We study energy futures option returns for crude oil, natural gas, heating oil, and gasoline. Average call and put returns are negative at short maturities, more so for OTM options, and increase with maturity. Put returns are less negative than call returns, but this is not the case for delta-hedged returns, indicating that the aggregate risk of the underlying energy futures is priced in the raw option returns. Moneyness patterns in raw and delta-hedged returns are similar to patterns for index option returns. Significant differences between the four commodities remain after removing the effect of the underlying futures returns, with natural gas as the main outlier. Variance risk premiums are negative and explain some maturity patterns in returns, but they cannot account for return differences across markets. Energy producers are net short the underlying through their option positions, and speculators net long. The larger the net long position of the speculators, the lower the returns on call options, which suggests that demand from speculators may affect option returns in energy markets.

Over the course of the past two decades, it has become a common experience for consumers authorizing an international transaction via credit card to be invited to choose the currency in which they wish the transaction to be executed. While this choice, made feasible by a technology known as dynamic currency conversion (DCC), seems to foster competition, we argue that the opposite is the case. In fact, the unique pure-strategy equilibrium in a natural fee-setting game, with uninformed and possibly inattentive consumers, turns out to be highly asymmetric, entailing fees for the service provider that persistently exceed the monopoly level. Although losses in welfare may be substantial, a regulatory solution is unlikely to come about due to a global free-rider problem.

We study whether and how banks reuse information across different but related borrowers in financing mergers and acquisitions. We find that stronger prior lending relationships between acquisition loan lenders and acquisition targets are associated with lower spreads and fewer covenant restrictions on acquisition loans. We show that the results are unlikely to be driven by unobservable acquirer, target, or lender characteristics. Consistent with the information asymmetry hypothesis, the effect is stronger when information asymmetry about the target firm is higher. We also find that the result is not driven by the coinsurance effect.

In this paper, we study how different categories of crucial COVID-19 information influence price dynamics in stock and option markets during the period from 01/21/20 to 01/31/21. We present a theoretical model in which the behavioral traders make perceptual errors based on the intensity of sentiment arising from different types of news. In addition to the magnitude and direction of the news and its payoff relevance to security prices, other factors such as fear, emotion, and social media can influence the sentiment level. Using Google search data, we construct novel proxies for the sentiment levels induced by five categories of news, COVID, Market, Lockdown, Banking, and Government relief efforts. If the relative presence of behavioral traders in the stock market exceeds that in the option market, different predictions obtain for the effect of sentiment indices on jump volatility of the VIX index, the S&P 500 index, and the S&P 500 Banks index. We find that the jump component in the VIX index is increasing significantly with COVID index, Market index, Lockdown index, and Banking index. However, only COVID index and Market index increase the jump component of realized volatility of the stock indices (S&P 500 index and S&P 500 Banks index). The Government relief efforts index decreases this jump component. Banking and Lockdown index reduce jump volatility in the S&P 500 index and S&P 500 Banks index, but only with a delay of 5 days. These results are consistent with the predictions of our model.

We examine whether the average earnings surprises announced yesterday affect investors’ responses to earnings news announced today. We find that in the short window surrounding an earnings announcement, the market rewards today's earnings news that is above yesterday's average earnings surprises with a premium, consistent with yesterday's average becoming a reference point for investors to classify today's earnings news as a gain or a loss. The price premium for an above-average earnings surprise is larger when more earnings announcements are made on the same day and when investors face greater uncertainty in assessing firms’ performance. We interpret this evidence as suggesting that investors rely more on the average as a reference point when they are more likely to be subject to cognitive constraints in processing information. We also find that firms announcing above-average earnings surprises exhibit a greater abnormal trading volume, consistent with the notion that beating reference points prompts investors to trade.

We find a positive relationship between individual stocks’ implied variance asymmetry, defined as the difference between upside and downside risk-neutral semivariances extracted from out-of-money options, and future stock returns. The high-minus-low hedge portfolio earns the excess return of 0.90% (0.67%) per month in equal-weighted (value-weighted) returns. We show that implied variance asymmetry provides a neat measure of risk-neutral skewness and outperforms the standard risk-neutral skewness in predicting the cross-section of future stock returns. Risk-based equilibrium asset pricing models can not explain such a positive relationship, which instead can be potentially explained by information asymmetry and informed trading.

We show that momentum profits for corporate bonds depend on the state of the market (UP/DOWN), as already documented for equities. Momentum gains exclusively follow UP periods. In contrast, DOWN markets herald momentum losses. Importantly, this study links momentum gains to underpricing, as measured by low sentiment. In particular, the UP-market momentum gains are generated exclusively by momentum portfolios formed in periods of low sentiment. The DOWN-market reversal returns in low sentiment are even larger than the UP-market momentum gains. We also introduce a novel top-volume bond momentum strategy and show that it yields large and persistent unconditional profits.

Reference dependence, loss aversion, and risk seeking for losses together comprise the preference-based component of prospect theory that sets its value function apart from the standard risk-aversion model. Using an elasticity analysis, we show that this distinctive preference component serves to underpin negative-feedback trading propensities, but cannot manifest itself in behavior directly or holistically at the individual-choice level. We then propose and demonstrate that the market interaction between prospect-theory investors and regular CRRA investors allows this preference component to dominate in equilibrium behavior and hence helps to reestablish the intuitive link between prospect-theory preferences and negative-feedback trading patterns. In the model, the interaction also reconciles the contrarian behavior of prospect-theory investors with asymmetric volatility and short-term return reversal. The results suggest that prospect-theory preferences can lead investors to behave endogenously as contrarian noise traders in the market interaction process.

Winner stocks have higher changes in sales order backlogs and a sales order backlog factor is significant in explaining various winner minus loser returns and often reduces the αs by big margins. We argue that this factor is a proxy for innovation in demand in the economy and it is likely to relate to expected growth risks and future business conditions.

The dynamic minimum variance hedge ratios (MVHRs) have been commonly estimated using the Bivariate GARCH model that overlooks the basis effect on the time-varying variance–covariance of spot and futures returns. This paper proposes an alternative specification of the BGARCH model in which the effect is incorporated for estimating MVHRs. Empirical investigation in commodity markets suggests that the basis effect is asymmetric, i.e., the positive basis has greater impact than the negative basis on the variance and covariance structure. Both in-sample and out-of-sample comparisons of the MVHR performance reveal that the model with the asymmetric effect provides greater risk reduction than the conventional models, illustrating importance of the asymmetric effect when modeling the joint dynamics of spot and futures returns and hence estimating hedging strategies.