We provide evidence that discretionary loan loss provisions (DLLP) convey value-relevant information to the market that is highly dependent upon the state of the economy. DLLP is associated with negative abnormal returns during bad economic states characterized by growing default concerns, but it is associated with significantly higher abnormal stock returns in good economic states, as banks relax underwriting standards and look to accelerate loan growth. Exploring the underlying link, we find that banks recording higher provisions during good times realize significantly higher earnings and loan growth in the subsequent year, whereas such banks experience further increases in non-performing loans following periods of distress. These findings are not driven by the 2008 financial crisis when investors responded even more negatively to DLLP. With new accounting standards requiring an even greater degree of subjective judgment, regulators should ensure the informativeness of bank loss reserves is preserved.

The standard heterogeneous autoregressive (HAR) model is perhaps the most popular benchmark model for forecasting return volatility. It is often estimated using raw realized variance (RV) and ordinary least squares (OLS). However, given the stylized facts of RV and well-known properties of OLS, this combination should be far from ideal. The aim of this paper is to investigate how the predictive accuracy of the HAR model depends on the choice of estimator, transformation, or combination scheme made by the market practitioner. In an out-of-sample study, covering the S&P 500 index and 26 frequently traded NYSE stocks, it is found that simple remedies systematically outperform not only standard HAR but also state of the art HARQ forecasts.

We document a long-lasting association between a common societal phenomenon, early-life family disruption, and investment behavior. Controlling for socioeconomic status and family background, we find fund managers who experienced the death or divorce of their parents during childhood exhibit a stronger disposition effect, take lower risk, and are more likely to sell their holdings following risk-increasing firm events. The results are consistent with persistent symptoms of post-traumatic stress and strengthen as treatment intensifies. The evidence adds to our understanding of the role of social factors and “nurture” in finance as well as the origin of investment biases.