We show that chief executive officers (CEOs) exhibit a hometown bias in acquisitions. Firms are over twice as likely to acquire targets located in the states of their CEOs’ childhood homes than similar targets domiciled elsewhere. Small, private home-state deals underperform other small, private deals, and the bias is stronger when acquirer governance is lax, suggesting that CEOs acquire private home-state targets for their own benefits. In contrast, large, public home-state acquisitions are value enhancing. CEOs create value in public home-state acquisitions by avoiding extremely poor deals and through deals with higher synergies. Thus, both agency issues and hometown advantages drive home-state acquisitions.

We propose a new approach based on a generalization of the logit model to improve prediction accuracy in U.S. bank failures. Mixed-data sampling (MIDAS) is introduced in the context of a logistic regression. We also mitigate the class-imbalance problem in data and adjust the classification accuracy evaluation. In applying the suggested model to the period from 2004 to 2016, we show that it correctly classifies significantly more bank failure cases than the classic logit model, in particular for long-term forecasting horizons. Some of the largest recent bank failures in the United States that had been previously misclassified are now correctly predicted.

In a model where investors disagree about the fundamentals of two stocks, the state-price density depends on investor disagreements for both stocks, especially the larger stock. This implies that disagreement among investors in a large firm has a spillover effect on the pricing of other stocks owned by these investors. The pricing effects of investor disagreements crucially depend on the average belief biases. Empirical findings support the novel model prediction of a disagreement spillover effect and help reconcile some mixed evidence in the literature.

Using a fast numerical technique, we investigate a large database of investors’ suboptimal nonexercise of short-maturity American call options on dividend-paying stocks listed on the Dow Jones. The correct modeling of the discrete dividend is essential for a correct calculation of the early exercise boundary, as confirmed by theoretical insights. Pricing with stochastic volatility and jumps instead of the Black–Scholes–Merton benchmark cuts the amount lost by investors through suboptimal exercise by one-quarter. The remaining three-quarters are largely unexplained by transaction fees and may be interpreted as an opportunity cost for the investors to monitor optimal exercise.

I investigate how distraction affects the trading behavior of professional asset managers. Exploring detailed transaction-level data, I show that managers with a large fraction of portfolio stocks that have an earnings announcement are significantly less likely to trade in other stocks, suggesting that these announcements divert attention from trading decisions for other stocks. This distraction effect is more pronounced for nonpassive managers who engage in active stock selection choices. Finally, I identify three channels through which distraction hurts managers’ performance: Distracted managers trade less profitably, incur slightly higher transaction costs, and are less likely to close losing positions.

This article investigates the gap-filling explanation for corporate debt maturity choices in a multi-country setting. We argue that companies adjust their debt maturity in response to shocks in government debt maturity both at home and abroad; the difference between the two effects depends on the markets’ relative size and level of integration. Focusing on the European case and treating the Economic and Monetary Union as a shock in market integration, we find strong empirical support for our predictions. Our results have relevant implications for the opportunity for individual governments to use their debt maturity structure as a policy tool.

We examine liquidity transformation by funds of hedge funds (FoFs) by developing a new measure, illiquidity gap, that captures the mismatch between the liquidity of their portfolios and the liquidity available to their investors. We find that higher liquidity transformation is driven by FoFs’ incentives to attract more capital and earn higher compensation. Greater liquidity transformation is associated with higher exposure to investor runs and worse performance during crisis periods. Finally, FoFs mitigate the risks associated with liquidity transformation by maintaining higher cash buffers.

Union and public pension funds, the most prolific institutional activists employing low-cost targeting methods, are often accused of pursuing private benefits. Extant literature finds that unions representing workers, as stakeholders, are not aligned with shareholders. Limiting shareholder power may mitigate “special interest” activism but can also exacerbate managerial agency problems. In two different settings, majority approved and withdrawn shareholder proposals, we examine and find supportive evidence that the director labor market as a corporate governance mechanism can selectively mitigate the negative influence that conflicted stakeholder-shareholder union funds have over firms without stifling all influence of low-cost activists.

Overconfident CEOs/senior executives tend to have excessively positive views of their own skills and their company’s future performance. We hypothesize that overconfident managers are more likely to engage in reckless or intentional actions/disclosures that give rise to securities class actions (SCAs). Empirical evidence is supportive: Overconfident CEOs/senior executives increase SCA likelihood, though litigation risk is ameliorated through improved governance, such as following the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002. Post-SCA, companies are less likely to hire an overconfident CEO. Following an SCA, overconfident CEOs appear to moderate behavior and to reduce their litigation risk.

This paper examines the effect of real-world, investor-level investment constraints, including several that have not been studied before, on hedge fund performance and its persistence. Using a large consolidated database, we demonstrate that hedge fund performance persistence is significantly reduced when rebalancing rules reflect fund size restrictions and liquidity constraints but remains statistically significant at higher rebalancing frequencies. Hypothetical investor portfolios that incorporate additional minimum diversification constraints, minimum investment requirements, and focus on open funds suggest that the performance and its persistence documented in earlier studies of hedge funds is not easily exploitable, especially by large investors.

We investigate the role of extreme positive payoffs in the distribution of monthly fund returns in investors’ mutual fund preferences. We document a positive and significant relationship between the maximum style-adjusted monthly return (MAX) and future fund flows. The relationship is robust to controlling for average performance, volatility, skewness, and various other fund characteristics. Our findings are consistent with the notion that fund investors overweight the probability of high payoff states in the past return distribution. We further show that MAX is not a useful predictor of future performance and that an increase in a fund’s visibility does not explain our findings.

In an effort to increase transparency, the chair of the Federal Reserve now holds a press conference (PC) following some, but not all, Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) announcements. Evidence from financial markets shows that investors lower their expectations of important decisions on days without PCs and that these announcements convey less price-relevant information. Correspondingly, we show that investors pay more attention to upcoming announcements with PCs. This coordination of attention can reduce welfare in models of the social value of public information. Consistent with theories of investor attention, the market risk premium is larger on days with PCs.

Post-earnings announcement drift (PEAD) is stronger in firms that release earnings on days when market returns are higher in magnitude. This drift remains robust after controlling for previously documented factors such as Friday releases, the number of simultaneous releases, and price delay measure. Negative earnings surprises drive this drift, and the drift is more pronounced among small stocks, value stocks, and stocks that have low analyst following. Slower analyst response to earnings contributes to the drift. These findings are consistent with investors paying more attention to market information and less attention to firm-specific information due to attention constraints.

We document that the likelihood of asset sales increases with union presence and union wages. Furthermore, acquiring firms gain significant concessions from the incumbent union following asset sales. Finally, the anticipation of union concessions helps explain the excess stock returns around asset sale announcements. We find no comparable effects for takeovers. We conclude that asset sales, but not takeovers, are partially motivated by the potential to extract concessions from unions.