This study examines the ex-dividend day trading behavior of all investors in the Finnish stock market. Consistent with dynamic dividend clientele theories, investors with a preference for dividend income buy shares cum-dividend and sell ex-dividend; the reverse is true for investors with the opposite preference. Investors also engage in overnight arbitrage, earning on average a 2% overnight return on their invested capital. Trades at the investor-level reveal that idiosyncratic risk is an important determinant in the choice of stock for short-term ex-day trading. Furthermore, transaction costs and dividend yield jointly determine whether the volume of short-term trading activity is nonzero.

This study documents patterns of investor behavior around Finnish rights issues. We find that shareholders of issuing companies lost at least €9.9 million in aggregate from 1995 to 2002 by exercising rights too early, selling rights in the open market below their intrinsic value, or leaving rights unexercised. At the investor level, the losses are modest. For example, the median household investor suffered a loss of €135 from not exercising or selling the rights. Investors with small portfolios, inactive trading history, those who know neither of the official languages in Finland, or who are living abroad leave money on the table the most.

We provide evidence of households’ stock market trading in response to clearly identifiable positive cash flow shocks: dividend payments and tender offer proceeds. Transaction cost motives appear important, and there is some support for rational portfolio rebalancing and life cycle considerations as well. Households’ tendency to reinvest is low, even for large and unexpected dividend payments. This is consistent with a default choice bias, and is not due to dividend clientele effects. Reinvestment of tender offer proceeds is significantly higher, controlling for other important factors. This is consistent with mental accounting, i.e., cash flows from different sources are treated differently.

We show that investors tend to hold the same securities as their parents. This intergenerational correlation is stronger for mothers and family members who are more likely to communicate with each other. An instrumental variables estimation and a natural experiment suggest that the correlation reflects social influence. This influence runs not only from parents to children, but also vice versa. The resulting holdings of identical securities increase intergenerational correlations in portfolio choice, exacerbate wealth inequality, and amplify the consequences of behavioral biases.

ABSTRACT We trace the impact of formative experiences on portfolio choice. Plausibly exogenous variation in workers’ exposure to a depression allows us to identify the effects and a new estimation approach makes addressing wealth and income effects possible. We find that adversely affected workers are less likely to invest in risky assets. This result is robust to a number of control variables and it holds for individuals whose income, employment, and wealth were unaffected. The effects travel through social networks: individuals whose neighbors and family members experienced adverse circumstances also avoid risky investments.