We present a model in which issuers of asset-backed securities choose to release coarse information to enhance the liquidity of their primary market, at the cost of reducing secondary market liquidity. The degree of transparency is inefficiently low if the social value of secondary market liquidity exceeds its private value. We show that various types of public intervention (mandatory transparency standards, provision of liquidity to distressed banks, or secondary market price support) have quite different welfare implications. Finally, we extend the model by endogenizing the private and social value of liquidity and the proportion of sophisticated investors. The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected] ., Oxford University Press.

[We analyze the location of stock trading for firms with a US cross-listing. The fraction of trading that occurs in the United States tends to be larger for companies from countries that are geographically close to the United States and feature low financial development and poor insider trading protection. For companies based in developed countries, trading volume in the United States is larger if the company is small, volatile, and technology-oriented, while this does not apply to emerging country firms. The domestic turnover rate increases in the cross-listing year and remains higher for firms based in developed markets, but not for emerging market firms. Domestic trading volume actually declines for companies from countries with poor enforcement of insider trading regulation]

The underpricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) is generally explained with asymmetric information and risk. We complement these traditional explanations with a new theory where investors worry also about the after-market illiquidity that may result from asymmetric information after the IPO. The less liquid the aftermarket is expected to be, and the less predictable its liquidity, the larger will be the IPO underpricing. Our model blends such liquidity concerns with adverse selection and risk as motives for underpricing. The model’s predictions are supported by evidence for 337 British IPOs effected between 1998 and 2000. Using various measures of liquidity, we find that expected after-market liquidity and liquidity risk are important determinants of IPO underpricing.

Theory predicts that information sharing among lenders attenuates adverse selection and moral hazard, and can therefore increase lending and reduce default rates. Using a new, purpose-built data set on private credit bureaus and public credit registers, we find that bank lending is higher and credit risk is lower in countries where lenders share information, regardless of the private or public nature of the information sharing mechanism. We also find that public intervention is more likely where private arrangements have not arisen spontaneously and creditor rights are poorly protected.

Local companies attract significantly more attention from investors than nonlocal companies, especially at times of news releases and high volatility. This attention gap widens especially when news is firm-specific rather than aggregate, and in response to idiosyncratic rather than market risk. Attention is causally related to perceived proximity: after a firm is acquired by a nonlocal one, local investors, compared with nonlocal investors, are more likely to reallocate attention away from it; conversely, COVID-19 travel restrictions led investors to reallocate attention toward local companies and away from nonlocal ones, especially those difficult to reach. Finally, local attention predicts volatility, bid-ask spreads, and nonlocal attention, but not vice versa. Our findings suggest that the geography of attention matters and is shaped by local investors’ information-processing advantage, not familiarity bias.

The excess sensitivity of consumption to current income fluctuations is higher in countries where consumers borrow less. Low levels of consumer debt can result either from capital market imperfections or from a low demand for loans. The evidence suggests that the former view is more appropriate than the latter, and thus supports the hypothesis that excess sensitivity may be attributed to liquidity constraints, rather than to other factors.

We present a model with adverse selection where information sharing between lenders arises endogenously. Lenders' incentives to share information about borrowers are positively related to the mobility and heterogeneity of borrowers, to the size of the credit market, and to advances in information technology; such incentives are instead reduced by the fear of competition from potential entrants. In addition, information sharing increases the volume of lending when adverse selection is so severe that safe borrowers drop out of the market. These predictions are supported by international and historical evidence in the context of the consumer credit market.

We present a model with adverse selection where information sharing between lenders arises endogenously. Lenders' incentives to share information about borrowers are positively related to the mobility and heterogeneity of borrowers, to the size of the credit market and to advances in information technology; on the other hand, such incentives are reduced by the fear of competition from potential entrants. In addition, information sharing increases the volume of lending when adverse selection is so severe that safe borrowers drop out of the market. These predictions are supported by international and historical evidence in the context of the consumer credit market. Information sharing is widespread in countries, such as Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States, where the geographical mobility of households is high and the consumer credit market is deep; while in countries with low mobility and thin consumer credit markets, e.g. Belgium and Italy, information sharing is minimal. The same predictions are also supported by US historical data.

We analyze the political determinants of investor and employment protection. Our model predicts that proportional electoral systems are conducive to weaker investor protection and stronger employment protection than majoritarian systems. This prediction is consistent with international panel data evidence. The proportionality of the voting system is significantly and negatively correlated with shareholder protection in a panel of 45 countries, and positively correlated with employment protection in a panel of 21 OECD countries. Other political variables also affect regulatory outcomes, especially for the labor market. The origin of the legal system has some additional explanatory power only for employment protection.

We investigate whether information sharing among banks has affected credit market performance in the transition countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, using a large sample of firm-level data. Our estimates show that information sharing is associated with improved availability and lower cost of credit to firms. This correlation is stronger for opaque firms than transparent ones and stronger in countries with weak legal environments than in those with strong legal environments. In cross-sectional estimates, we control for variation in country-level aggregate variables that may affect credit, by examining the differential impact of information sharing across firm types. In panel estimates, we also control for the presence of unobserved heterogeneity at the firm level, as well as for changes in macroeconomic variables and the legal environment.