A Study on Millennials' Investment Behaviour: The Mediating Effect of Investment Intention and the Moderating Effect of Income

Author

Tummala Sai Chaitra, Kanaka Durga


Abstract

 Purpose: This study examines how financial literacy, risk perception and digital investment influence shape the investment behaviour of millennials, and tests whether investment intention mediates these relationships and whether income level moderates them.

Design/methodology/approach: A descriptive and explanatory cross-sectional survey design was adopted. Primary data were collected through an online structured questionnaire (25 Likert items, five-point scale) between 12 and 29 September 2026. After removing exact duplicate submissions, 12 unique responses remained, so the study is reported as a pilot. The data were analysed using reliability analysis, descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, one-way ANOVA, multiple regression, bootstrapped mediation analysis and moderated regression.

Findings: All five scales showed very high internal consistency (α = 0.965–0.987) and the constructs were strongly intercorrelated (r = 0.93–0.99). Together the three antecedents explained 97.1% of the variance in investment behaviour, but only risk perception was a significant predictor (β = 0.77, p = 0.023); financial literacy (H1) and digital investment influence (H3) were not significant once the others were controlled. Investment intention did not significantly mediate any relationship (H4–H6; all bootstrap intervals included zero), income did not significantly moderate any relationship (H7–H9), and investment behaviour did not differ significantly by demographic group or income slab. Given the sample size and severe multicollinearity (VIF up to 20.9), these results are indicative only.

Practical implications: The findings can guide financial educators, investment platforms, advisors and regulators in designing literacy programmes, risk-communication tools and digital products that convert investment intentions into actual investing, once confirmed on a larger sample.

Originality/value: The study integrates three distinct drivers (financial literacy, risk perception and digital investment influence) into a single mediated and moderated model for young Indian investors, a cohort that is digitally native, earning and increasingly central to household wealth creation.



Keywords

Millennials; Investment behaviour; Investment intention; Financial literacy; Risk perception; Digital investment influence; Income



Full Text:

Download Paper PDF


References


  • Ajzen, (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
  • Associationof Mutual Funds in  (2026). Monthly data: August 2026 [Industry data released 10 September 2026]. AMFI.
  • Barber, M., & Odean, T. (2002). Online investors: Do the slow die first? Review of Financial Studies, 15(2), 455–488.
  • Baron, M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
  • Davis, D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
  • Dimock, (2019). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. Pew Research Center.
  • Fornell,, & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
  • Grable, E., & Lytton, R. H. (1999). Financial risk tolerance revisited: The development of a risk assessment instrument. Financial Services Review, 8(3), 163–181.
  • Green, B. (1991). How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26(3), 499–510.
  • Hair, F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  • Hayes, F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
  • Kahneman,, & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
  • Lusardi,, & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5–44.
  • Nunnally, C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  • Preacher, J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
  • Sheeran, (2002). Intention–behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology, 12(1), 1–36.
  • Slovic, (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285.
  • Streiner, L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: An introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99–103.
  • VanRooij, , Lusardi, A., & Alessie, R. (2011). Financial literacy and stock market participation. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(2), 449–472.
  • Venkatesh,, Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
  • Weber, U., Blais, A.-R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(4), 263–290.

Share your valuable work from Social Media Buttons