We hypothesize that when investors pay less attention to financial markets, they rationally allocate relatively more attention to market-level information than to firm-specific information, leading to increases in stock return co-movements. Using large jackpot lotteries as exogenous shocks that attract investors’ attention away from the stock market, we find supportive evidence that stock returns co-move more with the market on large jackpot days. This effect is stronger for stocks preferred by retail investors and is not driven by gambling sentiment. We also find that stock returns are less sensitive to earnings surprises and co-move more with industries on large jackpot days.

We empirically examine the impact of industry exchange-traded funds (IETFs) on informed trading and market efficiency. We find that IETF short interest spikes simultaneously with hedge fund holdings on the member stock before positive earnings surprises, reflecting long-the-stock/short-the-ETF activity. This pattern is stronger among stocks with high industry risk exposure. A difference-in-difference analysis on the ETF inception event shows that IETFs reduce post-earnings-announcement drift more among stocks with high industry risk exposure, suggesting that IETFs improve market efficiency. We also find that the short interest ratio of IETFs positively predicts IETF returns, consistent with the hedging role of IETFs.

We propose an equilibrium asset pricing model in which agents with heterogeneous beliefs care about relative performance. We find that the concern with relative performance leads agents to trade more similarly, a development that has two effects. First, similar trading directly decreases volatility. Second, similar trading decreases the impact of dominant agents. The second effect dominates the first when agents expect large differences between their final performances, and vice versa when agents expect small differences between their final performances. Compared with the case in which agents are unconcerned about relative performance, the stock return volatility is higher when the second effect dominates, and lower when the first effect dominates. This paper also demonstrates that the concern about relative performance influences investors’ holdings, stock prices and risk premia.

We provide a psychological explanation for the delayed price response to news about economically linked firms. We show that the return predictability of economically linked firms depends on the nearness to the 52-week high stock price. The interaction between news about economically linked firms and the nearness to the 52-week high can partially explain the underreaction to news about customers, geographic neighbors, industry peers, or foreign industries. We also find that analysts react to news about economically linked firms but the 52-week high effect reduces such reactions, providing direct evidence that the 52-week high affects the belief-updating process.

We investigate the effect of pre-IPO investments by public market institutional investors (institutions) on the exit of venture capitalists (VCs). Results indicate that institutions’ pre-IPO investments reduce IPO underpricing by mitigating VCs’ reliance on all-star analysts to boost market liquidity. We conclude that institutions facilitate VC exits in the secondary market. Supporting this view, our analysis reveals that the presence of institutions allows VCs to exit with a reduced price impact in the secondary market. Consistent with the ease of exit, VCs offer fewer shares at the IPO and are more likely to invest in institutionally backed startups.

This paper investigates the effects of relative performance concerns on fund managers’ behavior when managers are heterogeneous in their risk management practices. We find that relative performance concerns have distinct effects on different managers as follows: managers without risk management constraints conduct risk management, while those with risk management constraints do not change their trading. Our results suggest that a small number of fund managers with risk management requirements can have a significant impact on the market. Our theory can potentially reconcile the long-lasting debate regarding the impact of risk management on financial markets.

Mutual funds investing in illiquid corporate bonds actively manage Treasury positions to buffer redemption shocks. This liquidity management practice can transmit non-fundamental fund flow shocks onto Treasuries, generating excess return volatility. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find that Treasury excess return volatility is positively associated with bond fund ownership, and this pattern is more pronounced among funds conducting intensive liquidity management. Causal evidence is provided by exploiting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s 2017 Liquidity Risk Management Rule. Evidence also suggests that the COVID-19 Treasury market turmoil was attributed to intensified liquidity management, an unintended consequence of the 2017 Liquidity Risk Management Rule.

We re-examine the puzzling pattern of lead-lag returns among economically-linked firms. Our results show that investors consistently underreact to information from lead firms that arrives continuously, while information with the same cumulative returns arriving in discrete amounts is quickly absorbed into price. This finding holds across many different types of economic linkages, including shared-analyst-coverage. We conclude that the ǣfrog in the panǥ (FIP) momentum effect is pervasive in co-momentum settings, suggesting that information discreteness (ID) serves as a cognitive trigger that reduces investor inattention and improves inter-firm news transmission.