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: 10.
Investor Psychology and Asset Pricing
Published: 12/17/2002 | DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00379
The basic paradigm of asset pricing is in vibrant flux. The purely rational approach is being subsumed by a broader approach based upon the psychology of investors. In this approach, security expected returns are determined by both risk and misvaluation. This survey sketches a framework for understanding decision biases, evaluates the a priori arguments and the capital market evidence bearing on the importance of investor psychology for security prices, and reviews recent models.
American Finance Association
Published: 02/23/2018 | DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12608
American Finance Association
Published: 01/03/2018 | DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12597
Good Day Sunshine: Stock Returns and the Weather
Published: 05/06/2003 | DOI: 10.1111/1540-6261.00556
David Hirshleifer, Tyler Shumway
Psychological evidence and casual intuition predict that sunny weather is associated with upbeat mood. This paper examines the relationship between morning sunshine in the city of a country's leading stock exchange and daily market index returns across 26 countries from 1982 to 1997. Sunshine is strongly significantly correlated with stock returns. After controlling for sunshine, rain and snow are unrelated to returns. Substantial use of weather‐based strategies was optimal for a trader with very low transactions costs. However, because these strategies involve frequent trades, fairly modest costs eliminate the gains. These findings are difficult to reconcile with fully rational price setting.
Security Analysis and Trading Patterns When Some Investors Receive Information Before Others
Published: December 1994 | DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb04777.x
DAVID HIRSHLEIFER, AVANIDHAR SUBRAHMANYAM, SHERIDAN TITMAN
In existing models of information acquisition, all informed investors receive their information at the same time. This article analyzes trading behavior and equilibrium information acquisition when some investors receive common private information before others. The model implies that, under some conditions, investors will focus only on a subset of securities (“herding”), while neglecting other securities with identical exogenous characteristics. In addition, the model is consistent with empirical correlations that are suggestive of oft‐cited trading strategies such as profit taking (short‐term position reversal) and following the leader (mimicking earlier trades).
Are Overconfident CEOs Better Innovators?
Published: 07/19/2012 | DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2012.01753.x
DAVID HIRSHLEIFER, ANGIE LOW, SIEW HONG TEOH
Previous empirical work on adverse consequences of CEO overconfidence raises the question of why firms hire overconfident managers. Theoretical research suggests a reason: overconfidence can benefit shareholders by increasing investment in risky projects. Using options‐ and press‐based proxies for CEO overconfidence, we find that over the 1993–2003 period, firms with overconfident CEOs have greater return volatility, invest more in innovation, obtain more patents and patent citations, and achieve greater innovative success for given research and development expenditures. However, overconfident managers achieve greater innovation only in innovative industries. Our findings suggest that overconfidence helps CEOs exploit innovative growth opportunities.
Overconfidence, Arbitrage, and Equilibrium Asset Pricing
Published: 12/17/2002 | DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00350
Kent D. Daniel, David Hirshleifer, Avanidhar Subrahmanyam
This paper offers a model in which asset prices reflect both covariance risk and misperceptions of firms' prospects, and in which arbitrageurs trade against mispricing. In equilibrium, expected returns are linearly related to both risk and mispricing measures (e.g., fundamental/price ratios). With many securities, mispricing of idiosyncratic value components diminishes but systematic mispricing does not. The theory offers untested empirical implications about volume, volatility, fundamental/price ratios, and mean returns, and is consistent with several empirical findings. These include the ability of fundamental/price ratios and market value to forecast returns, and the domination of beta by these variables in some studies.
Does Investor Misvaluation Drive the Takeover Market?
Published: 03/09/2006 | DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00853.x
MING DONG, DAVID HIRSHLEIFER, SCOTT RICHARDSON, SIEW HONG TEOH
This paper uses pre‐offer market valuations to evaluate the misvaluation and Q theories of takeovers. Bidder and target valuations (price‐to‐book, or price‐to‐residual‐income‐model‐value) are related to means of payment, mode of acquisition, premia, target hostility, offer success, and bidder and target announcement‐period returns. The evidence is broadly consistent with both hypotheses. The evidence for the Q hypothesis is stronger in the pre‐1990 period than in the 1990–2000 period, whereas the evidence for the misvaluation hypothesis is stronger in the 1990–2000 period than in the pre‐1990 period.
Investor Psychology and Security Market Under‐ and Overreactions
Published: 12/17/2002 | DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00077
Kent Daniel, David Hirshleifer, Avanidhar Subrahmanyam
We propose a theory of securities market under‐ and overreactions based on two well‐known psychological biases: investor overconfidence about the precision of private information; and biased self‐attribution, which causes asymmetric shifts in investors' confidence as a function of their investment outcomes. We show that overconfidence implies negative long‐lag autocorrelations, excess volatility, and, when managerial actions are correlated with stock mispricing, public‐event‐based return predictability. Biased self‐attribution adds positive short‐lag autocorrelations (“momentum”), short‐run earnings “drift,” but negative correlation between future returns and long‐term past stock market and accounting performance. The theory also offers several untested implications and implications for corporate financial policy.
Driven to Distraction: Extraneous Events and Underreaction to Earnings News
Published: 09/28/2009 | DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01501.x
DAVID HIRSHLEIFER, SONYA SEONGYEON LIM, SIEW HONG TEOH
Recent studies propose that limited investor attention causes market underreactions. This paper directly tests this explanation by measuring the information load faced by investors. The investor distraction hypothesis holds that extraneous news inhibits market reactions to relevant news. We find that the immediate price and volume reaction to a firm's earnings surprise is much weaker, and post‐announcement drift much stronger, when a greater number of same‐day earnings announcements are made by other firms. We evaluate the economic importance of distraction effects through a trading strategy, which yields substantial alphas. Industry‐unrelated news and large earnings surprises have a stronger distracting effect.