This study compares the changes in implied volatilities of options on Nasdaq 100 and Russell 2000 value and growth portfolios, for the time period of 2004 and 2005. Following the methodologies in Stein (J Finance 44:1011–1024, 1989) and Heynen et al. (J Financ Quant Anal 29:31–56, 1994), we attempt to infer whether there are systematic differences in the degree of overreactions between value and growth options. The empirical evidence indicates that the reactions to information by investors in growth options, as proxied by options on Nasdaq 100 and Russell 2000 growth, are stronger than those of Russell 2000 value. Whether these reactions can be considered as overreacting, however, is not entirely conclusive. Nevertheless, the results imply that difference in investors’ behavior and styles is one potential explanation for the value stock effect.
Implied volatility Overreactions Value and growth stocks
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access
Bauman WS, Miller RE (1997) Investor expectations and the performance of value stocks versus growth stocks. J Portfol Manage 23:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caginalp G, Ilieva V, Porter D, Smith V (2002) Do speculative stocks lower prices and increase volatility of value stocks? J Psychol Financ Mark 3:119–132Google Scholar
Cao C, Li H, Yu F (2005) Is investor misreaction economically significant? Evidence from short- and long-term S&P 500 index options. J Futures Mark 25:717–752. doi:10.1002/fut.20170CrossRefGoogle Scholar