Fundamental Investment Analysis

In a monetary union, the risk-free rate cannot respond to country-level fiscal shocks, leaving only default spreads and convenience yields to respond. Empirically, we find that convenience yields play an important role as fiscal shock absorbers in the Eurozone. Consistent with downward-sloping demand for safety, Eurozone countries earn larger convenience yields after they release positive fiscal news.

In modern asset markets, man and machine compete for profits. How does each fare? I build a learning model in which quantitative investors (reliant on computer models) have more learning capacity but less flexibility to adapt to market conditions than discretionary investors (reliant on human judgment). I use machine learning to categorize US active equity mutual funds as quantitative or discretionary. Consistent with the model's predictions, I find that quantitative funds hold more stocks, specialize in stock picking, and engage in more overcrowded trades.

We use supervisory loan-level data to document that small firms (SMEs) obtain shorter maturity credit lines than large firms, post more collateral, have higher utilization rates, and pay higher spreads. We rationalize these facts as the equilibrium outcome of a trade-off between lender commitment and discretion. Using the COVID recession, we test the prediction that SMEs are subject to greater lender discretion. Consistent with this hypothesis, SMEs did not draw down whereas large firms did, even in response to similar demand shocks.

We examine the optimal financing of infrastructure when governments have limited financial commitment and can expropriate rents from private sector firms that manage infrastructure. While private firms need incentives to implement projects well, governments need incentives to limit expropriation. This double moral hazard limits the willingness of outside investors to fund infrastructure projects.

We develop a model of information and portfolio choice in which ex ante identical investors choose to specialize because of fixed attention costs required in learning about securities. Without this friction, investors would invest in all securities and would be indifferent across a wide range of information choices. When securities' dividends depend on an aggregate (macro) risk factor and an idiosyncratic (micro) shocks, fixed attention costs lead investors to specialize in either macro or micro information.

We investigate the impact of reporting regulation on corporate innovation. Exploiting thresholds in Europe’s regulation and a major enforcement reform in Germany, we find that forcing firms to publicly disclose their financial statements discourages innovative activities. Our evidence suggests that reporting regulation has significant real effects by imposing proprietary costs on innovative firms, which in turn diminish their incentives to innovate.

We investigate the impact of uneven transparency regulation across countries and industries on the location of economic activity. Using two distinct sources of regulatory variation—the varying extent of financial-reporting requirements and the staggered introduction of electronic business registers in Europe—, we consistently document that direct exposure to transparency regulation is negatively associated with the focal industry’s economic activity in terms of inputs (e.g., employment) and outputs (e.g., production).

The composition of natural liquidity has been changing over time. An analysis of intraday volumes for the S&P500 constituent stocks illustrates that (i) volume surprises, i.e., deviations from their respective forecasts, are correlated across stocks, and (ii) this correlation increases during the last few hours of the trading session.

This article empirically examines the magnitude of risk premiums for direct real estate investments on a global basis. As this article analyzes ex-ante risk premiums over more than 25 years consistently across the world, it enhances current knowledge about the regional differences between risk premiums and helps long-term investors with their global portfolio allocation over time. On a global level, the authors find a risk premium of 4.1% for Gordon’s growth and 3.7% for two-stage growth model. The periodic growth model shows a slightly lower risk premium of 3.1%.