Women stock-pickers

Women are better than men at one thing, at least - picking shares. This study of Dutch investors shows that women get net returns 0.59% a month (7.3% a year)  more than men, after controlling for obvious risks.
This is no isolated finding. There's evidence that women out-perform men in the UK and US too. However, women in China (pdf) do as well as men, whilst better-looking American women under-perform the market on average.
One reason for women's out-performance is that men, more than women on average, have too much confidence in their ability, and so trade more often - and trading destroys wealth.
However, the Dutch study shows that women earn better returns than men even before dealing costs. This might be because women (on average) are better than men at interpreting diverse, uncertain and non-quantitative information; this Australian paper (pdf) shows that better investment returns are associated with people who are psychologically feminine.
This doesn't, however, mean men should leave stock-picking to women. The Dutch study shows that even girlies under-perform the market. So it's yet more evidence for the superiority of passive investing.

Comments

[Larry Summers]

sexist b@stard!

[just the messenger]

To hell with selection issues; Heckman be damned.

[dearieme]

Our cats do well, but they've been neutered.

[pseudonymous]

Stereotype attack: Isn't picking stocks a little like shopping? Deciding how much something is worth etc...