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

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Liquidity Risk, Return Predictability, and Hedge Funds’ Performance: An Empirical Study

Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 2013 48(1), 219-244 open access
This article analyzes the effect of liquidity risk on the performance of equity hedge fund portfolios. Similarly to Avramov, Kosowski, Naik, and Teo (2007), (2011), we observe that, before accounting for the effect of liquidity risk, hedge fund portfolios that incorporate predictability in managerial skills generate superior performance. This outperformance disappears or weakens substantially for most emerging markets, event-driven, and long/short hedge fund portfolios once we account for liquidity risk. Moreover, we show that the equity market-neutral and long/short hedge fund portfolios’ “alphas” also entail rents for their service as liquidity providers. These results hold under various robustness tests.

Do Responsible Investors Invest Responsibly?

Review of Finance 2022 26(6), 1389-1432 open access
We study whether institutional investors that sign the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), a commitment to responsible investing, exhibit better portfolio-level environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores. Signatories outside of the USA have superior ESG scores than nonsignatories, but US signatories have at best similar ESG ratings, and worse scores if they have underperformed recently, are retail-client facing, and joined the PRI late. US signatories do not improve the ESG scores of portfolio companies after investing in them. Commercial motives, uncertainty about fiduciary duties, and lower ESG market maturity explain why US-domiciled PRI signatories do not follow through on their responsible investment commitments.

Preferences for Truthfulness: Heterogeneity among and within Individuals

American Economic Review 2013 103(1), 532-548 open access
We conduct an experiment assessing the extent to which people trade off the economic costs of truthfulness against the intrinsic costs of lying. The results allow us to reject a type-based model. People's preferences for truthfulness do not identify them as only either “economic types” (who care only about consequences) or “ethical types” (who care only about process). Instead, we find that preferences for truthfulness are heterogeneous among individuals. Moreover, when examining possible sources of intrinsic costs of lying and their interplay with economic costs of truthfulness, we find that preferences for truthfulness are also heterogeneous within individuals.