We investigate the relationship between the ownership structure and returns of firms on days when the absolute value of the market's return is two percent or more. We find that a firm's abnormal return on these days is related to the percentage of institutional ownership, that there is abnormally high turnover in the firm's shares on these days, and that this abnormal turnover is significantly related to the percentage of institutional ownership in the firm. Taken together, these results are consistent with positive feedback herding behavior on the part of some institutions, particularly mutual and pension funds.

Is liquidity better when a trade counterparty’s brokerage firm is unknown (anonymous) or known (transparent)? We examine a quasinatural experiment where some firms switched from transparent to anonymous trading and then, 1 year later, switched back. Our results for inside spread, price impact, and limit order book depth suggest that liquidity improves when anonymous post-trade reporting is introduced and liquidity worsens when anonymous post-trade reporting is reversed.

Dividends are clustered in increments of 5, such as 25, 50, and 75. Firms that gravitate towards these ‘prominent’ amounts have lower operating performance and lower annual five-factor alphas of 77 b.p. Consistent with agency frictions that lead to lazy decisions, clustering effects are stronger for entrenched firms, with more market power, and less shareholder activism. Dividend increases also cluster more than cuts, consistent with saliency bias. In a counterfactual exercise, we find no similar patterns in a sample of ADRs. Our results complement a number of recent studies showing the economic importance of simple decision heuristics.