首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   43篇
  免费   6篇
财政金融   26篇
工业经济   2篇
计划管理   3篇
经济学   4篇
贸易经济   3篇
农业经济   4篇
经济概况   7篇
  2023年   3篇
  2021年   1篇
  2020年   1篇
  2019年   1篇
  2018年   2篇
  2017年   1篇
  2016年   1篇
  2015年   2篇
  2014年   1篇
  2013年   2篇
  2012年   3篇
  2011年   2篇
  2010年   1篇
  2009年   2篇
  2008年   1篇
  2007年   4篇
  1997年   2篇
  1996年   2篇
  1995年   2篇
  1993年   2篇
  1992年   1篇
  1991年   1篇
  1985年   1篇
  1984年   1篇
  1983年   1篇
  1982年   2篇
  1981年   1篇
  1979年   2篇
  1973年   1篇
  1972年   1篇
  1964年   1篇
排序方式: 共有49条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Online auction sites like eBay provide ways to measure what consumers buy and how much they pay. Does this imply that consumers pay similar prices, irrespective of their location? Comparing prices for homogeneous, tradable goods in the euro area and the United Kingdom, we find that prices differ significantly. The differential is not related to countries' having different currencies. However, price dispersion—the variance of prices—does seem to be smaller if two countries share a common currency. Our results confirm the importance of national borders in explaining price differences and their magnitude is related to (not) sharing a common currency. (JEL E30, E31, E50, F40)  相似文献   
2.
3.
Using proprietary data on stock loan fees and quantities from a large institutional investor, we examine the link between the shorting market and stock prices. Employing a unique identification strategy, we isolate shifts in the supply and demand for shorting. We find that shorting demand is an important predictor of future stock returns: An increase in shorting demand leads to negative abnormal returns of 2.98% in the following month. Second, we show that our results are stronger in environments with less public information flow, suggesting that the shorting market is an important mechanism for private information revelation.  相似文献   
4.
5.
We propose a theory of the “profitability” anomaly. In our model, investors forecast future profits using a signal and sticky belief dynamics. In this model, past profits forecast future returns (the profitability anomaly). Using analyst forecast data, we measure expectation stickiness at the firm level and find strong support for three additional model predictions: (1) analysts are on average too pessimistic regarding the future profits of high‐profit firms, (2) the profitability anomaly is stronger for stocks that are followed by stickier analysts, and (3) the profitability anomaly is stronger for stocks with more persistent profits.  相似文献   
6.
We show that aversion to risk and ambiguity leads to information inertia when investors process public news about assets. Optimal portfolios do not always depend on news that is worse than expected; hence, the equilibrium stock price does not reflect this bad news. This informational inefficiency is more severe when there is more risk and ambiguity but disappears when investors are risk‐neutral or the news is about idiosyncratic risk. Information inertia leads to news momentum (e.g., after earnings announcements) and is consistent with low household trading activity. An ambiguity premium helps explain the macro and earnings announcement premium.  相似文献   
7.
Private Benefits of Control, Ownership, and the Cross-listing Decision   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
This paper investigates how a foreign firm's decision to cross-list on a U.S. stock exchange is related to the consumption of private benefits of control by its controlling shareholders. Theory has proposed that when private benefits are high, controlling shareholders are less likely to choose to cross-list in the United States because of constraints on the consumption of private benefits resulting from such listings. Using several proxies for private benefits related to the control and cash flow ownership rights of controlling shareholders, we find support for this hypothesis with a sample of more than 4,000 firms from 31 countries.  相似文献   
8.
9.
10.
We develop a dynamic asset pricing model in which monetary policy affects the risk premium component of the cost of capital. Risk‐tolerant agents (banks) borrow from risk‐averse agents (i.e., take deposits) to fund levered investments. Leverage exposes banks to funding risk, which they insure by holding liquidity buffers. By changing the nominal rate the central bank influences the liquidity premium, and hence the cost of taking leverage. Lower nominal rates make liquidity cheaper and raise leverage, resulting in lower risk premia and higher asset prices, volatility, investment, and growth. We analyze forward guidance, a “Greenspan put,” and the yield curve.  相似文献   
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号