(Luận văn) determinants of behavior intention to use derivative securities a study on individual investors behaviors in stock market of vietnam

t to ng UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business hi ep w n lo ad ju y th Trang Nguyen Thanh Phuong yi pl n ua al DETERMINANTS OF BEHAVIOR INTENTION TO USE DERIVATIVE SECURITIES A STUDY ON INDIVIDUAL INVESTOR'S BEHAVIORS IN STOCK MARKET OF VIETNAM n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm n a Lu MASTER OF BUSINESS (honours) n va y te re th Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2018 t to ng UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business hi ep w n lo ad ju y th yi Trang Nguyen Thanh Phuong pl n ua al n va DETERMINANTS OF BEHAVIOR INTENTION TO USE DERIVATIVE SECURITIES A STUDY ON INDIVIDUAL INVESTOR'S BEHAVIORS IN STOCK MARKET OF VIETNAM ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION n a Lu n va SUPERVISOR: DR Trần Phương Thảo y te re th Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2018 Acknowledgement t to I would like to express my sincere thankfulness to my supervisor, Dr Tran ng hi Phuong Thao, who made me believe in myself and gave me the possibility to ep complete the thesis Her guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing w this thesis I am sure that this thesis would not have been possible without her n lo support ad I would like to express my gratitude to all staffs in ISB who supported y th necessary materials and helped submit my papers ju yi My sincere thanks also go to friends and colleagues who participated in the pl pilot study that led to the development of the final survey questionnaire and their al n ua support over the time when I was busy to conduct the research n va Especially, I would like to give my special thanks my family for supporting ll fu me spiritually throughout my life oi m Trang Nguyen Thanh Phuong at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re Abstract This study investigates the determinants of behavior intention to use t to ng derivative securities on individual investor ‘s behaviors in stock markets of hi ep Vietnam Those determinants include attitude towards behavior, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control It also examines the effect of overconfidence, w n lo excessive optimism, herd behavior, risk aversion toward attitude towards behavior ad ju y th An empirical test was conducted with a sample of 317 individual investors by yi means of structural equation modeling The results show that perceived behavior pl ua al control has the strongest impact on the three main factors affecting behavior n intention to use derivative securities with a coefficient of 0.426 The other two va n factors, including attitude towards behavior, subjective norm, have a direct impact ll fu oi m on behavior intention to use derivative securities with coefficients of 0.356 and at nh 0.216 respectively On the other hand, overconfidence, excessive optimism, herd z behavior and risk aversion have direct effect on attitude towards behavior z vb However, herd behavior and aversion effect attitude towards behavior with positive jm ht coefficient while overconfidence, excessive optimism affect with negative k gm coefficient Finally, age and education play an important role in behavior intention l.c om to use securities derivatives while there is no difference between men and women an Lu who intend to use derivative securities n va ey t re Table of Contents Acknowledgement t to Abstract ng List of figures hi List of tables ep List of abbreviations Introduction w n Theoretical background and hypotheses 13 lo ad 2.1 Foundational Theory 13 y th 2.2 Research model and hypotheses 16 ju 2.2.1 Attitude towards behavior (ATB) 17 yi pl 2.2.2 Subjective Norm (SN) 21 ua al 2.2.3 Perceived behavioral control (PBC) 23 2.2.4 Demographic factors 24 n n va Research methodology 26 3.1 Research approach 26 fu ll 3.2 Questionnaire design 28 m oi 3.3 Data collection 32 at nh 3.4 Research Method 33 3.4.1 Pilot test 33 z z 3.4.2 Main survey test 34 vb ht Data analysis and results 37 jm 4.1 Descriptive statistics 37 k 4.2 Reliability Analysis 38 gm 4.3 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 40 l.c 4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) 43 om 4.4.1 Composite Reliability 43 an Lu 4.4.2 Convergent Validity of all variables 45 4.4.3 Discriminant Validity of all variables 46 4.5.1 Gender 50 4.5.2 Education 51 ey 4.5 Independent Sample T-test and Oneway Anova 50 t re 4.4 Indirect Effects of Behavior intention to use 49 n va 4.3 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) 48 4.5.3 Age 53 4.6 Hypothesis testing results 54 Discussion & conclusion 55 t to 5.1 Discussion 55 ng 5.2 Implications for managers 57 hi ep 5.3 Conclusion 58 5.4 Limitations and directions for future research 59 w n REFERENCES 60 lo APPENDICES 63 ad Questionnaire (English version) 63 y th Questionnaire (Vietnamese) 67 ju yi A Frequencies 71 pl C Reliability 73 al ua D Factor Analysis 81 n E Confirmatory Factor Analysis 87 va Structural Equation Modeling 93 n F ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re List of figures t to Figure The theory of planned behavior – (Ajzen, 1991) 14 Figure Research model 17 Figure Main steps of research process 28 Figure First Measurement Standardized Modelling 47 Figure Structural Equation Model 48 ng hi ep w n lo ad ju y th yi pl n ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re List of tables t to ng hi ep Table Measurement scale 30 Table Sample size Criteria (Comfrey & Lee, 1992) 32 Table Criteria for Measurement Model 35 Table Descriptive statistics 37 Table Remiability Test Results 38 Table KMO and Bartlett's Test 40 Table Total Variance Explained 41 Table Pattern Matrix 42 Table Value of Composite Reliability 45 Table 10 Value of Average Variance Extracted 45 Table 11 Discriminant Caculating Result 46 Table 12 Square root of AVE results 46 Table 13 Regression Weights of Model 49 Table 14 Indirect effects on Behavior intention to use 50 Table 15 Independent Samples Test 50 Table 16 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 51 Table 17 Anova tesing result 52 Table 18 Descriptives Statistics 52 Table 19 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 53 Table 20 Anova tesing result 53 Table 21 Descriptives Statistics 53 w n lo ad ju y th yi pl n ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re List of abbreviations No Abbreviation Average Variance Extracted ATB Attitude Towards Behavior CFA Confirmatory factor analysis CR Composite Reliability EFA Exploratory factor analysis ng AVE n t to Meaning hi ep w lo ad HOSE Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange Hanoi Stock Exchange 12 TRA 13 TBC 14 TPB SN Subjective Norm SEM Structural Equation Modeling ju HNX ua y th yi Theory of Reason Action pl al Perceived Behavioral Control n Theory of Planned Behavior n va ll fu 15 oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re Introduction Derivatives are a valuable financial instrument that depends on the price of t to the underlying asset Basically, derivatives can be understood as a type of contract ng hi ep for a future but predefined transaction Derivative instruments are conduct as a tool used to manage and control risk Specifically, derivative products are used to w n lo prevent risk when asset values fluctuate In addition, derivatives are considered as ad ju y th hedging instruments against volatility of commodity prices In the derivatives market, there are two main markets: the financial derivative market and commodity yi pl derivatives market In this study, the author will focus on the financial derivatives ua al n market on the stock market, exactly the Vietnam stock market va n To date, Vietnam stock market has been established for quite a long time, but ll fu oi m just over 11 years the stock market of Vietnam has a significant development; Two at nh stock exchanges have been established, namely the Ho Chi Minh City Stock z Exchange (HOSE) and the Hanoi Stock Exchange (HNX), a stock exchange z vb depository center has been established, nearly 89 securities companies are operating jm ht and more than 700 companies have listed their shares and fund certificates on two k gm Vietnamese stock exchanges By 2013, at the Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange, l.c om the stock market capitalization has reached over $ 32 billion, equivalent to 25 an Lu percent of GDP in 2013, the number of accounts of investors reached over 1.3 has nearly doubled, proving that the demand of securities investors has increased ey increased by more than 3.5 times and the number of accounts of foreign investors t re compared to the end of 2007, the total number of securities trading accounts has n va million trading accounts, of which foreign investors had about 16,000 accounts, HB5 711 EO1 -.302 394 308 858 -.382 -.384 t to ng hi ep -.320 824 -.369 -.389 EO4 -.311 805 -.348 -.336 EO3 -.314 791 -.303 -.392 OVC4 -.375 844 -.413 -.392 -.464 -.332 OVC2 -.376 826 -.379 -.477 -.367 -.370 800 -.357 -.369 -.359 -.303 693 -.335 -.348 325 -.323 793 401 408 327 -.341 744 410 478 308 -.378 681 410 397 -.326 665 338 360 w EO2 n OVC1 lo OVC3 ad RA4 ju RA5 y th RA2 yi pl RA1 494 -.345 -.410 449 812 507 423 ATB2 449 ua -.313 -.383 423 802 447 425 ATB1 429 -.366 -.328 445 753 461 446 ATB3 442 -.443 369 740 439 363 -.358 441 502 886 493 -.429 505 505 822 434 -.393 490 788 404 438 422 846 336 397 430 802 vb 468 445 763 n -.303 fu 333 ll m 345 oi SN4 n 326 va SN1 al ATB4 316 313 nh 494 BI1 482 356 -.395 -.322 360 BI3 421 333 -.383 -.360 BI2 431 341 -.319 at SN3 z z 302 ht jm Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring k Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization om l.c gm Factor Correlation Matrix 1.000 172 -.249 -.257 296 240 324 172 1.000 -.362 -.415 387 568 383 416 -.249 -.362 1.000 233 -.301 -.414 -.286 -.447 -.257 -.415 233 1.000 -.456 -.489 -.458 -.382 296 387 -.301 -.456 1.000 524 557 398 240 568 -.414 -.489 524 1.000 575 521 324 383 -.286 -.458 557 575 1.000 517 525 ey t re 86 n va an Lu Factor 525 416 -.447 -.382 398 521 517 1.000 Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization t to ng E Confirmatory Factor Analysis hi ep Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) w Estimat e n S.E C.R P Label PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTR OL 1.000 PBC4 < PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTR OL 1.042 05 18.26 ** * par_1 PBC1 < PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTR OL 1.043 05 18.23 ** * par_2 PBC3 < PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTR OL 898 05 16.67 ** * par_3 HB4 < HERD_BEHAVIOR n 1.000 HB1 < HERD_BEHAVIOR 1.057 08 12.90 ** * par_4 HB2 < HERD_BEHAVIOR 1.103 08 13.36 ** * par_5 HB5 < HERD_BEHAVIOR 1.011 08 12.25 ** * par_6 HB3 < HERD_BEHAVIOR 08 12.93 ** * par_7 EO1 < EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 1.000 EO4 < EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 896 17.04 ** * par_8 EO2 < EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 972 05 17.00 ** * par_9 EO3 < EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 847 05 16.09 ** * om par_1 lo < ad PBC2 ju y th yi pl ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z 1.063 jm ht vb k 05 l.c gm an Lu OVERCONFIDENCE 1.052 06 15.55 ** * OVC L R l.c k jm -.271 PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTRO < > RISK_AVERSION L om PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTRO BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ < > L USE 344 an Lu PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTRO < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM L 566 va < > EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM -.381 HERD_BEHAVIOR < > OVERCONFIDENCE -.438 HERD_BEHAVIOR < > HERD_BEHAVIOR < > RISK_AVERSION 404 HERD_BEHAVIOR < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM 402 ey 89 599 t re ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIO R n HERD_BEHAVIOR Estimate t to ng hi ep EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM < > OVERCONFIDENCE EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM < > EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM < > RISK_AVERSION -.323 EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM -.318 < > BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE -.469 < > ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIO R -.518 < > w BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE HERD_BEHAVIOR EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 247 ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIO R n lo ad OVERCONFIDENCE 432 -.443 y th < > RISK_AVERSION -.484 OVERCONFIDENCE < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM -.489 ju OVERCONFIDENCE yi BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE < > pl OVERCONFIDENCE -.416 al < > RISK_AVERSION 561 ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIOR < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM 622 n ua ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIOR va ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIOR BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE < > n fu RISK_AVERSION 548 < > SUBJECTIVE_NORM 586 < > BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE 430 SUBJECTIVE_NORM < > BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_ USE 554 oi m ll RISK_AVERSION at nh z z S.E C.R P PERCEIVED_BEHAVIORAL_CONTROL 637 072 8.895 *** par_52 HERD_BEHAVIOR 419 057 7.393 *** par_53 EXCESSIVE_OPTIMISM 605 066 9.093 *** par_54 OVERCONFIDENCE 513 064 8.078 *** ATTITUDE_TOWARD_BEHAVIOR 331 041 8.098 l.c par_55 *** par_56 RISK_AVERSION 319 044 7.318 *** par_57 SUBJECTIVE_NORM 724 079 9.118 *** par_58 BEHAVIORAL_INTENTION_TO_USE 471 054 8.723 *** par_59 e1 275 029 9.556 *** par_60 e2 248 028 8.945 *** par_61 e3 250 028 8.965 *** par_62 e4 284 028 10.208 *** par_63 e5 330 032 10.219 *** par_64 e6 355 035 10.176 *** par_65 k jm gm Label om an Lu n va ey t re 90 ht Estimate vb Variances: (Group number - Default model) ng hi ep C.R P e7 324 033 9.690 *** par_66 e8 433 040 10.719 *** par_67 e9 343 034 10.048 *** par_68 e10 224 027 8.438 *** par_69 e11 255 026 9.691 *** par_70 e12 277 030 9.372 *** par_71 e13 263 026 10.040 *** par_72 e14 304 031 9.692 *** par_73 e15 261 030 8.724 *** par_74 202 024 8.296 *** par_75 380 034 11.040 *** par_76 193 020 9.610 *** par_77 178 020 8.915 *** par_78 260 025 10.522 *** par_79 235 023 10.289 *** par_80 234 026 9.106 *** par_81 273 030 9.142 *** par_82 308 029 10.591 *** par_83 334 033 10.151 *** par_84 250 033 7.554 *** par_85 298 035 8.529 *** par_86 321 033 9.620 *** par_87 e29 190 025 7.711 *** par_88 e30 242 026 9.216 *** par_89 e31 277 029 9.621 *** par_90 S.E w t to Estimate n ll oi m at nh e28 fu e27 n e26 va e25 n e24 ua e23 al e22 pl e21 yi e20 ju e19 y th e18 ad e17 lo e16 Label z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re 91 Model Fit Summary CMIN t to ng hi Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF Default model 90 482.670 406 005 1.189 Saturated model 496 000 Independence model 31 5829.062 465 000 12.536 RMR GFI AGFI PGFI Default model 024 912 892 746 Saturated model 000 1.000 Independence model 233 244 194 229 Model n ep RMR, GFI w lo ad ju Model y th Baseline Comparisons yi RFI rho1 IFI Delta2 TLI rho2 CFI 917 905 986 984 986 pl Default model NFI Delta1 1.000 Independence model 000 1.000 ua al Saturated model 000 1.000 000 000 000 n va Parsimony-Adjusted Measures PRATIO PNFI PCFI Default model 873 801 Saturated model 000 000 Independence model 1.000 000 Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Default model 76.670 25.743 135.829 Saturated model 000 000 000 Independence model 5364.062 5121.198 5613.382 n Model ll fu 861 oi m 000 000 nh NCP at z z jm ht vb FMIN HI 90 Default model 1.527 243 081 430 Saturated model 000 000 000 000 Independence model 18.446 16.975 16.206 17.764 om LO 90 l.c F0 gm FMIN k Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE Default model 024 014 033 1.000 Independence model 191 187 195 000 n va Model an Lu RMSEA Model AIC BCC BIC CAIC Default model 662.670 682.952 1000.971 1090.971 Saturated model 992.000 1103.775 2856.415 3352.415 Independence model 5891.062 5898.048 6007.588 6038.588 92 ey t re AIC ECVI t to ng Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI Default model 2.097 1.936 2.284 2.161 Saturated model 3.139 3.139 3.139 3.493 Independence model 18.643 17.874 19.432 18.665 hi HOELTER ep Model HOELTER 05 HOELTER 01 298 312 28 30 w Default model n Independence model lo ad F Structural Equation Modeling y th ju Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) yi S.E C.R P 197 046 4.311 *** par_27 ATTITUDE_TOWARD_