Knowledge that Transforms

We address the determination of bitcoin prices and decentralized security. Users forecast the transactional and resale values of holdings, pricing the risk of systemic attacks. Miners contribute resources to protect against attackers and compete for block rewards. Bitcoin’s design leads to multiple equilibria: the same blockchain technology is consistent with sharply different price and security levels. Bitcoin’s monetary policy can lead to welfare losses and deviations from quantity theory. Price-security feedback amplifies fundamental shocks’ volatility impact and leads to boom and busts unconnected to fundamentals. We characterize how viability versus fiat currency depends on bitcoin’s relative acceptability and inflation protection.

The formation period return difference between past winners and losers, which I call the momentum gap, negatively predicts momentum profits. I document this for the U.S. stock market and find consistent results across 21 major international markets. A one-standard-deviation increase in the momentum gap predicts a 1.25% decrease in the monthly momentum return after controlling for existing predictors. This predictability extends up to 5 years for static momentum portfolios, consistent with time-varying investor biases. Following the simple real-time strategy of investing in momentum only when the momentum gap is below the 80th percentile delivers a Sharpe ratio of 0.78.

We investigate the time variability of abnormal returns from socially responsible investing (SRI). Using portfolio regressions and event studies on multiple data sources, including analyst ratings, firm announcements, and realized incidents, we find that highly rated SRI stocks outperform lowly rated SRI stocks during good economic times, for example, periods with high market valuations or aggregate consumption, but underperform during bad times, such as recessions. This variation in abnormal returns of high-SR stocks vis-à-vis low SR stocks is consistent with a wealth-dependent investor preference for SR stocks that leads to an increased (decreased) demand for SRI during good (bad) times.

Credit supply expansion boosts housing speculation and amplifies the housing cycle. The surge in private-label mortgage securitization in 2003 fueled a large expansion in mortgage credit supply by lenders financed with noncore deposits. Areas more exposed to these lenders experienced a large relative rise in transaction volume driven by a small group of speculators, and these areas simultaneously witnessed an amplified housing boom and bust. Consistent with the importance of belief heterogeneity, house price growth expectations of marginal buyers rose during the boom, while housing market pessimism among the general population increased.

This paper analyzes how trading after shareholder meetings changes the composition of the shareholder base. Analyzing daily trades, we find that mutual funds reduce their holdings if their votes are opposed to the voting outcome. Trading volume is high even when stock prices do not change, peaks on the meeting date, and remains high up to four weeks after shareholder meetings. The results support models based on differences of opinion that predict that shareholders’ beliefs may diverge more after observing voting outcomes. Hence, trading after meetings creates a more homogeneous shareholder base, which has important implications for corporate governance.

To understand what motivates individuals to look at their pension situation and make adequate savings decisions, we conduct two field experiments with 226,946 and 257,433 pension fund participants. We find peer-information statements do not increase the rate at which individuals check their pension information, but lottery-type financial incentives do. Offering a few large prizes rather than many small prizes is most effective. However, the uptake of pension information does not lead to improved pension knowledge nor to increased self-reported savings three weeks after our intervention.

Building on evidence that lifetime experiences shape individuals’ macroeconomic expectations, we study asset prices in an economy in which a representative agent learns with fading memory about unconditional mean endowment growth. With IID fundamentals, constant risk aversion, and memory decay calibrated to microdata, the model generates a high and strongly countercyclical objective equity premium, while the subjective equity premium is virtually constant. Consistent with this theory, experienced payout growth (a weighted average of past growth rates) is negatively related to future stock market excess returns and subjective expectations errors in surveys, and positively to analysts’ forecasts of long-run earnings growth.

Binding lower bounds on interest rates and large government deficits limit the scope of fiscal and monetary policies to stimulate households’ spending through financial intermediaries and firms. Policy makers have thus been implementing unconventional policies that aim to increase households’ spending directly through managing their expectations. We first show theoretically and empirically that higher inflation expectations increase households’ consumption. We then design a difference-in-differences strategy to assess the effectiveness of unconventional fiscal policy and forward guidance, both of which aim to raise aggregate demand via managing expectations. Whereas unconventional fiscal policy increases households’ expectations and spending, forward guidance announcements do not

To understand deviations from covered interest parity (CIP), it is crucial to account for heterogeneity in funding costs across both banks and currency areas. For most market participants, the no-arbitrage relation holds fairly well when implemented using marginal funding costs and risk-free investment instruments. However, a few high-rated banks do enjoy CIP-arbitrage opportunities. Dealers avert inventory imbalances stemming from lower-rated banks’ usage of FX swaps to obtain dollar funding by inducing opposite (arbitrage) flows from high-rated banks. Arbitrage trades are difficult to scale, however, because funding costs increase as soon as arbitrageurs increase positions.

We investigate the empirical implications of the investment-based model of asset pricing for the Hansen-Jagannathan and Kozak-Nagel-Santosh discount factors in the linear span of equity returns. We find that the stochastic discount factors satisfying the Euler equation for equity returns cannot satisfy the Euler equation for investment returns because returns on corporate investment covary inversely with the sources of equity risk relative to returns on equity. As a result, the model fails to replicate the level of the risk premium. Our results suggest that joint restrictions on the optimality of investment and consumption pose stringent conditions for candidate production models.