This article examines a model in which decisions are made at fixed intervals and are unsynchronized across agents. Agents choose nondurable consumption and portfolio composition, and either or both can be chosen infrequently. A small utility cost is associated with both decisions being made infrequently. Calibrating returns to the U.S. economy, less frequent and unsynchronized decision-making delivers the low volatility of aggregate consumption growth and its low correlation with equity return found in U.S. data. Allowing portfolio rebalancing to occur every period has a negligible impact on the joint behavior of aggregate consumption and returns.

This paper examines portfolio allocation across equity portfolios formed on the basis of characteristics like size and book-to-market. In particular, the paper assesses the impact of return predictability on portfolio choice for a multi-period investor with a coefficient of relative risk aversion of 4. Compared to the investor's allocation in her last period, return predictability with dividend yield causes the investor early in life to tilt her risky-asset portfolio away from high book-to-market stocks and away from small stocks. These results are explained using Merton's (Econometrica 41 (1973) 867) characterization of portfolio allocation by a multi-period investor in a continuous time setting. Abnormal returns relative to the investor's optimal early life portfolio are also calculated. These abnormal returns are found to exhibit the same cross-sectional patterns as abnormal returns calculated relative to the market portfolio: higher for small rather than large firms, and higher for high rather than low book-to-market firms. Thus, hedging demand may be a partial explanation for the high expected returns documented for small firms and high book-to-market firms. However, even with this hedging demand, the investor wants to sell short the low book-to market portfolio to hold the high book-to-market portfolio. The utility costs of using a value-weighted equity index or of ignoring predictability are also calculated. An investor using a value-weighted equity index would give up a much larger fraction of her wealth to have access to book-to-market portfolio than size portfolios. Finally, an investor would give up a much larger fraction of her wealth to have access to dividend yield information than term spread information.

Because a money manager learns more about her skill from her management experience than outsiders can learn from her realized returns, she expects inefficiency in future contracts that condition exclusively on realized returns. A fund family that learns what the manager learns can reduce this inefficiency cost if the family is large enough. The family's incentive is to retain any given manager regardless of her skill but, when the family has enough managers, it adds value by boosting the credibility of its retentions through the firing of others. As the number of managers grows, the efficiency loss goes to zero.

This article examines a model in which decisions are made at fixed intervals and are unsynchronized across agents. Agents choose nondurable consumption and portfolio composition, and either or both can be chosen infrequently. A small utility cost is associated with both decisions being made infrequently. Calibrating returns to the U.S. economy, less frequent and unsynchronized decision‐making delivers the low volatility of aggregate consumption growth and its low correlation with equity return found in U.S. data. Allowing portfolio rebalancing to occur every period has a negligible impact on the joint behavior of aggregate consumption and returns.

This article examines a model in which decisions are made at fixed intervals and are unsynchronized across agents. Agents choose nondurable consumption and portfolio composition, and either or both can be chosen infrequently. A small utility cost is associated with both decisions being made infrequently. Calibrating returns to the U.S. economy, less frequent and unsynchronized decision-making delivers the low volatility of aggregate consumption growth and its low correlation with equity return found in U.S. data. Allowing portfolio rebalancing to occur every period has a negligible impact on the joint behavior of aggregate consumption and returns.

This paper numerically solves the decision problem of a multiperiod constant relative risk aversion individual who faces transaction costs and has access to two risky assets, both with predictable returns. With proportional transaction costs and independent and identically distributed returns, we numerically find the rebalancing rule to be a no-trade region for the portfolio weights with rebalancing to the boundary. The shape of the no-trade region depends on the correlation between the two risky assets. With predictable returns, there is instead a no-trade region for each state. We also examine several important economic questions, including the utility cost of not being able to buy on margin or short stock.

Young agents with low wealth-income ratios counter factually hold more stock than young, rich agents and old agents using the standard portfolio choice model with i.i.d. stock returns and labor income. This paper matches the countercyclical volatility and procyclical mean of U.S. labor income and finds that, consistent with U.S. data, young, poor agents now hold less stock than both young, rich agents and old agents, and no stock a large fraction of the time. Our results suggest that the predictability of labor income growth at a business-cycle frequency, particularly the countercyclical variation in volatility, plays an important role in a young agent's decision making about her portfolio's stock holding.

We simulate standard tests of performance persistence using alternative return-generating processes, survival criteria, and test methodologies. When survival depends on performance over several periods, survivorship bias induces spurious reversals, despite the presence of cross-sectional heteroskedasticity in performance. Look-ahead biased methodologies and missing final returns typical of U.S. mutual fund datasets can also materially affect persistence measures. Our results reinforce previous findings that U.S. mutual fund performance is truly persistent. When fund performance is truly persistent, fund attrition affects persistence measures, even when the sample includes all nonsurvivor returns. We also examine the specification and power of the various persistence tests.

Constantinides (1986) documents how the impact of transaction costs on per‐annum liquidity premia in the standard dynamic allocation problem with i.i.d. returns is an order of magnitude smaller than the cost rate itself. Recent papers form portfolios sorted on liquidity measures and find spreads in expected per‐annum return that are the same order of magnitude as the transaction cost spread. When we allow returns to be predictable and introduce wealth shocks calibrated to labor income, transaction costs are able to produce per‐annum liquidity premia that are the same order of magnitude as the transaction cost spread.

This article provides a comprehensive study of survivorship issues using the mutual fund data of Carhart (1997). We demonstrate theoretically that when survival depends on multiperiod performance, the survivorship bias in average performance typically increases with the sample length. This is empirically relevant because evidence suggests a multiyear survival rule for U.S. mutual funds. In the data we find the annual bias increases from 0.07% for 1-year samples to 1% for samples longer than 15 years. We find that survivor conditioning weakens evidence of performance persistence. Finally, we explain how survivor conditioning affects the relation between performance and fund characteristics.