This study explores the distress risk anomaly—the tendency for stocks with high credit risk to perform poorly—among 38 countries over two decades. We find a strongly negative relationship between default probabilities and equity returns concentrated among low-capitalization stocks in developed countries in North America and Europe. Although risk-based explanations provide a poor account of these patterns, several pieces of evidence point to a behavioral interpretation, suggesting that stocks of firms in financial distress are temporarily overpriced.

Analysts follow disproportionally firms whose fundamentals correlate more with those of their industry peers. This coverage pattern supports models of profit-maximizing information intermediaries producing preferentially information valuable in pricing more stocks. We designate highly followed firms whose fundamentals best predict those of peer firms as bellwether firms. When analysts revise a bellwether firm's earning forecast, it changes the prices of other firms significantly; however, revisions for firms that are less intensely followed do not change the prices of heavily followed firms. Unidirectional information spillovers explain how the more accurately priced stocks might exhibit more comovement.

Investor preferences for holding speculative assets are likely to be more pronounced ahead of firms’ earnings announcements, probably because of lower inventory costs and immediate payoffs or because of enhanced investor attention. We show that the demand for lottery-like stocks is stronger ahead of earnings announcements, leading to a price run-up for these stocks. In sharp contrast to the standard underperformance of lottery-like stocks, lottery-like stocks outperform non-lottery stocks by about 52 basis points in the 5-day window ahead of earnings announcements. However, this return spread is reversed by 80 basis points in the 5-day window after the announcements. Moreover, this inverted-V-shaped pattern on cumulative return spreads is more pronounced among firms with a greater retail order imbalance, among firms with low institutional ownership, and in regions with a stronger gambling propensity, and it is also robust after controlling for past 12-month returns and various proxies for investor attention.

Recent studies conflict sharply about the stock returns of financially distressed firms. Both the basic empirical pattern and interpretation have been challenged. This study addresses both critiques. Analyzing about 4.3 million firm-months observations in 38 countries from January 1992 to June 2013, we find a strong, negative link between credit risk and subsequent equity returns, concentrated among low-capitalization stocks in developed countries in North America and Europe. Comparisons between countries reveal: 1) no relation to creditor rights, inconsistent with theories based on shareholders expropriation, but 2) a strong, positive relation to individualism, a proxy for investor overconfidence. Additional analysis using within-country proxies for investor overconfidence further supports an overconfidence-based explanation.

We find negative price reactions among non-sued U.S.-listed foreign firms to filings of U.S. shareholder lawsuits targeting firms from their home country. This country spillover effect is stronger for lawsuits, especially accounting-related ones, targeting firms from more poorly-governed countries. We also document a stronger country spillover effect for a recent wave of U.S. lawsuits targeting Chinese issuers than for other standalone litigation. Finally, a foreign firm's price reaction to lawsuits targeting its country peers predicts its chance of being sued in the future. Our findings are consistent with investors updating a foreign firm's litigation risk upon lawsuits targeting its country peers.

Firms with similar credit ratings, particularly high-yield ones, exhibit strong comovement in stock returns . After a firm is downgraded to high-yield status, it comoves more with other high-yield firms and less with investment-grade ones, a pattern not fully explained by changes in fundamentals or other firm characteristics. We find evidence that suggests the investor clientele explanation for rating-related comovement, potentially arising from heterogeneous lottery preferences. High-yield-averse funds reduce their holdings of firms being downgraded to high-yield status, particularly those that are more lottery-like, much more significantly than high-yield-prone funds. Furthermore, a firm’s stock returns become sensitive to flows into high-yield-prone funds after being downgraded to high-yield status, consistent with the price impact of rating-based category investing.

This paper shows that the degree of information asymmetry is lower for firms with more frequent news releases. The relation holds for various measures of information asymmetry such as the probability of information-based trading (PIN), permanent price impact, and adverse selection component of bid-ask spread, even after adjusting for endogeneity between news release and information asymmetry. By decomposing the PIN into intensities of uninformed and informed trades, similarly to Brown and Hillegeist (2007), we find that intensity of uninformed trading increases much more than that of informed trading for firms with more frequent news releases. As a result, information asymmetry, as is measured by PIN, decreases for such firms due to the large increase in the intensity of uninformed trading. Our findings highlight not only the importance of news releases in leveling the playing field of investors but also the role of uninformed investors in reducing trading cost due to information asymmetry.

Analysts follow disproportionally firms whose fundamentals correlate more with those of their industry peers. This coverage pattern supports models of profit-maximizing information intermediaries producing preferentially information valuable in pricing more stocks. We designate highly followed firms whose fundamentals best predict those of peer firms as bellwether firms. When analysts revise a bellwether firm's earning forecast, it changes the prices of other firms significantly; however, revisions for firms that are less intensely followed do not change the prices of heavily followed firms. Unidirectional information spillovers explain how the more accurately priced stocks might exhibit more comovement.