We hypothesize that individual investors treat trading as a fun and exciting gambling activity, implying substitution between this activity and alternative gambling opportunities. To examine this hypothesis, we study the lottery jackpots and the trading of individual investors in Taiwan. When the jackpots exceed 500 million Taiwan dollars, the trading volume decreases between 5.2% and 9.1% among stocks preferred by individual investors and between 6.8% and 8.6% among lottery-like stocks. The decline in individual buy volume is statistically indistinct from the decline in sell volume. Large jackpots are associated with less trading in options with high sensitivity to volatility.

How reliable is the recovery theorem of Ross (2015)? We explore this question in the context of options on the 30-year Treasury bond futures, allowing us to deduce restrictions that link the physical and risk-neutral return distributions. Our empirical results undermine the implications of the recovery theorem. First, we reject an implicit assumption of the recovery theorem that the martingale component of the stochastic discount factor is identical to unity. Second, we consider the restrictions between the physical and risk-neutral return moments when the recovery theorem holds, and reject them in both forecasting regressions and generalized method of moments estimations.

We hypothesize that individual investors treat trading as a fun and exciting gambling activity, implying substitution between this activity and alternative gambling opportunities. To examine this hypothesis, we study the lottery jackpots and the trading of individual investors in Taiwan. When the jackpots exceed 500 million Taiwan dollars, the trading volume decreases between 5.2% and 9.1% among stocks preferred by individual investors and between 6.8% and 8.6% among lottery-like stocks. The decline in individual buy volume is statistically indistinct from the decline in sell volume. Large jackpots are associated with less trading in options with high sensitivity to volatility.

How reliable is the recovery theorem of Ross (2015)? We explore this question in the context of options on the 30-year Treasury bond futures, allowing us to deduce restrictions that link the physical and risk-neutral return distributions. Our empirical results undermine the implications of the recovery theorem. First, we reject an implicit assumption of the recovery theorem that the martingale component of the stochastic discount factor is identical to unity. Second, we consider the restrictions between the physical and risk-neutral return moments when the recovery theorem holds, and reject them in both forecasting regressions and generalized method of moments estimations. Received November 7, 2016; editorial decision July 24, 2017 by Editor Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh.