We examine “reaching for yield” in U.S. corporate bond mutual funds. We define reaching for yield as tilting portfolios toward bonds with yields higher than the benchmarks. We find that funds generate higher returns and attract more inflows when they reach for yield, especially in periods of low-interest rates. Returns for high reaching-for-yield funds nevertheless tend to be negative on a risk-adjusted basis. Funds engage in rank-chasing behavior by reaching for yield, although these incentives are moderated by the illiquid nature of corporate bonds. High reaching-for-yield funds hold less cash and less liquid bonds, exacerbating redemption risks.

This paper shows empirically how asset risk and financial leverage interact to explain the equity risk dynamics of value versus growth stocks. During economic downturns, the asset betas and leverage of value firms increase, contributing to a sharp rise in equity betas. Asset betas of growth firms are much less sensitive to economic conditions, and, consistent with the tradeoff theory of capital structure, growth firms are also less levered, contributing to the relative stability of their equity betas. By incorporating instruments that better capture beta dynamics, I show that the interactions of conditional betas with the market risk premium and volatility explain approximately 40% of the unconditional value premium.

We show theoretically and empirically that the durations of corporate securities are monotonically related to their capital structure priority, with equity often having a negative duration. The magnitude of this effect increases with firm leverage. We use these insights to challenge existing results on stock-bond comovements and factor pricing. For example, though overlooked, higher leverage and lower priority reduce the correlation between corporate security and government bond returns, and these variables explain time-series and cross-sectional variation in correlations; traditional market model regressions significantly understate corporate bond betas; and regressions on standard term and default factors dramatically overstate interest rate and default risk.

We investigate the volatility of firms’ assets in contrast to existing studies that focus on equity volatility. We estimate asset volatility using a comprehensive data set on the market values of corporate security returns. We find significant differences between the properties of equity and asset volatilities with implications for several important areas of finance. First, financial leverage has a large influence on equity volatility. Second, leverage and asset volatility have permanent and transitory effects, respectively, on equity volatility, helping explain the short- and long-run dynamics of equity volatility. Third, we analyze and compare the cross-section of asset versus equity returns.

We examine “reaching for yield” in U.S. corporate bond mutual funds. We define reaching for yield as tilting portfolios toward bonds with yields higher than the benchmarks. We find that funds generate higher returns and attract more inflows when they reach for yield, especially in periods of low-interest rates. Returns for high reaching-for-yield funds nevertheless tend to be negative on a risk-adjusted basis. Funds engage in rank-chasing behavior by reaching for yield, although these incentives are moderated by the illiquid nature of corporate bonds. High reaching-for-yield funds hold less cash and less liquid bonds, exacerbating redemption risks. Received January 17, 2017; editorial decision September 23, 2017 by Editor Wei Jiang.

Several measures of credit-market booms are known to precede downturns in real economic activity. We offer an early indicator for all known measures of credit booms. Our measure is based on intra-family flow shifts towards high-yield bond mutual funds. It predicts indicators such as growth in financial intermediary balance sheets, increase in shares of high-yield bond issuers, and downturns of various measures of credit spreads. It also directly predicts the business cycle by positively predicting GDP growth and negatively predicting unemployment. Our results provide support for the investor demand-based narrative of credit cycles and can be useful for policymakers.

Motivated by research in psychology and experimental economics, we assume that investors update their beliefs about an asset's value upon observing the price, but only when the price clearly reveals that others obtained private information that differs from their own private information. Specifically, we assume that investors learn from the price of an asset in an asymmetric manner—they learn from the price if they observe good (bad) private information and the price is worse (better) than what is justified based on public information alone. We show that asymmetric learning from an asset's price leads to post‐earnings‐announcement drift (PEAD), and that it generates arbitrage opportunities that are less attractive than alternative explanations of PEAD. In addition, our model predicts that PEAD will be concentrated in earnings surprises that are not dominated by accruals, and it also predicts that earnings response coefficients will decline in the magnitude of the earnings surprises.

We study whether firms spread out debt-maturity dates, which we call granularity of corporate debt. In our model, firms that are unable to roll over expiring debt need to liquidate assets. If multiple small asset sales are less inefficient than a single large one, it can be optimal to diversify debt rollovers across time. Using a large sample of corporate bond issuers during the 1991–2012 period, we establish novel stylized facts and evidence consistent with our model’s predictions. There is substantial heterogeneity (i.e., firms have both concentrated and dispersed debt structures). Debt maturities are more dispersed for larger and more mature firms and for firms with better investment opportunities, higher leverage, and lower profitability. During the recent financial crisis, firms with valuable investment opportunities implemented more dispersed maturity structures. Finally, firms manage granularity actively and adjust toward target levels.

We study a novel aspect of a firm’s capital structure, namely, the profile of its debt maturity dates. In a simple theoretical framework we show that the dispersion of debt maturities constitutes an important dimension of capital structure choice, driven by firm characteristics and debt rollover risk. Guided by these predictions we establish two main empirical results. First, using an exogenous shock to rollover risk, we document a significant increase in maturity dispersion for firms that need to roll over maturing debt. Second, we find strong support that maturities of newly issued debt are influenced by pre-existing maturity profiles.

This paper investigates how capital supply from mutual funds affects municipal bond financing, making three key contributions. First, we introduce an identification strategy using the rule-based update of Morningstar ratings for 5-year-old funds, isolating supply-side effects from fund and issuer fundamentals. The results indicate that exogenous fund flows increase bond issuance probability and decrease yields. Second, these fund flows lead to more issuances when funds and issuers are connected through underwriters, highlighting relationship lending in municipal bond financing. Third, municipal issuers leverage favorable financing conditions for new issuance of revenue bonds, which translates into higher local house prices.