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: 10.

What if Trading Location Is Different from Business Location? Evidence from the Jardine Group

Published: 05/06/2003   |   DOI: 10.1111/1540-6261.00564

Kalok Chan, Allaudeen Hameed, Sie Ting Lau

We examine the price behavior and market activity of the Jardine Group companies after they were delisted from Hong Kong in 1994. Although the trading activity of the Jardine Group moved to Singapore, the core businesses remained in Hong Kong and Mainland China. Evidence indicates the Jardine stocks are correlated less (more) with the Hong Kong (Singapore) market after the delisting. This result cannot be explained by various hypotheses, such as relocation of core business, time‐varying betas, migration of trading activity, and currency and tax distortions. We conclude that price fluctuations are affected by country‐specific investor sentiment.


Electing Directors

Published: 09/28/2009   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01504.x

JIE CAI, JACQUELINE L. GARNER, RALPH A. WALKLING

Using a large sample of director elections, we document that shareholder votes are significantly related to firm performance, governance, director performance, and voting mechanisms. However, most variables, except meeting attendance and ISS recommendations, have little economic impact on shareholder votes—even poorly performing directors and firms typically receive over 90% of votes cast. Nevertheless, fewer votes lead to lower “abnormal” CEO compensation and a higher probability of removing poison pills, classified boards, and CEOs. Meanwhile, director votes have little impact on election outcomes, firm performance, or director reputation. These results provide important benchmarks for the current debate on election reforms.


Earnings Management and the Long‐Run Market Performance of Initial Public Offerings

Published: 12/17/2002   |   DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00079

Siew Hong Teoh, Ivo Welch, T.J. Wong

Issuers of initial public offerings (IPOs) can report earnings in excess of cash flows by taking positive accruals. This paper provides evidence that issuers with unusually high accruals in the IPO year experience poor stock return performance in the three years thereafter. IPO issuers in the most “aggressive” quartile of earnings managers have a three‐year aftermarket stock return of approximately 20 percent less than IPO issuers in the most “conservative” quartile. They also issue about 20 percent fewer seasoned equity offerings. These differences are statistically and economically significant in a variety of specifications.


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.


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.


The Cost of Debt

Published: 11/09/2010   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01611.x

JULES H. Van BINSBERGEN, JOHN R. GRAHAM, JIE YANG

We use exogenous variation in tax benefit functions to estimate firm‐specific cost of debt functions that are conditional on company characteristics such as collateral, size, and book‐to‐market. By integrating the area between the benefit and cost functions, we estimate that the equilibrium net benefit of debt is 3.5% of asset value, resulting from an estimated gross benefit (cost) of debt equal to 10.4% (6.9%) of asset value. We find that the cost of being overlevered is asymmetrically higher than the cost of being underlevered and that expected default costs constitute only half of the total ex ante costs of debt.


Incentive Effects of Stock and Option Holdings of Target and Acquirer CEOs

Published: 08/14/2007   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2007.01260.x

JIE CAI, ANAND M. VIJH

Acquisitions enable target chief executive officers (CEOs) to remove liquidity restrictions on stock and option holdings and diminish the illiquidity discount. Acquisitions also enable acquirer CEOs to improve the long‐term value of overvalued holdings. Examining all firms during 1993 to 2001, we show that CEOs with higher holdings (illiquidity discount) are more likely to make acquisitions (get acquired). Further, in 250 completed acquisitions, target CEOs with a higher illiquidity discount accept a lower premium, offer less resistance, and more often leave after acquisition. Similarly, acquirer CEOs with higher holdings pay a higher premium, expedite the process, and make diversifying acquisitions using stock payment.


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.


Are All Ratings Created Equal? The Impact of Issuer Size on the Pricing of Mortgage‐Backed Securities

Published: 11/19/2012   |   DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2012.01782.x

JIE (JACK) HE, JUN (QJ) QIAN, PHILIP E. STRAHAN

Initial yields on both AAA‐rated and non‐AAA rated mortgage‐backed security (MBS) tranches sold by large issuers are higher than yields on similar tranches sold by small issuers during the market boom years of 2004 to 2006. Moreover, the prices of MBS sold by large issuers drop more than those sold by small issuers, and the differences are concentrated among tranches issued during 2004 to 2006. These results suggest that investors price the risk that large issuers received more inflated ratings than small issuers, especially during boom periods.


Testing Disagreement Models

Published: 05/11/2022   |   DOI: 10.1111/jofi.13137

YEN‐CHENG CHANG, PEI‐JIE HSIAO, ALEXANDER LJUNGQVIST, KEVIN TSENG

We provide plausibly identified evidence for the role of investor disagreement in asset pricing. Our natural experiment exploits the staggered implementation of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) system, which induces a reduction in investor disagreement. Consistent with models of investor disagreement, EDGAR inclusion helps resolve disagreement around information events, leading to stock price corrections. The reduction in disagreement following EDGAR inclusion also reduces stock price crash risk, especially among stocks with binding short‐sale constraints and high investor optimism.