We analyze how the availability of internal funds affects a firm's investment. We show that under fairly standard assumptions, the relation is U-shaped: investment increases monotonically with internal funds if they are large but decreases if they are very low. We discuss the tradeoff that generates the U-shape, and argue that models predicting an always increasing relation are based on restrictive assumptions. Using a large data set, we find strong empirical support for our predictions. Our results qualify conventional wisdom about the effects of financial constraints on investment behavior, and help to explain seemingly conflicting findings in the empirical literature.

We examine the yield curve behavior and the relative performance of affine term structure models (ATSMs) using government bond yield data from Canada, Germany, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S. We find strong predictability of forward rates for excess bond returns and reject the expectations hypothesis in all five countries. A three-factor model is sufficient to capture movements in the yield curve of Canada, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S., but may not be enough for Germany. An exhaustive comparison among ATSMs with no more than three factors reveals that the three-factor essential affine model (A1(3)E), with only one factor affecting the volatility of the short rate but with all three factors affecting the price of risk, performs best in all five countries. Simulations provide inconclusive evidence on whether this best affine model can successfully generate the rich yield curve behavior observed in the data.

This paper tests the expectations hypothesis (EH) using U.S. monthly data for bond yields spanning the 1952–2003 sample period and ranging in maturity from one month to 10 years. We apply the Lagrange multiplier test developed by Bekaert and Hodrick (2001) and extend it to increase the test power by introducing economic variables as conditioning information and by using more than two bond yields in the model and testing the EH jointly on more than one pair of yields. While the conventional bivariate procedure provides mixed results, the more powerful testing procedures suggest rejection of the EH throughout the maturity spectrum examined.

We find that among firms that file Chapter 11 those that are smaller have better operating performance, and are in higher operating margin industries spend less time in Chapter 11. Firms are more likely to emerge as going concerns and to achieve positive post reorganization profitability if they significantly reduce assets and liabilities while in Chapter 11. Higher pre-bankruptcy industry-adjusted operating margins and improvements in margin are associated with post-reorganization profitability but do not impact the decision to reorganize. These results reveal characteristics and actions associated with successful reorganizations and, furthermore, suggest that Chapter 11 allows promising firms to successfully reorganize.

Given the growth in the importance and popularity of share repurchases, we use an alternative time-series approach to test two hypotheses on the motives for share repurchases and dividends: the flexibility hypothesis and the substitution hypothesis. By investigating both share repurchase and dividend payout policies in the context of a time-series vector autoregression, we account for the dynamic and multi-dimensional nature of the two payout policies. We find that share repurchases are associated with temporary components of earnings, whereas dividends are not, and that share repurchases and dividends are imperfect substitutes.

Legal rights of investors are recognized as an essential component of corporate governance. We assess the efficacy of these rights by examining board changes surrounding the filings of shareholder derivative lawsuits. We find that the incidence of derivative lawsuits is higher for firms with a greater likelihood of agency conflicts. We also find that derivative lawsuits are associated with significant improvements in the boards of directors. In particular, the proportion of outside representation on the board of directors increases. There is also some evidence that other board characteristics change favorably. These findings suggest that shareholder derivative lawsuits are not frivolous as is often claimed, but rather that they can serve as an effective corporate governance mechanism.

We investigate how price discovery occurs in the options markets through traders' trade size choice. By employing transactions data on all options traded on a sample of 100 firms, we show that informed traders fragment their orders into small (medium) trades for low (high) volume contracts. We also find that almost 60% of the price discovery occurs in the exchange with the largest market share for a given option, where informed traders favor medium size trades. Upon examining distinct option series for a given stock, we find that at-the-money calls display the highest information share.

Bayesian learning claims that the strength of the price impact of unanticipated information depends on the relative precision of traders' prior and posterior beliefs. In this paper, we test for this implication of Bayesian models by analyzing intraday price responses of T-bond futures to U.S. employment announcements. By employing additional detailed information in addition to the widely used headline figures, we extract release-specific precision measures. We find that the price impact of more precise information is significantly stronger, even after controlling for an asymmetric price response to “good” and “bad” news. This result strengthens previous findings that differences in earnings response coefficients across companies are related to proxies for the credibility of the reported financial information.

This paper generalizes and tightens Chen and Yeh's (2002) analytical upper bounds for American options under stochastic interest rates, stochastic volatility, and jumps, where American option prices are difficult to compute with accuracy. We first generalize Theorem 1 of Chen and Yeh (2002) and apply it to derive a tighter upper bound for American calls when the interest rate is greater than the dividend yield. Our upper bounds are not only tight, but also converge to accurate American call option prices when the dividend yield or strike price is small or when volatility is large. We then propose a general theorem that can be applied to derive upper bounds for American options whose payoffs depend on several risky assets. As a demonstration, we utilize our general theorem to derive upper bounds for American exchange options and American maximum options on two risky assets.

We demonstrate analytically that cross-sectional variation in the effects of events, i.e., in true abnormal returns, necessarily produces event-induced variance increases, biasing popular tests for mean abnormal returns in short-horizon event studies. We show that unexplained cross-sectional variation in true abnormal returns plausibly produces nonproportional heteroskedasticity in cross-sectional regressions, biasing coefficient standard errors for both ordinary and weighted least squares. Simulations highlight the resulting biases, the necessity of using tests robust to cross-sectional variation, and the power of robust tests, including regression-based tests for nonzero mean abnormal returns, which may increase power by conditioning on relevant explanatory variables.