I do wonder. Did the author's check for a confounding variable? It seems so easy " more pensioners own your stock? Yep 25% more likely to do a div Increase".
Maybe pensioners love bluechips and don't buy growth stocks... Also is it really pensioners or is ownership by a pension fund used as proxy?
The data comes from a household survey, so it really is pensioners, not pension funds. And it is their direct stock holdings, not stocks held via funds.
But they do not check if there is a sentiment bias in favour of blue chips.
Also, more pensioners is a relative measure. They sorted the companies by share of pensioners holding the stocks on the register and thenn split them up into quantiles. So more just means more relative to the market.
Good morning Joachim! Fun read.
I do wonder. Did the author's check for a confounding variable? It seems so easy " more pensioners own your stock? Yep 25% more likely to do a div Increase".
Maybe pensioners love bluechips and don't buy growth stocks... Also is it really pensioners or is ownership by a pension fund used as proxy?
Also what is "more pensioners" 51%?
The data comes from a household survey, so it really is pensioners, not pension funds. And it is their direct stock holdings, not stocks held via funds.
But they do not check if there is a sentiment bias in favour of blue chips.
Also, more pensioners is a relative measure. They sorted the companies by share of pensioners holding the stocks on the register and thenn split them up into quantiles. So more just means more relative to the market.