The Journal of Finance

The Journal of Finance publishes leading research across all the major fields of finance. It is one of the most widely cited journals in academic finance, and in all of economics. Each of the six issues per year reaches over 8,000 academics, finance professionals, libraries, and government and financial institutions around the world. The journal is the official publication of The American Finance Association, the premier academic organization devoted to the study and promotion of knowledge about financial economics.

AFA members can log in to view full-text articles below.

View past issues


Search the Journal of Finance:






Search results: 2.

Pockets of Predictability

Published: 04/03/2023   |   DOI: 10.1111/jofi.13229

LELAND E. FARMER, LAWRENCE SCHMIDT, ALLAN TIMMERMANN

For many benchmark predictor variables, short‐horizon return predictability in the U.S. stock market is local in time as short periods with significant predictability (“pockets”) are interspersed with long periods with no return predictability. We document this result empirically using a flexible time‐varying parameter model that estimates predictive coefficients as a nonparametric function of time and explore possible explanations of this finding, including time‐varying risk premia for which we find limited support. Conversely, pockets of return predictability are consistent with a sticky expectations model in which investors slowly update their beliefs about a persistent component in the cash flow process.


Selling Fast and Buying Slow: Heuristics and Trading Performance of Institutional Investors

Published: 08/11/2023   |   DOI: 10.1111/jofi.13271

KLAKOW AKEPANIDTAWORN, RICK DI MASCIO, ALEX IMAS, LAWRENCE D.W. SCHMIDT

Are market experts prone to heuristics, and do these heuristics transfer across buying and selling domains? We investigate this question using a unique data set of institutional investors with portfolios averaging $573 million. A striking finding emerges: While there is evidence of skill in buying, selling decisions underperform substantially, even relative to random‐selling strategies. This holds despite the similarity between the two decisions in frequency, substance, and consequences for performance. Evidence suggests an asymmetric allocation of cognitive resources such as attention can explain the discrepancy: We document a systematic, costly heuristic process for selling but not for buying.