A general formula is derived for the price of a security whose value under specified conditions is a known function of the value of another security. Although the formula can be derived using the arbitrage technique of Black and Scholes, the alternative approach of continuous-time portfolio strategies is used instead. This alternative derivation allows the resolution of some controversies surrounding the Black and Scholes methodology. Specifically, it is demonstrated that the derived pricing formula must be continuous with continuous first derivatives, and that there is not a ‘pre-selection bias’ in the choice of independent variables used in the formula. Finally, the alternative derivation provides a direct proof of the Modigliani-Miller theorem even when there is a positive probability of bankruptcy.

The validity of the classic Black-Scholes option pricing formula depends on the capability of investors to follow a dynamic portfolio strategy in the stock that replicates the payoff structure to the option. The critical assumption required for such a strategy to be feasible, is that the underlying stock return dynamics can be described by a stochastic process with a continuous sample path. In this paper, an option pricing formula is derived for the more-general case when the underlying stock returns are generated by a mixture of both continuous and jump processes. The derived formula has most of the attractive features of the original Black-Scholes formula in that it does not depend on investor preferences or knowledge of the expected return on the underlying stock. Moreover, the same analysis applied to the options can be extended to the pricing of corporate liabilities.

We entertain the possibility of pervasive factors that are not common across two (or more) groups of securities. We propose and implement a general procedure to estimate the space spanned by common and group-specific pervasive factors. In our empirical analysis, we study the factor structure of excess returns on stocks traded on the NYSE and Nasdaq using our methodology. We find that there are only two common pervasive factors that govern the returns for both NYSE and Nasdaq. At the same time, the NYSE and Nasdaq each have one more group-specific factor that is not the same across the two exchanges. Our results point to the absence of complete similarity between the factors driving the returns on these exchanges.

We show that analyst coverage proxies contain information about expected returns. We decompose analyst coverage into abnormal and expected components using a simple characteristic-based model and show that firms with abnormally high analyst coverage subsequently outperform firms with abnormally low coverage by approximately 80 basis points per month. We also show abnormal coverage rises following exogenous shocks to underpricing and predicts improvements in firms’ fundamental performance, suggesting that return predictability stems from analysts more heavily covering underpriced stocks. Our findings highlight the usefulness of analysts’ actions in expected return estimations, and a potential inference problem when coverage proxies are used to study information asymmetry and dissemination.

This study documents a six-fold increase in short-term return reversals during earnings announcements relative to non-announcement periods. Following prior research, we use reversals as a proxy for expected returns market makers demand for providing liquidity. Our findings highlight significant time-series variation in the magnitude of short-term return reversals and suggest that market makers demand higher expected returns prior to earnings announcements because of increased inventory risks that stem from holding net positions through the release of anticipated earnings news. Collectively, our findings suggest that uncertainty regarding anticipated information events elicits predictable increases in the compensation demanded for providing liquidity and that these increases significantly affect the dynamics and information content of market prices.

We investigate the upstream and downstream product-market effects of a large sample of horizontal mergers and acquisitions from 1980 to 1997. We construct a data set that identifies the corporate customers, suppliers, and rivals of the firms initiating horizontal mergers and use this data set to examine announcement-related stock market revaluations and post-merger changes in operating performance. We find little evidence consistent with increased monopolistic collusion. However, we do find evidence consistent with improved productive efficiency and buying power as sources of gains to horizontal mergers. The nature of the buying power gains, i.e., rents from monopsonistic collusion or improved purchasing efficiency, is also investigated.

We value a firm that pays its cash flows to equity through share repurchases in a dynamic environment where personal taxes are paid on capital gains upon realization. The cost of capital is reduced by approximately 0.8% through the use of repurchases relative to dividends. We use the empirical distribution of pre-tax free cash flows in Fama and French (1999) to evaluate the tradeoffs between the costs of financial distress, the personal-tax advantages of equity, and the corporate-tax advantage to debt. The optimal capital structure is interior with a 3% bankruptcy cost.

Recent evidence indicates irrational behavior among retail investors. They hold onto losses and sell winners in a manner consistent with the disposition effect. Market professionals often use the term “discipline” to indicate trading strategies that minimize potential behavioral influences. We investigate the nature of trading discipline and whether professional traders are able to avoid the costly irrational behaviors found in retail populations. The full-time traders in our sample hold onto losses significantly longer than gains, but we find no evidence of costs associated with this behavior. The successful floor futures traders in our sample exhibit trading behavior characterized as rational and disciplined. Moreover, measures of relative trading discipline have predictive power for subsequent trading success.

This paper examines the role of uninsured deposits as a source of thrift funding from 1984 to 1994, and tests whether uninsured depositors have adjusted their holdings at thrifts in response to market forces, such as indications of impending institutional failure. It also examines how the reactions have changed over time as new legislation has been implemented. The study finds that failed institutions exhibit declining proportions of uninsured deposits-to-total-deposits prior to failure and that failing institutions attract fewer deposits from uninsured depositors prior to failure than do solvent institutions. Though there are some differences between the periods, the empirical results indicate that uninsured deposits will be governed by market discipline and that reducing the insurance limits on deposits will increase market discipline on thrifts.