Knowledge that Transforms

The return premium associated with the Amihud (2002) measure is generally considered a liquidity premium that compensates for price impact. We find that the pricing of the Amihud measure is not attributable to the construction of the return-to-volume ratio intended to capture price impact, but is driven by the trading volume component. Additionally, the high-frequency price impact and spread benchmarks are priced only in January and do not explain the pricing of the trading volume component of the Amihud measure. Additional analyses suggest that the volume effect on stock return is likely caused by mispricing, not by compensation for illiquidity. Received September 20, 2014; editorial decision April 16, 2017 by Editor Andrew Karolyi.

We exploit an exogenous change in basis risk in the oil and gas industry to analyze the channels through which hedging affects firm value. Using a difference-in-differences framework, we find that firms affected by a basis risk shock reduce investment, have lower valuations, sell assets, and reduce debt. Our findings are driven by firms with ex ante high leverage. Overall, our results provide evidence that reducing the probability of financial distress and underinvestment risk are first-order channels through which hedging affects firm value. Received October 5, 2015; editorial decision December 22, 2016 by Editor David Denis.

This paper establishes a new empirical fact: Mutual funds’ flow-performance sensitivity is a hump-shaped function of aggregate risk-factor realizations. Explanations based on extant theories can explain only a fraction of the pattern. We thus develop a new parsimonious model. It assumes Bayesian investors who are uncertain about the degree to which fund returns are exposed to systematic risk. Fund performance is then less informative about manager skill when factor realizations are larger in absolute value. The data also support the out-of-sample prediction that the hump shape is more pronounced for funds with more uncertain risk loadings.Received October 24, 2014; editorial decision October 11, 2016 by Editor Itay Goldstein.

Following surprise independent director departures, affected firms have worse stock and operating performance, are more likely to restate earnings, face shareholder litigation, suffer from an extreme negative return event, and make worse mergers and acquisitions. The announcement returns to surprise director departures are negative, suggesting that the market infers bad news from surprise departures. We use exogenous variation in independent director departures triggered by director deaths to test whether surprise independent director departures cause these negative outcomes or whether an anticipation of negative outcomes is responsible for the surprise director departure. Our evidence is more consistent with the latter. Received January 12, 2016; editorial decision October 7, 2016 by Editor David Denis.

We propose a new approach for estimating expected returns on individual stocks from a large number of firm characteristics. We treat expected returns as latent variables and apply the partial least squares (PLS) estimator that filters them out from the characteristics under an assumption that the characteristics are linked to expected returns through one or few common latent factors. The estimates of expected returns constructed by our approach from 26 firm characteristics generate a wide cross-sectional dispersion of realized returns and outperform estimates obtained by alternative techniques. Our results also provide evidence of commonality in asset pricing anomalies. Received June 26, 2014; editorial decision May 15, 2016 by Editor Leonid Kogan.

We study the impact of the financial condition of firms on firms’ ability to produce safer products that result in fewer recalls. Using a variety of tests, including two quasi-natural experiments that result in exogenous negative industry cash-flow shocks, we find that firms with higher leverage or distress likelihood have a greater probability of a product recall. These firms also face more frequent and severe recalls. Further, firms with more debt due at the onset of the financial crisis experience a greater likelihood and frequency of recalls. We conclude that a firm’s financial condition has real effects that impact product safety.

We examine how alumni ties with corporate boards differentially affect male and female analysts’ job performance and career outcomes. Connections improve analysts’ forecasting accuracy and recommendation impact, but the effect is two to three times as large for men as for women. Connections also contribute to analysts’ likelihood of being voted by institutional investors as “star” analysts, but act as a partial substitute to performance for men, while a complement to performance for women. Our evidence indicates that men benefit more than women from connections in both job performance and the subjective evaluation by others.Received August 27, 2015; editorial decision January 24, 2017 by Editor Francesca Cornelli.

We show that banks significantly underreport the risk in their trading book when they have lower equity capital. Specifically, a decrease in a bank’s equity capital results in substantially more violations of its self-reported risk levels in the following quarter. Underreporting is especially frequent during the critical periods of high systemic risk and for banks with larger trading operations. We exploit a discontinuity in the expected benefit of underreporting present in Basel regulations to provide further support for a causal link between capital-saving incentives and underreporting. Overall, we show that banks’ self-reported risk measures become least informative precisely when they matter the most. Received April 30, 2015; editorial decision October, 27 2016 by Editor Itay Goldstein.

We use an asset pricing approach to compare the effects of the liquidity level and liquidity risk on expected U.S. corporate bond returns. Using signed transaction data, we estimate effective transaction costs for bond portfolios by a repeat-sales method. We find that the liquidity level and exposure to equity market liquidity risk affect expected bond returns. In contrast, exposure to corporate bond liquidity shocks carries an economically negligible risk premium. A simulation study shows that it is unlikely that our results are driven by measurement error in betas or multicollinearity. We present a simple theoretical model that explains these findings.

We study the dynamics of high-frequency market efficiency measures. We provide evidence that these measures comove across stocks and with each other, suggesting the existence of a systematic market efficiency component. In vector autoregressions, we show that shocks to funding liquidity (the TED spread), hedge fund assets under management, and a proxy for algorithmic trading are significantly associated with systematic market efficiency. Thus, stock market efficiency is prone to systematic fluctuations, and, consistent with recent theories, events and policies that impact funding liquidity can affect the aggregate degree of price efficiency.