We investigate the motivations and effects of financial firms’ hiring of former US financial regulatory employees. The number of top executives with regulatory experience per firm has increased 24% over 2001–15, and hiring is associated with positive average announcement returns and a salary premium. In the quarter after hire, market and balance sheet measures of firm risk decrease significantly and measures of risk management activity increase, especially for hires from prudential regulators, who directly monitor financial firm risk. The absence of this result for unregulated firms and for exogenous shocks to regulatory experience suggests that firms hire ex-employees of their regulators when they perceive a need to reduce risk, consistent with a schooling hypothesis. We find little direct evidence of quid pro quo behavior in regulatory event frequency and fines.

Variation in the composition of the defaulted debt pool and credit conditions at the time of default generate time variation in the distribution of recoveries on defaulted debt, and the related distribution of losses on portfolios of credit sensitive debt. We quantify the importance of accounting for such time variation in out-of-sample comparisons of alternative approaches to forecasting recoveries or losses given default (LGD) on defaulted bonds. Using simulations of losses on defaultable bond portfolios, we show that conditional mixture models improve forecasts of expected credit losses through capturing time variation in the recovery/LGD distribution. However, the best forecasts of instrument or firm-level recovery/LGD do not necessarily provide the best forecasts of portfolio-level losses, as the latter depend on the association between errors in the default and recovery/LGD forecasts. Our systematic comparisons of cross-sectional and intertemporal forecasting performance are enabled by a fast maximum-likelihood approach to estimating conditional mixtures of distributions.

In this article, we show that when banks increase their use of wholesale funding they shorten the maturity of loans to corporations. This effect appears to be linked to banks’ exposure to rollover risk resulting from their increasing use of short-term uninsured funding. Banks that use more wholesale funding shorten both the maturity of newly issued loans and the maturity of their loan portfolios. These results are not present among banks that rely predominantly on insured deposits. The link between wholesale funding and loan maturity is robust, and holds when we include firm-year fixed effects, suggesting that the decline in loan maturity is bank driven. In line with this premise, we find that the slope of the loan yield curve becomes steeper for banks that use more wholesale funding and that borrowers turn to the bond market to raise funding with longer maturity in response to banks’ loan maturity shortening.

The dramatic increase in the percentage of mutual funds lending equities suggests that lending fees are an increasingly important source of income for investment advisors. We find that funds that lend equities underperform otherwise similar funds in spite of lending income. The effect of lending is concentrated in funds that cannot act on the short-selling signal due investment restrictions set by the fund family to diversify their fund offerings across styles. Our findings suggest that the family organization explains why fund managers lend, rather than sell, stocks with short selling demand.

Liquidity plays an important role in global research. We identify high-quality liquidity proxies based on low-frequency (daily) data, which provide 1,000× to 10,000× computational savings compared to computing high-frequency (intraday) liquidity measures. We find that: (i) Closing Percent Quoted Spread is the best monthly percent-cost proxy when available, (ii) Amihud, Closing Percent Quoted Spread Impact, LOT Mixed Impact, High–Low Impact, and FHT Impact are tied as the best monthly cost-per-dollar-volume proxy, (iii) the daily version of Closing Percent Quoted Spread is the best daily percent-cost proxy, and (iv) the daily version of Amihud is the best daily cost-per-dollar-volume proxy.

We determine the optimal lifecycle purchasing strategy for deferred income annuities (DIAs)—which are distinct from single-premium income annuities (SPIAs)—for an individual who wishes to maximize the expected utility of his/her annuity income at a fixed time in the future. In contrast to the vast portfolio-choice literature for SPIAs, we focus on the stochasticity of the DIA’s payout yield and address concerns that rates are currently “too low” to justify irreversible annuitization. We assume a mean-reverting model for payout yields and show that a risk-neutral consumer who wishes to maximize his/her expected retirement income should wait until yields reach a threshold—which lies above historical averages—and then purchase the DIA in one lump sum. In contrast, a risk-averse consumer who is concerned the payout yield will remain below average for an extended period and worries about losing mortality credits while waiting, should employ a barrier purchasing strategy, as in the portfolio choice problem under transaction costs. We illustrate how this insight is applied in the context of annuitization. In fact, the optimal behavior of a risk-averse consumer resembles an asymmetric dollar-cost averaging strategy, with a portion of the DIA-budget spent even while payout rates are below historical averages. As part of our analysis we offer an easy-to-use asymptotic approximation for the optimal purchasing strategy (threshold) and provide some numerical examples to illustrate the concept.