[We show that the positive relation between institutional ownership and future stock returns documented in Gompers and Metrick (2001) is driven by shortterm institutions. Furthermore, short-term institutions' trading forecasts future stock returns. This predictability does not reverse in the long run and is stronger for small and growth stocks. Short-term institutions' trading is also positively related to future earnings surprises. By contrast, long-term institutions' trading does not forecast future returns, nor is it related to future earnings news. Our results are consistent with the view that short-term institutions are better informed and they trade actively to exploit their informational advantage.]

We document a significant and negative effect of the change in a firm's leverage ratio on its stock prices. We find that the negative effect is stronger for firms that have higher leverage ratios, higher likelihood of default, and face more severe financial constraints. Moreover, firms with an increase in leverage ratio tend to have less future investment. These findings are consistent with Myers' (1977) debt overhang theory that an increase in leverage may lead to future underinvestment, thus reducing a firm's value.

We show that the positive relation between institutional ownership and future stock returns documented in Gompers and Metrick (2001) is driven by short-term institutions. Furthermore, short-term institutions' trading forecasts future stock returns. This predictability does not reverse in the long run and is stronger for small and growth stocks. Short-term institutions' trading is also positively related to future earnings surprises. By contrast, long-term institutions' trading does not forecast future returns, nor is it related to future earnings news. Our results are consistent with the view that short-term institutions are better informed and they trade actively to exploit their informational advantage.

We construct a new measure of trading regularity, capturing the extent to which investors trade on a regular basis. Institutional investors that regularly trade outperform those that trade less regularly. The performance of funds that regularly trade persists for at least a year. Among those who trade most regularly, larger funds perform relatively worse, because they incur higher transaction costs associated with their larger trades. Institutions that regularly trade generate superior performance, in part, by behaving as contrarians and by trading more aggressively on information. By contrast, we find no relation between trading regularity and performance among index funds. Received November 21, 2016; editorial decision March 28, 2018 by Editor Andrew Karolyi.

Goyal and Santa‐Clara (2003) find a significantly positive relation between the equal‐weighted average stock volatility and the value‐weighted portfolio returns on the NYSE/AMEX/Nasdaq stocks for the period of 1963:08 to 1999:12. We show that this result is driven by small stocks traded on the Nasdaq, and is in part due to a liquidity premium. In addition, their result does not hold for the extended sample of 1963:08 to 2001:12 and for the NYSE/AMEX and NYSE stocks. More importantly, we find no evidence of a significant link between the value‐weighted portfolio returns and the median and value‐weighted average stock volatility.