We investigate whether skilled hedge fund managers are more likely to pursue unique investment strategies that result in superior performance. We propose a measure of the distinctiveness of a fund's investment strategy based on historical fund return data. We call the measure the “Strategy Distinctiveness Index” (SDI). We document substantial cross-sectional variations as well as strong persistence in SDI. Our main result indicates that, on average, a higher SDI is associated with better subsequent performance. After adjusting for risk, funds in the highest SDI quintile outperform funds in the lowest quintile by 3.5% in the subsequent year.

We conduct an empirical analysis of forward prices in the PJM electricity market using a high‐frequency data set of hourly spot and day‐ahead forward prices. We find that there are significant risk premia in electricity forward prices. These premia vary systematically throughout the day and are directly related to economic risk factors, such as the volatility of unexpected changes in demand, spot prices, and total revenues. These results support the hypothesis that electricity forward prices in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Maryland market are determined rationally by risk‐averse economic agents.

We show that, when stock prices are subject to stochastic mispricing errors, expected rates of return may depend not only on the fundamental risk that is captured by a standard asset pricing model, but also on the type and degree of asset mispricing, even when the mispricing is zero on average. Empirically, the mispricing induced return premium, either estimated using a Kalman filter or proxied by the volatility and variance ratio of residual returns, is shown to be significantly associated with realized risk-adjusted returns.

How do corporate bond mutual funds manage liquidity to meet investor redemptions? We show that during tranquil market conditions, these funds tend to reduce liquid asset holdings to meet redemptions, temporarily increasing relative exposures to illiquid asset classes. When aggregate uncertainty rises, however, they tend to scale down their liquid and illiquid assets proportionally to preserve portfolio liquidity. This fund-level dynamic management of liquidity appears to affect the broad financial market: Redemptions from the corporate bond fund sector lead to more corporate bond selling during high-uncertainty periods, which generates price pressures and predicts strong return reversals.

Open-end corporate bond mutual funds invest in illiquid assets while providing liquid claims to shareholders. Does such liquidity transformation introduce fragility to the corporate bond market? To address this question, we create a novel bond-level latent fragility measure based on asset illiquidity of mutual funds holding the bond. We find that corporate bonds bearing higher fragility subsequently experience higher return volatility and more outflows-induced mutual fund selling over the period of 2006–2019. Using the COVID-19 crisis as a natural experiment, we find that bonds with higher precrisis fragility experienced more negative returns and larger reversals around March 2020.

A simple valuation model with time‐varying investment opportunities is developed and estimated. The model assumes that the investment opportunity set is completely described by the real interest rate and the maximum Sharpe ratio, which follow correlated Ornstein–Uhlenbeck processes. The model parameters and time series of the state variables are estimated using U.S. Treasury bond yields and expected inflation from January 1952 to December 2000, and as predicted, the estimated maximum Sharpe ratio is related to the equity premium. In cross‐sectional asset‐pricing tests, both state variables have significant risk premia, which is consistent with Merton's ICAPM.