Knowledge that Transforms

We examine search-based peer (SBP) groups proposed by Lee, Ma, and Wang (2015) and their relationship with commonality in liquidity. Our results confirm that SBP affiliation is a significant determinant of commonality in liquidity and, unlike market- and industry-commonality, SBP-commonality has been increasing over the past 15 years. We separate retail from institutional investor queries by tracing the IP locations of Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) searches. Our results show that retail investors are responsible for roughly 85% of the EDGAR searches that generate SBP groups. Overall, our study provides new evidence of a significant demand-side commonality associated with SBP affiliations.

We examine the effect of staggered changes in the state-level capital gains tax on venture capital (VC)-backed start-ups and show that an increase in the tax rate of VC firms reduces the quantity and quality of patents by the start-ups. The results are consistent with a reduction in VC firms’ incentives to provide effort: increases in the capital gains tax for VC firms lead to incrementally lower innovation exchanges between start-ups in the VC firm’s portfolio. VC firms also decrease the level of investment in start-ups and the size of their portfolio as well as increase the number of start-ups that they write off.

Mutual fund families set and report values of their private startup holdings, which affect the fund net asset value (NAV) at which investors buy/sell fund shares. We test three hypotheses related to the valuation practice: (i) information cost/access, (ii) litigation risk, and (iii) strategic NAV management. Consistent with (i), families with larger PE holdings and/or stronger information access update valuations more frequently in the absence of public information releases, their updates co-move less with other families, and their fund returns jump less at follow-on financings. We find no support for hypotheses (ii) or (iii). We also find that high-PE-exposure funds are subject to greater financial fragility.

Classic bond pricing centralizes bond valuation across all maturities by specifying the dynamics of the short-term interest rate. This article develops a decentralized theory that prices each bond based purely on the near-term behavior of the bond’s own yield. The theory levers the domain expertise of an investor on a particular bond and allows the investor to make pricing and investment analysis on the bond without the shackles of an ambitious centralizing mandate. The theory decomposes the short-term return on a bond with respect to the variation of its own yield. Imposing no dynamic arbitrage on the return decomposition leads to a simple pricing equation relating the bond yield to the market pricing and conditional mean and variance forecasts of the yield’s near-term change. The article illustrates the theory’s applications in decentralized investment of a single bond and in the construction and investment of decentralized butterfly bond portfolios.

This article develops a new approach to explain why risk factors constructed from index option returns are priced in the stock market. We decompose an option-based factor into three main components and identify the one responsible for the beta–return relationship. Applying this method to the bear risk factor proposed by Lu and Murray reveals that the negative correlation between bear betas and stock returns does not reflect systematic risk premia. Instead, it represents an anomaly closely related to the betting-against-beta puzzle. We trace the root of this anomaly to disagreement concerning the aggregate stock market. Our work reconciles the conflicting evidence concerning downside risk by showing that neither ex-post nor ex-ante downside risk is priced in the cross-section of stocks while making a methodological contribution that facilitates more accurate interpretation of option-based risk factors in future research.

An increasing number of studies depart from the rational expectations assumption to reconcile survey expectations with asset prices. While surveys are helpful to establish a link between subjective beliefs and investment decisions, precise inference about how investors depart from rational expectations can be challenging without relying on strong assumptions. In this article, we provide direct experimental evidence of how systematic distortions in investors’ expectations affect their risk-taking across market cycles. As mechanism, we identify an asymmetry in how individuals update their expectations across boom and bust markets. The documented mechanism is consistent with survey data and provides important implications for recently proposed asset pricing models.

This article studies how the three-way interaction among shareholders, creditors, and managers shapes firms’ executive compensation. Firms with a higher ownership share by “dual holders”—institutional investors that simultaneously hold equity and bond of the company—adopt a less risk-inducing compensation structure: less stock options and more inside debt. Exploiting financial institution mergers that increase or decrease dual ownership for portfolio companies, we identify a causal link between dual ownership and CEO compensation policies. Mutual fund proxy voting data suggest that shareholder voting is an important channel for dual holders to implement less convex contracts.

We study the effect of an asset’s volatility on the expected returns of European options on the asset. Deriving predictions from a stochastic discount factor model, we show that the effect depends on whether variations in the asset’s volatility are driven by systematic or idiosyncratic volatility. While idiosyncratic-volatility-induced variations only affect the option elasticity, systematic-volatility-induced variations also oppositely affect the expected return of the asset. Since the expected asset return (elasticity) effect dominates for options with more linear (non-linear) payoffs, systematic volatility prices sufficiently in-the-money (out-of-the-money) options with the opposite (same) sign as idiosyncratic volatility. Using single-stock calls as test assets, double-sorted portfolios and Fama–MacBeth (1973) regressions broadly support the model’s predictions.

We show that investors tend to hold the same securities as their parents. This intergenerational correlation is stronger for mothers and family members who are more likely to communicate with each other. An instrumental variables estimation and a natural experiment suggest that the correlation reflects social influence. This influence runs not only from parents to children, but also vice versa. The resulting holdings of identical securities increase intergenerational correlations in portfolio choice, exacerbate wealth inequality, and amplify the consequences of behavioral biases.

Financial markets have a central role in allocating resources in modern economies. One of the main functions of financial markets is the discovery of information. This information in turn helps guide decisions in the real side of the economy. The literature on the “feedback effect” of financial markets explores this channel. Empirical work tries to identify the informational feedback from markets to corporate decisions. Theoretical work explores implications that this feedback effect has for the equilibrium in financial markets and for economic efficiency. Current trends in information technology under the FinTech revolution change the nature of information processing in financial markets and so may change the nature of the feedback effect. In this article, I review the main themes of this developing literature and connect them to the current information revolution. I also discuss directions for future research.