Abstract This paper studies financial intermediation in a general equilibrium overlapping generations model. Indivisible investment projects combine with informational imperfections to create a (hidden action) moral hazard problem and introduce a role for third-party monitoring. Agency costs at the intermediary level are also considered. Under some conditions, monitors can be viewed as banks facing a non-trivial portfolio diversification problem. Equilibria are derived in which a large nationwide bank coexists with a number of community-regional banks, a structure of strong empirical relevance. Policies such as a mandatory reserve requirement are shown to have substantial effects on the levels of investment in the economy. JEL classification: E44, G21, G28

Abstract We present a comprehensive analysis of the performance and flows of U.S. actively managed equity mutual funds during the 2020 COVID-19 crisis. We find that most active funds underperform passive benchmarks during the crisis, contradicting a popular hypothesis. Funds with high sustainability ratings perform well, as do funds with high star ratings. Fund outflows surpass precrisis trends, but not dramatically. Investors favor funds that apply exclusion criteria and funds with high sustainability ratings, especially environmental ones. Our finding that investors remain focused on sustainability during this major crisis suggests they view sustainability as a necessity rather than a luxury good. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Investment advisory firms and brokerage firms hire analysts to uncover profitable securities investment opportunities. Then these firms sell the information (either directly or indirectly) to others. Why? Given that the information has value, why do these firms not keep the information to themselves and trade solely for their own accounts? Because of competition, information is more valuable when fewer people trade on the information. This paper shows that selling information is a strategic response by competing informed traders. Specifically, it is a means for informed traders to commit to trade aggressively, thereby inducing other informed traders to trade less aggressively. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: G10, D82.

Abstract Predicted stock issuers (PSIs) are firms with expected high-investment and low-profit profiles that earn extremely low returns. We evaluate alternative explanations for this empirical phenomenon. Our results show top-PSI firms are cash-strapped, have lottery-like payoffs, high volatility, high beta, low liquidity, and high shorting costs. Over the next 2 years, top-PSI firms earn return on assets of −30% per year, report disappointing earnings, and experience strongly negative forecast revisions. They perform poorly in down markets and are six times more likely to delist for performance-related reasons. Overall, we find substantial support for mispricing, some support for nonstandard preferences, and virtually no support for the risk explanation. (JEL G12, G14, G32, G40, G41) Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Abstract We examine the relation between venture capital (VC) investments, M&A activity, and merger competition laws in 45 countries around the world. We find evidence of a strong positive association between VC investments and lagged M&A activity, consistent with an active M&A market providing viable exit opportunities for VC companies and therefore incentives for venture capitalists to invest. We also explore the effects of country-level merger competition laws and pro-takeover legislation passed internationally on VC activity. We find significant reductions in VC activity in countries with stricter competition laws and find that VC activity intensifies after the enactment of country-level takeover-friendly legislation. (JEL G15, G24, D43, K21, L26)

Abstract Studies proposing new determinants of corporate innovation include previously identified factors in an ad hoc manner. We find that only a sparse set of recently proposed innovation determinants provide material, independent information about patents and citations. We document that inferences in recent empirical studies often change when we include previously discovered innovation determinants. Commonly used econometric methods, including fixed effects and plausible shocks, do not always mitigate the need to condition on previously identified innovation determinants. Rather than randomly selecting a subset of control variables from prior studies, our analysis offers researchers a framework to consider previously proposed variables. (JEL G30, O30, G32, O34). Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

We distinguish between identification and establishing causality. Identification means forming a unique mapping from features of data to quantities that are of interest to economists. Establishing causality by finding sources of exogenous variation is often considered synonymous with identification, but these two concepts are distinct. Exogenous variation is only sometimes necessary and never sufficient to identify economically interesting parameters. Instead, even for causal questions, identification must rest on an underlying economic model. We illustrate these points by analyzing identification in three recent papers and by examining the estimation of a simple dynamic model. Received June 6, 2017; editorial decision September 26, 2017 by Editor Gregor Matvos. Authors have furnished supplementary code, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.