We provide an entropy approach for measuring the asymmetric comovement between the return on a single asset and the market return. This approach yields a model-free test for stock return asymmetry, generalizing the correlation-based test proposed by Hong, Tu, and Zhou (2007). Based on this test, we find that asymmetry is much more pervasive than previously thought. Moreover, our approach also provides an entropy-based measure of downside asymmetric comovement. In the cross section of stock returns, we find an asymmetry premium: Higher downside asymmetric comovement with the market indicates higher expected returns.

We test the signaling view of corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement using two complementary quasi-natural experiments that impose exogenous negative pressure on stock prices. Firms under such adverse price pressure increase CSR activities compared to otherwise similar firms. This effect concentrates among firms with stronger signaling incentives, namely, those facing greater information asymmetry, more product market competition, higher shareholder litigation risk, and higher stock price crash risk. Firms under the exogenous negative price pressure mainly improve CSR strengths, including costly environmental investments. We also find that CSR engagement attracts socially responsible investors and lowers the cost of capital for signaling firms.

This paper investigates the impact of a firm’s annual report readability and ambiguous tone on its borrowing costs. We find that firms with larger 10-K file sizes and a higher proportion of uncertain and weak modal words in 10-Ks have stricter loan contract terms and greater future stock price crash risk. Our results suggest that the readability and tone ambiguity of a firm’s financial disclosures are related to managerial information hoarding. Shareholders of firms with less readable and more ambiguous annual reports not only suffer from less transparent information disclosure but also bear the increased cost of external financing.

In this article, we propose two asymmetry measures for stock returns. Unlike the popular skewness measure, our measures are based on the distribution function of the data rather than just the third central moment. We present empirical evidence that the greater upside asymmetries calculated using our new measures imply lower average returns in the cross section of stocks. In contrast, when using the skewness measure, the relationship between asymmetry and returns is inconclusive.

We document statistically significant relations between mutual fund betas and past market returns driven by fund feedback trading. Against this backdrop, evidence of “artificial” market timing emerges when standard market timing regressions are estimated across periods that span time variation in fund systematic risk levels, as is typical. Artificial timing significantly explains the inverse relation between timing model estimates of market timing and stock selectivity. A fund’s feedback trading relates to its past performance and remains significant after accounting for trading on momentum. Fund flows suggest that investors value feedback trading, which helps hedge downside risk during bear markets.

Using panel data on top management characteristics and a management quality factor constructed using common factor analysis on individual management quality measures, we analyze the relation between top firm management quality and corporate innovation input and output. We show that top management quality is an important determinant of corporate innovation, with individual aspects of management quality affecting innovation in younger and older firms differently. Further, firms with higher top management quality engage in more risky (“explorative”) innovation strategies. Finally, hiring more and higher-quality inventors is an important channel through which firms with higher management quality achieve greater innovation output.

This study investigates whether the management earnings forecasts of Republican and Democratic CEOs differ due to systematic differences in their information disclosure preferences. We find that Republican CEOs prefer a less asymmetric information environment than Democrat CEOs, and thus make more frequent, timelier, and more accurate disclosures than Democrat CEOs. Results using the propensity score matched sample and difference-in-differences analysis show that our results are unlikely to be driven by potential endogeneity. Our results are robust to controlling for various CEO characteristics and are stronger for firms with higher levels of institutional ownership and litigation risk.

We analyze a model in which an anomaly is unknown to arbitrageurs until its discovery, and test the model implications on both asset prices and arbitrageurs’ trading activities. Using data on 99 anomalies documented in the existing literature, we find that the discovery of an anomaly reduces the correlation between the returns of its decile-1 and decile-10 portfolios. This discovery effect is stronger if the aggregate wealth of hedge funds is more volatile. Finally, hedge funds increase (reverse) their positions in exploiting anomalies when their aggregate wealth increases (decreases), further suggesting that these discovery effects operate through arbitrage trading.