This paper explores the shock of school closures caused by the COVID-19 pandemic to study the effect of childcare responsibilities on analyst forecasts. With manually collected data on whether analysts have children, I find that female analysts with children (mother analysts) are less likely to issue timely forecasts after school closures, compared to male analysts with children (father analysts). Mother analysts’ forecasts also become less accurate after school closures, but the negative effect only exists among forecasts for firms with relatively low institutional ownership, suggesting that mother analysts prioritize maintaining the forecast accuracy for firms that are more important to their careers. Additionally, mother analysts shift forecast release times to avoid childcare hours. My findings imply that childcare responsibilities hurt the productivity of mother analysts more than that of father analysts, even though these women have established themselves in a competitive industry.

Women often lack the opportunity to join exclusive social clubs, limiting the benefits they derive from their social networks. We investigate whether, when given the opportunity to interact with the right people in a professional setting, women gain greater advantages from these connections for career performance and advancement compared to men. Using a unique data set that documents when, where, and with whom financial analysts interact at investor conferences, we find that female analysts show greater improvement in earnings forecast accuracy than their male counterparts after interacting with a firm's executives. Further evidence suggests that female analysts overcome homophily in conference interactions with executives and that they sustain their gains, enhancing forecast accuracy for up to three years. In addition, both the capital and labor markets recognize women's superior gains from conference connections. Our findings suggest that women capitalize on professional connections, highlighting the importance of promoting structured networking opportunities for women in professional environments.

This article shows that mutual funds’ trading experiences bias their future repurchasing decisions. Mutual funds are less likely to repurchase a stock if they previously sold the stock for a loss rather than for a gain. After switching to managing a different fund, fund managers still avoid repurchasing stocks they sold for a loss at a past fund. We do not find that mutual fund managers are biased against repurchasing past loser stocks because of superior information. Though less likely to be repurchased, repurchased losers do not underperform repurchased winners—and the fund itself—in the subsequent quarter.