Knowledge that Transforms

To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
127 results ✕ Clear filters

Ex dividend day stock price behavior: discreteness or tax-induced clienteles?

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 47(2), 127-159 open access
Since prices are constrained to discrete tick multiples while dividends are essentially continuous, ex day price changes will not equal dividends. We argue that the expected price drop is strictly less than the dividend but within one tick of the dividend. The price-drop-to-dividend ratio will (i) be less than one, (ii) increase with dividends generally, and (iii) decline between tick multiples, giving a sawtooth pattern in the data. Since dividends and dividend yields are highly correlated, discreteness will give the impression of tax-induced dividend clienteles even if there are none. Taxable cash dividends and nontaxable stock dividends exhibit similar ex day behavior.

Does order preferencing matter?

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 50(1), 3-37 open access
This study examines how order preferencing affects the competitiveness and efficiency of laboratory financial markets. We operationalize preferencing by allowing some dealers to execute a portion of the order flow by matching the most favorable quotes available. Increasing the proportion of order flow that is preferenced can increase bid–ask spreads, reduce the informational efficiency of prices, and benefit dealers at the expense of liquidity traders. Preferencing has none of these effects, however, when two or more dealers are not receiving preferencing orders. Preferencing may significantly degrade market performance if preferencing arrangements affect all, or virtually all, dealers.

Information-time option pricing: theory and empirical evidence1We would like to thank Robert Merton, Peter Ritchken, L. Sankarasubramanian, David Shimko, and Mark Weinstein for useful discussions. We are indebted to John B. Long, Jr. (the editor) and Robert Whaley (the referee) for detailed and constructive comments and suggestions. Any remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors.1

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 48(2), 211-242 open access
With a stochastic time change from calendar-time to information-time, we derive a parsimonious option pricing formula with stochastic volatility as a risk-neutral Poisson sum of Merton's (1973) prices over the option's information-time maturity domain. The formula contains two unobservable parameters, information arrival intensity and information-time asset volatility, with stochastic volatility induced by random information arrival. When the information arrival rate intensifies, the option price increases and vice-versa. We test the formula in pricing, hedging, and excess profits capture empirically using currency and the S&P 500 futures options transaction data.

Open-end mutual funds and capital-gains taxes

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 49(1), 3-43 open access
Despite the fact that taxable investors would prefer to defer the realization of capital gains indefinitely, most open-end mutual funds regularly realize and distribute a large portion of their gains. We present a model in which unrealized gains in the fund's portfolio increase expected future taxable distributions, and thus increase the present value of a new investor's tax liability. In equilibrium, managers interested in attracting new investors pass through taxable capital gains to reduce the overhang of unrealized gains. This model contains a number of empirical predictions that are consistent with data on actual fund overhangs.

Venture capital and the structure of capital markets: banks versus stock markets

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 47(3), 243-277 open access
The United States has many banks that are small relative to large corporations and play a limited role in corporate governance, and a well developed stock market with an associated market for corporate control. In contrast, Japanese and German banks are fewer in number but larger in relative size and are said to play a central governance role. Neither country has an active market for corporate control. We extend the debate on the relative efficiency of bank- and stock market-centered capital markets by developing a further systematic difference between the two systems: the greater vitality of venture capital in stock market-centered systems. Understanding the link between the stock market and the venture capital market requires understanding the contractual arrangements between entrepreneurs and venture capital providers; especially, the importance of the opportunity to enter into an implicit contract over control, which gives a successful entrepreneur the option to reacquire control from the venture capitalist by using an initial public offering as the means by which the venture capitalist exits from a portfolio investment. We also extend the literature on venture capital contracting by offering an explanation for two central characteristics of the U.S. venture capital market: relatively rapid exit by venture capital providers from investments in portfolio companies; and the common practice of exit through an initial public offering.

The effects of bank mergers and acquisitions on small business lending

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 50(2), 187-229 open access
We examine the effects of bank M&As on small business lending using data on over 6000 recent U.S. bank M&As. We are the first to decompose the impact of M&As into the static effects from simply melding the antecedent institutions and the dynamic effects associated with post-M&A refocusing of the consolidated institution. We are also the first to estimate the dynamic reactions of other local banks. We find that the static effects of consolidation reduce small business lending, but are mostly offset by the reactions of other banks, and in some cases also by refocusing efforts of the consolidating institutions themselves.

The exercise and valuation of executive stock options

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 48(2), 127-158 open access
In theory, hedging restrictions faced by managers make executive stock options more difficult to value than ordinary options, because they imply that exercise policies of managers depend on their preferences and endowments. Using data on option exercises from 40 firms, this paper shows that a simple extension of the ordinary American option model which introduces random, exogenous exercise and forfeiture predicts actual exercise times and payoffs just as well as an elaborate utility-maximizing model that explicitly accounts for the nontransferability of options. The simpler model could therefore be more useful than the preference-based model for valuing executive options in practice.

Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 48(1), 35-54 open access
Several studies hypothesize a relation between board size and financial performance. Empirical tests of the relation exist in only a few studies of large U.S. firms. We find a significant negative correlation between board size and profitability in a sample of small and midsize Finnish firms. Finding a board-size effect for a new and different class of firms affects the range of explanations for the board-size effect.

Efficiency loss and constraints on portfolio holdings

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 48(3), 359-375 open access
This paper examines the degree of portfolio inefficiency subject to various constraints on portfolio weights. When portfolio weights are unconstrained, the posterior loss in expected return on the NYSE-AMEX market portfolio is over 20% (annualized). In contrast, when portfolio weights are constrained to be nonnegative, the posterior loss in expected return is only about 4% (annualized). In addition, short-sale constraints greatly reduce uncertainty in inferences about portfolio efficiency.

The trading profits of SOES bandits

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 50(1), 39-62 open access
SOES bandits are individual investors who use Nasdaq's Small Order Execution System (SOES) for day trading. Their average profit per trade is small, but they trade dozens or hundreds of times per week. Bandits usually establish a position before most market-makers have updated their quotes, and lay off the position at favorable prices through Instinet or SelectNet. It is noteworthy that they trade profitably with market-makers despite having less information. Bandits keep the profits and bear the losses from their trades. Thus they have greater incentives to trade well than the employees of market-making firms.