Sebastien Thibault
Few strategies for financial fraud are as broadly familiar as “pump and dump.” Pump-and-dump schemes—in which fraudsters misleadingly tout cheap or “penny” stocks to lure investors, pushing up the price before selling for huge gains and leaving other investors with significant losses—have featured prominently in films such as The Wolf of Wall Street and Boiler Room. They are fairly ubiquitous offscreen, too: at one point, they were estimated to account for 15 percent of all spam email. But though the tactic is well known and the resulting price distortions well documented, little is known about which investors take the bait.
Research by Chicago Booth’s Christian Leuz, Leibniz University of Hanover’s Steffen Meyer, Maximilian Muhn of Humboldt University of Berlin, Harvard’s Eugene Soltes, and Andreas Hackethal of Goethe University Frankfurt examines who invests in these schemes, and how often. Contrary to the popular understanding that people who invest in such schemes are duped into doing so, the research suggests that some investors actually may seek out these scenarios, perhaps viewing them as analogous to lotteries.
Regulators face a crucial tradeoff between creating opportunities for small businesses to acquire capital and providing adequate protection to investors.
On OTC Markets, Lowering the Bar for Regulation Lowers Market Quality
Not everyone who invests in pump-and-dumps is duped into doing it.
Line of Inquiry: Christian Leuz on Pump-and-Dump SchemesThe researchers examined 421 pump-and-dumps between 2002 and 2015 provided by BaFin, a German financial regulator, along with cases they hand collected from searches on German websites and internet forums. They combined data about these schemes with trading records of more than 110,000 investors from a German online bank to see who actually participated. During the sample period, these investors made a total of 29 million trades with an aggregate transaction value of €178 billion.
Of these investors, 6,569 individuals—nearly 6 percent of the sample—collectively made more than 20,000 purchases during the first 60 days of the pump-and-dump schemes that the researchers identified. These individuals invested an average of €6,972 per tout, or about 11.4 percent of their portfolio’s overall value, and sustained an average loss of nearly 30 percent. Compared with a control group of investors who didn’t participate in these schemes, pump-and-dump investors owned more stocks and had a greater share of penny stocks than reputable “blue chip” stocks in their portfolios.
Analyzing the characteristics of traders who bought stocks that turned out to be pump-and-dump schemes, the researchers find that many of them have a history of risky bets.
On average, each scheme reduced investors’ wealth by €800, generating losses of at least €1.2 million for German online investors. The average investor in tout schemes was an older, married male not residing in a big city, who had a high self-assessed risk tolerance, the researchers find. Blue-collar workers, retirees, and the self-employed were also more likely to invest in these schemes. But trading behavior, demonstrated by the composition of investors’ portfolios and their past trading patterns, was a better predictor than demographics of who participated: more than 35 percent of pump-and-dump investors were day-trading in penny stocks or were frequent traders with short-term horizons, taking substantial risks and trading aggressively before they participated in the schemes, the researchers find.
“The frequency with which some investors invest in touts as well as the composition of their portfolios suggests that not all tout investors are gullible or fall prey to pump-and-dump schemes,” the researchers write. The observation that some investors may actively search for pump-and-dump schemes underscores the need for regulators to better understand who actually buys touted stocks when they’re trying to design more-effective investor protections. Many pump-and-dump stocks trade on over-the-counter or alternative markets that are less regulated than the major exchanges.
For some investors, interventions—such as prompts to take more time before making investment decisions and to think about whether funds look suspicious—could decrease the likelihood of participating in pump-and-dump schemes. But the researchers warn that these techniques are less likely to work for the subset of investors who intentionally seek out such schemes for the sheer thrill of it and the possibility of big, quick gains.
Christian Leuz, Steffen Meyer, Maximilian Muhn, Eugene Soltes, and Andreas Hackethal, “Who Falls Prey to the Wolf of Wall Street? Investor Participation in Market Manipulation,” NBER working paper, November 2017.
Reliable information, not financial literacy, is the main barrier to credit growth.
In Informal Markets, Trustworthy Data Are Key
Nobel laureate Douglas W. Diamond and former Boston Fed president Eric Rosengren visit the Capitalisn’t podcast to discuss the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.
Capitalisn’t: Silicon Valley Bank—The End of Banking As We Know It?
In areas lacking formal reporting and resolution systems, community-driven reciprocity may fill in and enable access to crwww.
In Some Places, Community Is Key to Who Gets Commercial CreditYour Privacy
We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice, which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.