Lottery-Stock Premium

The lottery-stock premium is the persistent overvaluation of stocks that resemble lottery tickets—cheap, volatile, and prone to explosive upside with crushing downside. Investors’ attraction to these properties creates an anomaly where the most lottery-like stocks trade at depressed future returns, an effect first formally documented in 2004.

The skewness appetite

Humans like lottery tickets despite their negative expected value. This preference appears in how people select stocks. Some investors chase the slim probability of a gigantic win—a stock that doubles overnight—even if the base case is mediocrity or loss. A stock trading at $2 with wildly swinging earnings and a history of 50% monthly moves feels like it could make you rich. A $150 blue-chip utility does not.

This appetite for positive skewness—a distribution with a fat right tail—creates excess demand for stocks that offer it. The demand bids the price up. When prices rise above what cash flows justify, future returns fall. The lottery-stock premium is this reversal: the stocks people most want to own trade at the worst expected returns.

Measuring the effect

Researchers construct “lottery-stock” scores by combining low price, high volatility, and positive skewness. Blitz, Hanauer, Vidojevic, and Zaremba (2013) tracked the US stock universe from 1962 to 2012. They formed quintiles ranked from least to most lottery-like. The highest quintile—the pure lottery stocks—returned about 11% per year. The lowest quintile returned approximately 23% per year. The spread of 12 percentage points annually is economically massive and difficult to reconcile with standard risk models.

Not all volatility is punished equally. A volatile stock is penalised in returns only if it also trades cheaply and exhibits strong positive skew. A volatile but pricey stock faces no such discount. This specificity strengthens the case that the effect stems from preference, not risk.

International evidence broadly replicates the pattern across developed and emerging markets. Japanese, European, and Asian stocks show similar skewness-seeking behaviour. The universality suggests it reflects a stable feature of human psychology rather than a US quirk.

Why it persists

Market efficiency—the idea that prices reflect all available information—predicts that obvious, recurring patterns should vanish. Arbitrageurs should short overvalued lottery stocks and long cheap ones until prices normalise. Yet the premium has not evaporated in two decades. Several factors explain its survival.

Lottery stocks are typically small-cap, illiquid, and high-volatility. Short selling them is expensive or forbidden. Holding short positions in volatile stocks risks ruinous losses. Arbitrage in lottery stocks is risky and crowded only rarely, making it unprofitable for large institutions. The friction is too high.

Behavioural explanations also matter. Retail investors, who dominate small-cap trading, exhibit the strongest preference for skewness. They are least likely to correct their own biases. Institutions using disciplined rules (or those ruled by the same cognitive biases) may reinforce rather than counter the overpricing. The effect is, in a sense, self-perpetuating—it persists because the people who fund it do not know to avoid it, and the people who do know cannot bet against it profitably.

Interaction with other anomalies

The lottery-stock premium overlaps with but is distinct from other market anomalies. It is related to the size premium—small stocks underperform—but not identical. A small, expensive stock avoids the lottery discount. It is different from momentum, which rewards recent winners regardless of price or skewness.

The premium also compounds the experience of retail investors. The most retail-accessible stocks—penny stocks, biotechs, single-stock options—tend to be lottery-like. This means the average retail investor inadvertently overweights the category offering the worst forward returns. Institutional portfolios, by contrast, concentrate in large, liquid, stable names that rank poorly on lottery-stock metrics and therefore enjoy expected return advantages.

The return driver: behaviour vs. risk

Theorists debate whether the lottery-stock discount is a risk premium or a behavioural mispricing. Standard risk models do not price skewness. If skewness protection were genuinely risky, models should account for it; they typically do not. This gap suggests behaviour.

However, some researchers note that lottery stocks are riskier in ways not captured by traditional metrics. They are prone to idiosyncratic shocks, regulatory surprises, and sudden reversions to profitability (or insolvency). If they are truly riskier, the lower returns are compensation, not a puzzle. This remains unsettled, but the weight of evidence favours behaviour: the effect is larger among stocks most likely to attract retail demand, and it grows stronger during periods of high retail investor participation.

Practical implications

For investors, the premium is one of the clearest documented findings in behavioural finance. A systematic tilt away from lottery-like characteristics—avoiding the cheapest, most volatile, most positively skewed stocks—historically added value. Conversely, chasing lottery-like properties historically destroyed it.

The effect also explains why amateur investing is so punishing. The stocks that feel most exciting to buy—the ones with potential for life-changing gains—are precisely those where the mathematics of markets work hardest against you. The premium exists because excitement and financial return are, on average, inversely related.

See also