The Effects of Twitter Sentiment on Stock Price Returns.
ABSTRACT: Social media are increasingly reflecting and influencing behavior of other complex systems. In this paper we investigate the relations between a well-known micro-blogging platform Twitter and financial markets. In particular, we consider, in a period of 15 months, the Twitter volume and sentiment about the 30 stock companies that form the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) index. We find a relatively low Pearson correlation and Granger causality between the corresponding time series over the entire time period. However, we find a significant dependence between the Twitter sentiment and abnormal returns during the peaks of Twitter volume. This is valid not only for the expected Twitter volume peaks (e.g., quarterly announcements), but also for peaks corresponding to less obvious events. We formalize the procedure by adapting the well-known "event study" from economics and finance to the analysis of Twitter data. The procedure allows to automatically identify events as Twitter volume peaks, to compute the prevailing sentiment (positive or negative) expressed in tweets at these peaks, and finally to apply the "event study" methodology to relate them to stock returns. We show that sentiment polarity of Twitter peaks implies the direction of cumulative abnormal returns. The amount of cumulative abnormal returns is relatively low (about 1-2%), but the dependence is statistically significant for several days after the events.
Project description:We investigate the relationship between social media, Twitter in particular, and stock market. We provide an in-depth analysis of the Twitter volume and sentiment about the 30 companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Average index, over a period of three years. We focus on Earnings Announcements and show that there is a considerable difference with respect to when the announcements are made: before the market opens or after the market closes. The two different timings of the Earnings Announcements were already investigated in the financial literature, but not yet in the social media. We analyze the differences in terms of the Twitter volumes, cumulative abnormal returns, trade returns, and earnings surprises. We report mixed results. On the one hand, we show that the Twitter sentiment (the collective opinion of the users) on the day of the announcement very well reflects the stock moves on the same day. We demonstrate this by applying the event study methodology, where the polarity of the Earnings Announcements is computed from the Twitter sentiment. Cumulative abnormal returns are high (2-4%) and statistically significant. On the other hand, we find only weak predictive power of the Twitter sentiment one day in advance. It turns out that it is important how to account for the announcements made after the market closes. These after-hours announcements draw high Twitter activity immediately, but volume and price changes in trading are observed only on the next day. On the day before the announcements, the Twitter volume is low, and the sentiment has very weak predictive power. A useful lesson learned is the importance of the proper alignment between the announcements, trading and Twitter data.
Project description:For biopharmaceutical companies, investments in research and development are risky, and the results from clinical trials are key inflection points in the process. Few studies have explored how and to what extent the public equity market values clinical trial results.Our study dataset matched announcements of clinical trial results for investigational compounds from January 2011 to May 2013 with daily stock market returns of large United States-listed pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Event study methodology was used to examine the relationship between clinical research events and changes in stock returns.We identified public announcements for clinical trials of 24 investigational compounds, including 16 (67%) positive and 8 (33%) negative events. The majority of announcements were for Phase 3 clinical trials (N = 13, 54%), and for oncologic (N = 7, 29%) and neurologic (N = 6, 24%) indications. The median cumulative abnormal returns on the day of the announcement were 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.3, 13.4%; P = 0.02) for positive events and -2.0% (95% CI: -9.1, 0.7%; P = 0.04) for negative events, with statistically significant differences from zero. In the day immediately following the announcement, firms with positive events were associated with stock price corrections, with median cumulative abnormal returns falling to 0.4% (95% CI: -3.8, 12.3%; P = 0.33). For firms with negative announcements, the median cumulative abnormal returns were -1.7% (95% CI: -9.5, 1.0%; P = 0.03), and remained significantly negative over the two day event window. The magnitude of abnormal returns did not differ statistically by indication, by trial phase, or between biotechnology and pharmaceutical firms.The release of clinical trial results is an economically significant event and has meaningful effects on market value for large biopharmaceutical companies. Stock return underperformance due to negative events is greater in magnitude and persists longer than abnormal returns due to positive events, suggesting asymmetric market reactions.
Project description:Does president Trump's use of Twitter affect financial markets? The president frequently mentions companies in his tweets and, as such, tries to gain leverage over their behavior. We analyze the effect of president Trump's Twitter messages that specifically mention a company name on its stock market returns. We find that tweets from the president which reveal strong negative sentiment are followed by reduced market value of the company mentioned, whereas supportive tweets do not render a significant effect. Our methodology does not allow us to conclude about the exact mechanism behind these findings and can only be used to investigate short-term effects.
Project description:With a sample of 49 stock market indices of the developed and emerging markets in the world using the standard event methodology, this paper aims to examine the impacts of the 2019-nCoV outbreak on the global stock markets. Previous studies have supported that macroeconomic news and firm-specific news do impact the stock market returns. This study provides evidence for global stock market reactions to epidemics. The study concludes that the 2019-nCoV outbreak has significantly impacted the global stock markets with the Asian stock markets being hit the hardest. Further, the study also analyzed the impacts of lockdowns/restrictions imposed by the economies to contain the 2019-nCoV outbreak. This study evidences that early lockdowns/restrictions imposed by the nations have yielded positive results in containing the spread of the novel coronavirus, thus, rebuilding the investor’s confidence and sharp reversal in the stock market returns. The statistical results establish a high and moderate negative correlation between the cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) and the cumulative cases and deaths both country-wise and that of the world indicating that the cross-country variation in the evolution of cases and fatality rates led to such stock market reactions impacting the market sentiments and anticipation for the future.
Project description:In this age of social media, any news-good or bad-has the potential to spread in unpredictable ways. Changes in public sentiment have the potential to either drive or limit investment in publicly funded activities, such as scientific research. As a result, understanding the ways in which reported cases of scientific misconduct shape public sentiment is becoming increasingly essential-for researchers and institutions, as well as for policy makers and funders. In this study, we thus set out to assess and define the patterns according to which public sentiment may change in response to reported cases of scientific misconduct. This study focuses on the public response to the events involved in a recent case of major scientific misconduct that occurred in 2014 in Japan-stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP) cell case.The aims of this study were to determine (1) the patterns according to which public sentiment changes in response to scientific misconduct; (2) whether such measures vary significantly, coincident with major timeline events; and (3) whether the changes observed mirror the response patterns reported in the literature with respect to other classes of events, such as entertainment news and disaster reports.The recent STAP cell scandal is used as a test case. Changes in the volume and polarity of discussion were assessed using a sampling of case-related Twitter data, published between January 28, 2014 and March 15, 2015. Rapidminer was used for text processing and the popular bag-of-words algorithm, SentiWordNet, was used in Rapidminer to calculate sentiment for each sample Tweet. Relative volume and sentiment was then assessed overall, month-to-month, and with respect to individual entities.Despite the ostensibly negative subject, average sentiment over the observed period tended to be neutral (-0.04); however, a notable downward trend (y=-0.01 x +0.09; R ²=.45) was observed month-to-month. Notably polarized tweets accounted for less than one-third of sampled discussion: 17.49% (1656/9467) negative and 12.59% positive (1192/9467). Significant polarization was found in only 4 out of the 15 months covered, with significant variation month-to-month (P<.001). Significant increases in polarization tended to coincide with increased discussion volume surrounding major events (P<.001).These results suggest that public opinion toward scientific research may be subject to the same sensationalist dynamics driving public opinion in other, consumer-oriented topics. The patterns in public response observed here, with respect to the STAP cell case, were found to be consistent with those observed in the literature with respect to other classes of news-worthy events on Twitter. Discussion was found to become strongly polarized only during times of increased public attention, and such increases tended to be driven primarily by negative reporting and reactionary commentary.
Project description:This paper uncovers a new finding of sustainable cross-sectional variations in stock returns explained by mood fluctuations across the days of the week. Long/short leg of illiquid anomaly returns are extensively related to the days of the week, and the magnitude of excess returns is also striking [Long leg refers to portfolio deciles that earn higher excess returns. Historical evidence suggests that more illiquid stock earn higher excess returns (Amihud, 2002; Corwin and Schultz, 2012)]. The speculative leg of illiquid anomalies is the long leg (Birru, 2018) [The speculative leg falls into the long leg of anomaly because more illiquid stocks are sensitive to investor sentiment (Birru, 2018)]. Therefore, the long (speculative) leg experiences more sustainable high returns on Friday than the short (non-speculative) leg. At the same time, relatively higher long (speculative) leg returns were witnessed on Friday than Monday with a greater magnitude difference. These cross-sectional variations in illiquid stocks on specific days are consistent with the explanation of the limit to arbitrage. The observed variations in cross-sectional returns are sustained and consistent with plenty of evidence from psychology research regarding the low mood on Monday and high mood on Friday.
Project description:Experimental studies in the area of Psychology and Behavioral Economics have suggested that people change their search pattern in response to positive and negative events. Using Internet search data provided by Google, we investigated the relationship between stock-specific events and related Google searches. We studied daily data from 13 stocks from the Dow-Jones and NASDAQ100 indices, over a period of 4 trading years. Focusing on periods in which stocks were extensively searched (Intensive Search Periods), we found a correlation between the magnitude of stock returns at the beginning of the period and the volume, peak, and duration of search generated during the period. This relation between magnitudes of stock returns and subsequent searches was considerably magnified in periods following negative stock returns. Yet, we did not find that intensive search periods following losses were associated with more Google searches than periods following gains. Thus, rather than increasing search, losses improved the fit between people's search behavior and the extent of real-world events triggering the search. The findings demonstrate the robustness of the attentional effect of losses.
Project description:Cryptocurrencies have recently received large media interest. Especially the great fluctuations in price have attracted such attention. Behavioral sciences and related scientific literature provide evidence that there is a close relationship between social media and price fluctuations of cryptocurrencies. This particularly applies to smaller currencies, which can be substantially influenced by references on Twitter. Although these so-called "altcoins" often have smaller trading volumes they sometimes attract large attention on social media. Here, we show that fluctuations in altcoins can be predicted from social media. In order to do this, we collected a dataset containing prices and the social media activity of 181 altcoins in the form of 426,520 tweets over a timeframe of 71 days. The containing public mood was then estimated using sentiment analysis. To predict altcoin returns, we carried out linear regression analyses based on 45 days of data. We showed that short-term returns can be predicted from activity and sentiments on Twitter.
Project description:This paper investigates the effect of firm-level operating flexibility on stock performance during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. We find that firm-level operating flexibility is significantly positively correlated with the cumulative abnormal stock returns that occurred during the event window, and this positive relation is more pronounced in firms in the provinces most affected by the epidemic. This positive relation is also more obvious in firms that have relatively fewer fixed assets. Therefore, our results provide direct empirical evidence that the real options embedded in operating flexibility played an important role during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Project description:Do spikes in Twitter chatter about a firm precede unusual stock market trading activity for that firm? If so, Twitter activity may provide useful information about impending financial market activity in real-time. We study the real-time relationship between chatter on Twitter and the stock trading volume of 96 firms listed on the Nasdaq 100, during 193 days of trading in the period from May 21, 2012 to September 18, 2013. We identify observations featuring firm-specific spikes in Twitter activity, and randomly assign each observation to a ten-minute increment matching on the firm and a number of repeating time indicators. We examine the extent that unusual levels of chatter on Twitter about a firm portend an oncoming surge of trading of its stock within the hour, over and above what would normally be expected for the stock for that time of day and day of week. We also compare the findings from our explanatory model to the predictive power of Tweets. Although we find a compelling and potentially informative real-time relationship between Twitter activity and trading volume, our forecasting exercise highlights how difficult it can be to make use of this information for monetary gain.