Comments for Single Men Trade Stocks Too Much

Single Men Trade Stocks Too Much

2009-03-10T07:35:38Z

Nick Kapur at The Motley Fool says that men trade stocks more frequently than women. This is not a good thing; the result of all this hyperactivity and overconfidence is lower earnings on your investment. He writes, "Worse still (for unmarried guys like me) is that single men trade a whopping 67% more than single women, earning them annual net returns of 2.3% less! The authors cite increased trading costs, taxes, and a greater tendency to speculate as reasons for this underperformance."

"Attention, Single Men: Stop Trading So Much" [The Motley Fool]
(Photo: goatling)

Comment from failurate on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T21:52:02Z

@hateeecs: I know things are much different on the massive scale that most mutual fund managers work on... but what the hell? They could all be replaced by dart throwing monkeys and the performance would be similar or better.

Comment from kwsventures on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T21:39:35Z

Until Obama takes away my freedom, I will invest as I like.

Comment from johnva on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T21:35:39Z

@Eyebrows McGee: Thank you.

Comment from ChuckECheese on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T20:46:22Z

This reminds me of men hogging the TV remote and constantly changing channels.

Comment from nakedscience on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T19:11:19Z

SexCpotatoes, I don't think you really know what "wage discrimination" means...

Comment from cmdrsass on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T18:59:40Z

men hunt for the higher yield while women nest.

Comment from RandomHookup on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T17:34:18Z

Another "single men have trouble with commitment" article. I'm surprised it didn't show up right before V-Day.

Comment from JustThatGuy3 on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T17:15:08Z

@parliboy
@hateeecs

If you hold a coin-flipping contest, somebody's going to win.

Comment from parliboy on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T17:13:29Z

Oh, certainly anecdotal. I read that from the perspective of: "Hey, they're talking about males who trade. I'm a male who trades. And I don't really care all that much."

Thus, the meh.

Apologies if the intent of my statement was off.

Comment from Yossarian on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T16:31:40Z

@parliboy: Look up "anecdotal," meh.

Comment from Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!) on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T16:24:33Z

@N.RobertMoses: Ah, yes, teaching the young and studying the way the world works, such an unproductive waste of time.

Somebody should tell Newton all those papers he wrote were "just to look like he was actually doing something productive."

Comment from SexCpotatoes on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T14:44:45Z

I don't believe it, after all, it's an accepted law that men always make more than women, it's called "wage discrimination."

/sarcasm

Comment from FuryOfFirestorm on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T11:51:43Z

Didn't our mothers warn us that "trading stocks" too much caused hairy palms and blindness?

Comment from parliboy on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T11:43:40Z

Meh. Last year, I set up a $2,000 stock purchase before I went to bed. I checked it about 10:00 AM, and saw that the value was $2,400. You're damn right I sold it, and I'd do it again.

OTOH, I stopped investing in July, so I'm up 50% against the market. Again, meh.

Comment from hateeecs on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T10:08:48Z

My managed account is down much, much less than all of my 401k mutual funds over the last few years.

Comment from Jim Hsu on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T08:43:41Z

I don't get it why articles do not take an extra minute to provide a MLA or APA style reference, or link to the paper in question (in this case, the paper is accessible by the public).

Here's the link: [faculty.haas.berkeley.edu]

I certainly don't think it's too academic, and I don't major in economics or psychology. Could be organized better though.

Comment from N.RobertMoses on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T08:43:32Z

And in a few weeks there will be another study contradicting this one. Studies seem to be the only thing these academics do and it seems like they are just doing them to look like they are actually doing something productive.

Comment from Chris Walters on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T08:16:45Z

@krunk4ever - check the comments for a link to the original paper (which in turn is buried halfway down a list of papers--check the "published" section).

It's too academic for this blog, but if you don't believe it and want details that's where to look.

Comment from krunk4ever on 2009-03-10

2009-03-10T08:04:12Z

This article doesn't really mean much more details on how those %s came about. Were they over a 1 year period? Were they over a 10 year period? How many participants were included in the survey.

All we know is that they used the the "oft-cited study by Brad Barber and Terrance Odean".