To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
581 results ✕ Clear filters

Predators and Prey on Wall Street

The Review of Asset Pricing Studies 2014 4(1), 1-38 open access
Much financial activity is zero-sum. While providing transactional and diversification services to others, participants also prey upon each other. High-ability predators trade opportunistically with less-able prey. In our dynamic model these features amplify real shocks. The presence of more low-ability traders reduces expected losses to high-ability traders, leading to equilibria with high levels of financial activity and employment. Shocks to profits can motivate exit by low-ability traders, rendering those of intermediate skill more vulnerable. Thus, our relatively simple model generates boom-bust dynamics suggestive of Wall Street. (JEL G00, G20, E44)

Liars Never Prosper? How Management Misrepresentation Reduces Monitoring Costs

Journal of Financial Intermediation 1997 6(4), 269-306 open access
When monitoring is not contractible—so investors monitor only when, at that time, they expect to benefit from doing so—efficient contracts sometimes induce managers to makefalsereports to investors. Because of monitoring discretion, management misrepresentation can produce Pareto improvements by reducing monitoring costs. When costs of renegotiation are small, optimal contracts necessarily induce misrepresentation. Discretionary monitoring also generates an equilibrium role for multiple-security capital structures. When an optimal contract has two investors, securityholder conflict arises endogenously as a means of reducing monitoring costs. It is efficient to write the contract so that one investor's decision to monitor hurts the other investor.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Number: G32.

Short-Termism and Capital Flows

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2019 8(1), 207-233 open access
From 2007 to 2016, S&P 500 firms distributed $7 trillion via buybacks and dividends, over 96% of their aggregate net income, prompting claims that “short-termism” is impairing firms’ ability to invest and innovate. We show that, accounting for both direct and indirect equity issuances, net shareholder payouts by all public firms during this period totaled only 41% of net income. And, during this decade, investment substantially increased while cash balances ballooned. In short, S&P 500 shareholder-payout figures cannot provide much basis for the notion that short-termism has been depriving public firms of needed capital. Received September 23, 2018; Editorial decision November 13, 2018; Editor Andrew Ellul

The regulatory response to the financial crisis

Journal of Financial Stability 2008 4(4), 351-358 open access
There are numerous aspects concerning financial regulation which the current financial turmoil has high-lighted. These include: (1) the form of deposit insurance; (2) bank solvency regimes, ‘prompt corrective action’; (3) Central Banks’ money market operations; (4) commercial bank liquidity risk management; (5) procyclicality of CARs (and mark-to-market); lack of counter-cyclical instruments; (5) boundaries of regulation, conduits, SIVs and reputational risk; (6) crisis management: (a) within countries, e.g. UK Tripartite Committee; or (b) cross-border, how to allocate the burden of cross-border defaults? This paper describes how the crisis exposed regulatory failings, drawing largely on UK experience, and suggests remedies.

A Survey of Short-Selling Regulations

The Review of Asset Pricing Studies 2024 14(4), 613-639 open access
Abstract Given the complex and controversial nature of short-selling regulation, we review the academic literature and provide insights for policy makers and academics. We organize the complex history of short-selling regulation into three areas: trading restrictions, securities lending regulations, and disclosure requirements. We identify, analyze, and discuss 45 distinct regulations promulgated from 1896 to 2021, primarily by reviewing the academic literature and the data sources employed. We provide several insights regarding the effectiveness of regulatory approaches and the wider impact of short-selling regulation on markets. (JEL G2, G12, G14, G15, G34)

A First Look at the Impact of COVID-19 on Commercial Real Estate Prices: Asset-Level Evidence

The Review of Asset Pricing Studies 2020 10(4), 669-704 open access
Abstract This is the first paper to examine how the COVID-19 shock transmitted from the asset markets to capital markets. Using a novel measure of the exposure of commercial real estate (CRE) portfolios to the increase in the number of COVID-19 cases (GeoCOVID), we find a one-standard-deviation increase in GeoCOVID on day t-1 is associated with a 0.24 to 0.93 percentage points decrease in abnormal returns over 1- to 3-day windows. There is substantial variation across property types. Local and state policy interventions helped to moderate the negative return impact of GeoCOVID. However, there is little evidence that reopenings affected the performance of CRE markets.

Analysts' forecasts as earnings expectations

Journal of Accounting and Economics 1988 10(1), 53-83 open access
I examine three composite analyst forecast of earnings per share as proxies for expected earnings. The most current forecast weakly dominates the mean and median forecasts in accuracy. This is evidence that forecast dates are more relevant for determining accuracy than individual error. Consistent with previous research, I find analysts more accurate than time-series models. However prior knowledge of forecast errors from a quarterly autoregressive model predicts excess stock returns better than prior knowledge of analysts' errors. This is inconsistent with previous research, and is anomalous given analysts' greater accuracy.

Oil Prices and the Stock Market

Review of Finance 2018 22(1), 155-176 open access
Abstract This paper develops a novel method for classifying oil price changes as supply or demand driven using information in asset prices. Motivated by a simple model, demand shocks are identified as returns to an index of oil producing firms which are orthogonal to unexpected changes in the VIX index, with supply shocks capturing the remaining variation in oil prices. Demand shocks are strongly positively correlated with market returns and economic output, whereas supply shocks have a strong negative correlation. The negative correlation of supply shocks and returns is strongest in industries that produce consumer goods, while the positive correlation of demand shocks is stronger for industries which use relatively large amounts of oil as an input.