We examine how mutual funds form stock market expectations and the implications of these beliefs for asset returns, using a novel text-based measure extracted from Chinese fund reports. Funds extrapolate from recent stock market and fund returns when forming expectations, with more recent returns receiving greater weight. This recency tendency is weaker among more experienced managers. At the aggregate level, consensus expectations positively predict short-term future market returns, both in and out of sample. At the fund level, expectations are positively related to subsequent fund performance in the time series. In the cross-section, however, superior performance arises only when funds accurately forecast market direction and adjust their portfolios accordingly. This effect is stronger for optimistic forecasts and among funds with greater exposure to liquid stocks. Our findings highlight the conditional nature of belief-driven performance, shaped jointly by forecasting skill and the ability to implement views in the presence of execution frictions such as short-selling and liquidity constraints.

Using comprehensive account-level data and 192 asset pricing anomaly signals, we investigate whether retail investors and institutions trade on anomalies in China. We find that retail investors tend to trade contrary to anomaly prescriptions, suggesting that they have a strong tendency to buy (sell) overvalued (undervalued) stocks. In contrast, institutions trade consistent with anomalies, indicating that they buy (sell) undervalued (overvalued) stocks. Regarding the information content of anomalies, we find that small retail investors trade contrary to trading-based anomalies, whereas institutions trade consistent with both trading- and accounting-based anomalies. Additionally, lottery stock preference and return extrapolation help explain investors’ trading behavior on anomalies.

This study investigates the relationship between investors’ prior gains or losses and their adoption of extrapolative beliefs. Our findings indicate that investors facing prior losses tend to rely on optimistic extrapolative beliefs, whereas those experiencing prior gains adopt pessimistic extrapolative beliefs. These results support the theory of motivated beliefs. The interaction between the capital gain overhang and extrapolative beliefs results in noteworthy mispricing, yielding monthly returns of approximately 1%. Motivated extrapolative beliefs comove with investors’ survey expectations and trading behavior, and help explain momentum anomalies. Additionally, households are susceptible to this belief distortion. Institutional investors can avoid overpriced stocks associated with motivated (over-)optimistic extrapolative beliefs.

This study investigates the relationship between investors’ prior gains or losses and their adoption of extrapolative beliefs. Our findings indicate that investors facing prior losses tend to rely on optimistic extrapolative beliefs, whereas those experiencing prior gains adopt pessimistic extrapolative beliefs. These results support the theory of motivated beliefs. The interaction between the capital gain overhang and extrapolative beliefs results in noteworthy mispricing, yielding monthly returns of approximately 1%. Motivated extrapolative beliefs comove with investors’ survey expectations and trading behavior, and help explain momentum anomalies. Additionally, households are susceptible to this belief distortion. Institutional investors can avoid overpriced stocks associated with motivated (over-)optimistic extrapolative beliefs.

We survey a large representative sample of retail investors to elicit their memories of stock market investment and return expectations. We then merge the survey data with administrative data of transactions to test a model in which investors form expectations by selectively recalling past experiences similar to the present cue. Our analysis not only uncovers newstylized facts about investor memory, but also provides support for similarity-based recall as a key mechanism of belief formation in ffnancial markets. Market ffuctuations affect investors’ recall: positive market returns cue investors to retrieve episodes of rising markets and recall own performances more positively. Recalled experiences explain a sizable fraction of cross-investor variation in beliefs and dominate actual experiences in explanatory power. We also show that recalled experiences can drive out the explanatory power of recent returns for expected future returns, ruling in a memory-based foundation for return extrapolation.

Using novel data from a stock forum, we analyze return extrapolation in the cross-section. Our findings indicate that extrapolators overreact to the returns but underreact to the fundamentals. The post-earnings-announcement drift (PEAD) is more pronounced among firms with a high firm-level degree-of-extrapolation (DOX). Additionally, investors ask fewer questions about high-DOX firms’ fundamental information on official online interactive platforms. Extrapolation reduces the informativeness of stocks due to investors’ inattention to fundamentals. Furthermore, extrapolators’ overreaction to returns and underreaction to fundamentals increase stock price crash risks. These findings support explanations of extrapolation based on limited asymmetric attention.

This paper examines the role of earnings management in the underpricing and long-term performance of Chinese initial public offerings (IPOs) issued during the 1998-2003 period. It tests the earnings extrapolation hypothesis that naive investors extrapolate pre-issue earnings without fully adjusting for potential manipulation of accounting accruals, thereby inflating the initial trading price. If the hypothesis holds, underpricing will be positively related to initial earnings management. However, since the latter is subsequently corrected over time, it will lead to inferior long-term stock performance. The empirical evidence is consistent with both the earnings extrapolation and the long run underperformance hypotheses for our sample of 506 IPOs.