to investors, even though investors employ diverse standards when taking stocks.

Contemporary concerns such as local or international operations, environmental path record and the house ‘s ethical position look to be given merely casual consideration. The recommendations of securities firm houses, single stock agents, household members and coworkers go mostly ignored. Many single investors discount the benefits of rating theoretical accounts when measuring stocks.

Seven comparatively homogeneous groups of variables were formed that influence single investor behaviour which were impersonal information, self image / steadfast image happenstance, authoritative, societal relevancy, accounting information, advocator recommendation, and personal fiscal demands. Therefore one can state that investing determination procedure appears to integrate a broader scope of points than antecedently assumed.The Wharton Survey ( Bodnar, Hayt, & A ; Marston, 1996 ) which is one of the most comprehensive surveies of investor behaviour examines how demographic variables influence the investing choice and portfolio composing procedure.( Riley & A ; Russon, 1995 ) Asset allotment is dependent upon expected capital market returns and the single client ‘s desire and ability to digest hazard. ( Riley & A ; Russon, 1995 ) determined the hazard tolerance of the client by doing the client hazard tolerance to be a map of clip skyline, salary, expected salary growing, age, gender, matrimonial position, and figure of kids. The relationship between perceived client hazard tolerance and skyline, client wage, and projected salary growing were all positive. The longer the planning skyline, the greater the client ‘s wage, the higher the projected salary growing, the more hazard the client should be able to digest. They used Nonlinear Estimation Regression which showed that the explanatory power of the theoretical account is high with over 89 per centum of the fluctuation in the sensed hazard being explained by the independent variables.

The consequences clearly indicate that the false clip skyline for a client appears to hold the greatest explanatory power of hazard tolerance and is an indispensable component for a proper plus allotment while variables such as age, matrimonial position, gender, and figure of kids were discernible and should be farther investigated.( Merikas, et Al. 2004 ) studied the factors that appear to exert the greatest influence on the single stock investor in the Greek stock exchange. Participants were asked to measure the importance of 26 variables, identified from the literature and personal interviews as potentially act uponing determination variables. The most of import variables were related to authoritative wealth maximization standards such as “expected corporate earnings” , “condition of fiscal statements” , or “firm position in the industry” . Environmental standards like “coverage in the press” , “statements from politicians and authorities officials” , “ease of obtaining borrowed funds” and “political party affiliation” were wholly unimportant to most stock investors and they are autonomous disregarding inputs of household members, politicians, and coworkers when buying stocks. Factor analysis was used to categorise the similar variables based on correlativities and group them into identifiable classs.

Varimax algorithm of extraneous rotary motion identified factor classs as Accounting Information, Personal Financial Needs Subjective/Personal, Advocate Recommendation, and Neutral Information. Accounting information includes variables from wealth maximising standards such as expected corporate net incomes and status of fiscal statements.While Subjective/Personal factor includes feelings for a house ‘s merchandises & A ; services variable holding the highest burden, therefore being the most of import variable and Impersonal Information include current economic indexs and recent monetary value motions in a houses stock as most of import variable stand foring this factor.

Advocate Recommendation holding sentiments of the house ‘s bulk shareholders as most of import variable and eventually attraction of non-stock investings as the most of import variable due to highest factor burden in Personal Financial Needs factor.( Boye, 2005 ) studied the extent to which some selected dimensions of civilization influenced the investing determinations of institutional and single investors based on frequence distribution.Cultural factors such as uncertainness turning away, clip construct, cultural logic, determination regulations and unwritten tradition identifies the extent to which investors invest their financess. Besides picks of Bankss, stock investing e.g. determinations to put in Treasury measure or fixed belongings is largely influenced by friends.( Hoffmann, et Al, 2006 ) used theories of demands and conformance behaviour on investors in their research in Netherlands.

The consequences indicated that investors besides fulfilling the fiscal demands besides strive to fulfill other more socially oriented demands. Investors that report less investing related cognition and experience show more informational and normative conformance behaviour while investors evaluation societal needs as more of import show more informational and normative conformance behaviour. Besides, the consequence of socially oriented demands is larger than the consequence of investment-related cognition and experience and socially oriented demands are a stronger forecaster of normative conformance behaviour than investment-related cognition and experience of the investor. They besides found that even though single investors give importance to the demand for fiscal addition but they besides give importance to societal interaction with other investors, and hence enjoy puting as a free-time activity. Therefore, this survey follows an “extended” public-service corporation attack which supports the claims from recent behavioural finance literature, which states that puting offers both useful and expressive benefits and hence investors do non merely care about fiscal facets of puting, but instead display a pallet of different demands. ( Fisher & A ; Statman, 1997 ; Statman, 1999 ; Statman, 2002 ; Statman, 2004 )( Al-Tamimi, 2006 ) researched factors which influence the UAE investor behaviour on the Dubai Financial Market and Abu Dhabi Securities Market.

They foremost used arrested development and so factor analysis. Demand on common stocks was the dependent variable represented by past public presentation of the house ‘s stock and recent monetary value motion in a house ‘s stock while independent variables were spiritual factor, market portion and repute of the house, accounting information, publically available information, advocator recommendation and personal fiscal demands. These independent variables were represented by the 25 variables asked in the signifier of inquiries in the questionnaire. Their arrested development theoretical account was undistinguished because it merely explained 20 % of the fluctuation in the dependant variable explained by the independent variable. By doing the frequence tabular array they identified the most influencing factors were past public presentation of the house ‘s stock, expected corporate net incomes, authorities retentions, stock marketability, acquire rich quick, and the creative activity of fiscal markets ( i.e. Dubai Financial Market and Abu Dhabi Securities Markets ) . The least influencing factor were expected losingss in international fiscal markets, expected losingss in other local investings, household member sentiments, minimising hazard, and gut feeling on the economic system.

Factor analysis made 5 factors: impersonal information, accounting information, advocator recommendation, self-image / firm-image happenstance, and personal fiscal demands.( Sevil, et Al, 2007 ) aimed at understanding the determination processes of little investors merchandising in Istanbul stock exchange and found out that investors are non wholly rational as perceived by traditional finance theories.

Chapter 3: Research Methods

Specifically, two research inquiries have been addressed in this research.* First, what comparative importance do determination variables have for single investors doing stock purchase determinations?* Second, are at that place homogenous groups of variables that form identifiable concepts that investors rely upon when doing equity investing determinations?In order to reply the above research inquiries, 30 variables which has been antecedently used by ( Nagy & A ; Obenberger, 1994 and Al-Tamimi, 2006 ) given in appendix, table 2, were used harmonizing to their significance in the Pakistani market, peculiarly in Karachi.

These variables included few from the traditional sphere i.e. from public-service corporation theory or wealth maximization standards for example, expected dividends, expected corporate net incomes, perceived hazard, variegation demands while others addressed more modern concerns such as house ‘s environmental record, perceived house moralss, etc along with few variables concerned with fiscal information such as Condition of Financial Statements and Recent Price Motions of Firm ‘s Stock. Besides these 30 points, respondents were besides asked about their demographics which included age, income, matrimonial position, gender, instruction, field and appellation.

Respondents were besides asked about an extra variable which was to place their common stock retentions in footings of their rupee value.The survey aimed at analysing the behaviour of single investors/shareholders in Karachi Stock Exchange utilizing these 30 variables. The information was gathered from single investors who purchase and sell stocks in the Karachi Stock Exchange. The Karachi Stock Exchange besides known as KSE is the oldest exchange in Pakistan which was established in 1947 and after few old ages it became a registered company limited.

It has experienced an outstanding growing with merely 5 companies listed and 90 members in 1950s while 663 listed companies and 200 members in 2006. KSE is the most liquid and biggest exchange in Pakistan with market capitalisation of US $ 54.28 billion and an mean day-to-day turnover of 525.15 million portions.

KSE was recognized as the top acting universe stock market in 2002 by international magazine ‘Business Week ‘ .There are around 200 securities firm houses in Karachi, out of which 142 are active while the remainder are inactive. Each active securities firm house has at least 400 single investors therefore giving a entire population of around 57000 ( 142*400 ) . The variables were used to place of import variables which influence single investors when doing stock purchase determinations and whether these variables can be grouped in homogeneous sets that form identifiable concepts on which they rely when doing equity investing determinations.Convenience based sampling was the technique used in this research in which respondents were selected based on convenience.

It was a primary research therefore information was collected through a questionnaire. In order to acquire responses on the research inquiries 153 questionnaires were distributed to single investors who invested in Karachi stock exchange and the response rate was 100 % .Participants were asked to measure the importance of 30 variables which provided as potentially act uponing on their equity investing determinations. Respondents noted whether each variable was ( 1 ) A of import point used to do investing determinations ( “ Act On ” ) , ( 2 ) A secondary point ( “ Consider ” ) or ( 3 ) An point ignored in the investing determination procedure ( “ No Influence ” ) .In order to prove the dependability of the instrument used, Cronbach Alpha was applied. Cronbach alpha measures the dependability of the different classs and consists of estimations of how much fluctuation in tonss of different variables is due to opportunity or random mistakes ( Al-Tamimi, 2006 ) . A coefficient greater than or equal to 0.5 is acceptable and a good indicant of concept dependability.

Table 3.1 represents Cronbach alpha ‘s consequence for 33 variables wholly which besides included age, income and their common stock retentions, all measured on ordinal graduated table. Table 3.2 in appendix represents the Cronbach Alpha values for single variables. The sample size chosen for the dependability trial was 40. The overall significance degree of Cronbach ‘s alpha came out to be 0.761, therefore dependability is 76 % and the instrument was dependable to be used further in the survey. It could hold been farther improved by taking some variables but these variables were of import for research findings so all the variables were held at a dependability of 0.


Table 3.1

Cronbach Alpha
N of Items.761
33The variables were ranked harmonizing to how often they were found in each response class and used factor analysis to analyze how they interacted.

Factor analysis technique was used to find whether there were underlying concepts that represented a combination of investor concerns. Factor analysis takes big Numberss of variables ( 30 points in this survey ) and identifies similarities between them doing account of the consequences easier. The sample size status of factor analysis is that there should be at least 5 responses per variable for factor analysis to bring forth sufficient consequences, therefore 30*5 gives the sum of 150 responses which was an appropriate sample size. Besides, all variables should be metric, hence all the variables included in the questionnaire was based on ordinal graduated table.

Chapter 4: Consequences

In response to the first research inquiry of this survey, important variables based on their frequence distributions were identified which influence single investor ‘s behaviour while doing stock purchase determinations. Table 4 in appendix lists 30 variables by their frequences with which respondents considered them to hold important influence on their stock purchase determinations. Some observations made were that most of the variables ranked important were Authoritative wealth-maximization standards such as Expected Dividends, Expected Corporate Net incomes and Diversification Needs.

Besides another standard which was important included the Performance of Stocks such as Expected Stock Market Performance, Recent Price Motions of Firm ‘s Stock, Past Performance of Investor ‘s Stock Portfolio, Current fiscal place, Condition of Financial Statements and Past Performance of Stock. Last, the sample respondents were more self reliant when sing which stocks to take and disregard household members and friends/coworkers sentiments but consider stock agent advices. This confirms that investors employ different determination standard when choosing stocks. It is besides apparent that modern concerns i.e.

Social Relevance & A ; Image such as Perceived Ethics of Firm, Environmental path record, Local Operations and International operations, are given merely minimal consideration by stock investors.Table 5, in appendix, ranks the frequence distribution of variables that respondents ignore or in other words that least act upon the investor ‘s behaviour. First, Social Relevance & A ; image is seemingly non of import to stock investors which include Environmental Record, International Operations, Perceived Ethics of Firm and Local Operations. Second, they ignore inputs from household members and friends/coworkers when choosing stocks. While Datas in Reports/Prospectuses and Exchange listings of companies were given merely casual considerations. The recommendations of stock agents considered by respondents but lesser than their self trust.As it is hard to place which variables are related to wealth-maximization standards ( economic public-service corporation theory ) and which are non related, but few observations can be made that it is apparent that investors rely largely on determination standards predicted by authoritative economic public-service corporation theory. However, at the same clip, it is besides clear that investors use diverse standards, instead than a individual attack.

Many respondents do non take investing determinations in a traditional mode.The 2nd focal point of this research was to place whether the variables most of import to investors form homogeneous groups or non. As there is no individual set of variables investors used systematically to do stock purchase determinations, factor analysis was applied to find whether there are underlying concepts that signify a combination of investor concerns.

Varimax Algorithm of Orthogonal Rotation was used to analyse 34 variables. Evaluation of the resulting concepts is chiefly subjective. The labeling of the variables and the empirical factor formation and designation are seldom perfect, therefore endurance is encouraged.

The implicit in premises to run factor analysis is that KMO ( Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ) value should be greater than 0.5 and Bartlett trial of sphericalness should be rejected ( i.e. ) its significance value should be less than 0.05.

Bartlett trial of sphericalness tests the void hypothesis that the correlativity matrix ( based on which factor analysis makes factors ) is an individuality matrix means there is no correlativity or multicollinearity among variables.Two variables were removed from factor analysis because their Anti Image values ( Measure of Sampling Adequacy ; an extension of KMO, which gives partial correlativities of single variables ) were less than 0.5 ( i.e.

0.410 and 0.430 ) which should hold been equal to or more than 0.5.

These variables were You/Yourself and Family Member Opinions. Removing these variables besides improved KMO ( Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ) from 0.769 to 0.785 and Bartlett trial of sphericalness is rejected which means that the correlativity matrix is non an individuality matrix and therefore there is an implicit in construction among the variables. Table 6 shows the KMO and Bartlett values.

Table 6: Premises of factor Analysis: KMO & A ; Bartlett trials.

KMO and Bartlett ‘s TrialKaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
.785Bartlett ‘s Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square
Table no. 7, in appendix, represents Communalities which identify the most of import variable among the set of 30 variables based on their extractions.

The most of import variables are Past Performance of Investors Stock Portfolio with 0.770, Past Performance of Stock with 0.702 and Stock Broker Recommendation with 0.702 extractions.

Seven factors/components were extracted based on “Principle Components” extraction method and threshold of Eigen value 1. Table 8 in appendix, represents the entire discrepancy explained by seven factors extracted. In the column of Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings, the first constituent being the most of import constituent explains 22.29 % of fluctuation in the information with 6.242 Eigen value. The 2nd constituent explains 10.185 % fluctuation with Eigen value of 2.852, 3rd constituent explains 7.

664 % fluctuation with 2.146 Eigen value. While 4th constituent explicating 6.864 % of fluctuation with 1.

922 Eigen value, 5th constituent explicating 4.911 % fluctuation in the information with Eigen value of 1.375, 6th constituent with 4.636 % fluctuation and 1.298 Eigen value and last constituent explicating 3.794 % fluctuation and 1.

062 Eigen value.Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings provides the initial burdens in each constituent with highest factor lading in first constituent along with highest Eigen value and fluctuation explained by the constituent and so the remainder of the Eigen value and fluctuation in go uping order in other constituents. While Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings rotates all the burdens utilizing Varimax Algorithm of Orthogonal Rotation and distributes all the burdens about uniformly across all the constituents, therefore fluctuation explained and Eigen values are besides bifurcated about even across the factors. Therefore component one explicating 12.

8 % fluctuation with 3.591 Eigen value, component two, 10.6 % , 2.98, 3rd constituent with 10.

3 % and 2.909, 4th constituent with 7.537 % fluctuation and 2.11 Eigen value, 5th constituent with 7.

494 % discrepancy explained and Eigen value of 2.098, 6th constituent with 6.109 % and 1.71 Eigen value and 7th constituent with 5.35 % fluctuation and 1.498 Eigen Value. Figure 1 below represents the Eigen values of the seven constituents based on Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings in the graphical signifier.

Table 9: Rotated Component Matrix placing seven factors with the highest factor burdens of each variable in each factor.

Rotated Component Matrix
7Local Operationss
International Operationss
Institutional Retentions
Environmental Record

Perceived Ethical motives Of Firm
Tax Consequences
Competing Financial Needs
Current Financial Position

Condition of Financial Statements
Exchange Listing
Datas In Reports & A ; Prospectuss
Past Performance of Investors Stock Portfolio
Past Performance Of Stock
Recent Price Motions Of Firms Stock

Expected Stock Market Performance
Gut Feeling On Economy
Expected Corporate Net incomes
Friend or Coworker Recommendation
Attractiveness of Non Stock Investings
Use of Valuation Equations
Current Economic Indexs

Time Before Fundss are Needed
Diversification Needs
Low-cost Share Price
Minimizing Hazard
Expected Dividends
Stock Broker Recommendation
.810Feelingss For Firms Products And Services
.451Table 9 represents the Rotated Component Matrix which identifies seven factors with highest factor burdens of each variable in each factor.

The first factor/component bearing 6 variables, revenue enhancement effects being omitted because it is transverse lading in another constituent every bit good, therefore 5 variables staying which include Local Operations, International Operations, Institutional Holdings, Environmental Record, Perceived Ethics Of Firm with.726, 0.716, 0.669, 0.

639, and 0.500 factor burdens, severally. Factor/ Component two include variables such as Current Financial Position, Condition of Financial Statements, Exchange Listing, and Data in Reports & A ; Prospectuses with factor burdens of 0.

794, 0.715, 0.632, and 0.591.

Factor 3 comprises of Past Performance of Investors Stock Portfolio, Recent Price Motions of Firms Stock, Expected Stock Market Performance, and Gut Feeling on Economy with 0.780, 0.694, 0.675, 0.635, and 0.533 burdens.Factor 4 consists of Friend or Coworker Recommendation and Attractiveness of Non Stock Investments with factor burdens of 0.717 and 0.677. While Factor 5 has variables Use of Valuation Equations, Current Economic Indicators, and Time before Fundss are needed incorporating 0.692, 0.690 and -0.601. This negative mark indicates importance of the variable but in the opposite way of the position of the variable i.e. it indicates reverse relationship among these 3 variables. Competing Fiscal Needs and Diversification Needs have no factor lading because they have no of import function to play in any factor. Low-cost Share Price, Minimizing Risk and Expected Dividends are a portion of 6th factor/ constituent with 0.718, 0.558 and 0.476 burdens. Finally, the last factor includes Stock Broker Recommendation and Feelings for Firms Products and Services variables with 0.810 and 0.451factor burdens in the revolved constituent matrix.

Table 10: Hypothesiss Assessment Summary

Factor Loads
Factor 1: Social relevancy & A ; Image alpha= ( 0.762 )
Local Operationss
0.726International Operationss
0.716Institutional Retentions
0.669Environmental Record
0.639Perceived Ethical motives Of Firm
Factor 2: Accounting Information alpha= ( 0.75