Resilience of Environmental and Social Stocks under Stress: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic

This paper examines whether environmental and social (ES) activities affect the resiliency of firms during the COVID-19 crisis. We study a sample of 330 firms operating in five developed countries: Canada, France, Japan, the UK and the US. Our analysis shows that US firms with a high ES ranking experienced a significantly lower stock price range volatility during the Covid stock market rundown of February-March 2020. Such findings also hold for Japanese firms but only later on after the introduction of government support. In terms of returns, compared to their peers with a low ES ranking, Japanese and UK stock prices with a high ES ranking suffered more during and after the market rundown. For other countries, we do not find significant differences in stock price behavior based on ES ratings. Our findings suggest that engaging with ES activities is not associated with a better or worse performance during crisis times, which has important implications for investors and managers.     

Does Shareholder Composition Matter? Evidence from the Market Reaction to Corporate Earnings Announcements

We examine whether institutional ownership composition is related to parameters of the market reaction to negative earnings announcements. When firms report earnings below analysts' expectations, the stock price response is more negative for firms with higher levels of ownership by momentum or aggressive growth investors. There is no evidence, however, that these institutions cause an “overreaction” to earnings news. Ownership structure is also related to trading volume and to stock price volatility on days around earnings announcements. Our findings are consistent with the idea that the composition of institutional shareholders effects stock price behavior around the release of corporate information.     

Internal capital markets,corporate investment,and the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from Korean business groups

This paper examines whether the investment of Korean business group (“chaebol”) affiliated firms behaved differently from that of non-chaebol firms in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. I show that chaebol firms cut back investment to a lesser degree than similar non-chaebol firms. Chaebol firms with higher-than-industry-median market-to-book ratios invested more and experienced less decline in their stock prices, while I do not find such relationships for non-chaebol firms. This paper provides evidence that chaebol internal capital markets helped mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic on firm investment and value.     

REVISITING MARKET EFFICIENCY: THE STOCK MARKET AS A COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEM

Well‐functioning financial markets are key to efficient resource allocation in a capitalist economy. While many managers express reservations about the accuracy of stock prices, most academics and practitioners agree that markets are efficient by some reasonable operational criterion. But if standard capital markets theory provides reasonably good predictions under “normal” circumstances, researchers have also discovered a number of “anomalies”—cases where the empirical data appear sharply at odds with the theory. Most notable are the occasional bursts of extreme stock price volatility (including the recent boom‐and‐bust cycle in the NASDAQ) and the limited success of the Capital Asset Pricing Model in accounting for the actual risk‐return behavior of stocks. This article addresses the question of how the market's efficiency arises. The central message is that managers can better understand markets as a complex adaptive system. Such systems start with a “heterogeneous” group of investors, whose interaction leads to “self‐organization” into groups with different investment styles. In contrast to market efficiency, where “marginal” investors are all assumed to be rational and well‐informed, the interaction of investors with different “decision rules” in a complex adaptive system creates a market that has properties and characteristics distinct from the individuals it comprises. For example, simulations of the behavior of complex adaptive systems suggest that, in most cases, the collective market will prove to be smarter than the average investor. But, on occasion, herding behavior by investors leads to “imbalances”—and, hence, to events like the crash of '87 and the recent plunge in the NASDAQ. In addition to its grounding in more realistic assumptions about the behavior of individual investors, the new model of complex adaptive systems offers predictions that are in some respects more consistent with empirical findings. Most important, the new model accommodates larger‐than‐normal stock price volatility (in statistician's terms, “fat‐tailed” distributions of prices) far more readily than standard efficient market theory. And to the extent that it does a better job of explaining volatility, this new model of investor behavior is likely to have implications for two key areas of corporate financial practice: risk management and investor relations. But even so, the new model leaves one of the main premises of modern finance theory largely intact–that the most reliable basis for valuing a company's stock is its discounted cash flow.     

Starts and refutations of the Covid-19 rumors: Evidence from the reaction of the stock market

By manually collecting data on Internet-based rumors concerning COVID-19, we investigate the market reactions to the spread of such rumors and the government’s refutation of them. We find that frightening (reassuring) rumors have a negative (positive) impact on investors. The refutation of frightening rumors triggers a positive market response, whereas the refutation of reassuring rumors does not cause a significant market reaction. Further analysis shows that there is a stock price drift when frightening rumors are refuted by governments. Our conclusions remain robust after considering endogeneity. Our findings support the notion that epidemic-related rumors affect investors’ decisions, which add to literatures of the market responses of companies in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and provide incremental evidence for the “the spiral of silence” theory.     

Dividends and share repurchases during the COVID-19 economic crisis

In this article, we examine dividends and share repurchases of S&P 1500 firms during the COVID-19 crisis characterized by the stock market crash and a relatively quick stock price recovery propelled by technology stocks. We find that the great majority of firms either maintain or increase the level of dividends during the crisis period. Yet, the relation between the dividend payout and reported earnings is negative and significant. This relation also holds for other types of payouts, including share repurchases and special dividends. Moreover, we find that both forecasted and realized earnings of up to 1 year into the future are negatively associated with current dividends, implying that existing payout policies are unsustainable in the longer term. Surprisingly, the difference-in-differences test shows that firms strongly affected by the COVID-19 crisis have higher dividend payouts (relative to net earnings) compared to unaffected firms. The same test indicates that strongly affected firms significantly reduce repurchases.     

What's in a “China” Name? A Test of Investor Attention Hypothesis

We study whether a firm's name affects investor attention and firm valuation. Some Chinese firms listed on US stock exchanges have the word “China” included in their company names (“China‐name stocks”), while others do not (“non‐China‐name stocks”). During the 2007 China stock market boom, we find that China‐name stocks significantly outperform non‐China‐name stocks. This is not due to differences in firm characteristics, risk, or liquidity. The “China‐name effect” is largely consistent with the investor attention hypothesis that price pressure caused by increased investor attention on China‐name stocks during the boom period drives up China‐name stocks more than non‐China‐name stocks.     

Stock splits in a neutral transaction cost environment: Evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange

This paper investigates the value consequences of stock splits in a market where institutional characteristics minimize the effects of price realignment and signaling. We find that despite these market conditions, stock splits by Greek firms produce positive price reaction around the announcement day. Further, split factors are directly related to pre-split price levels and deviations from average market prices. Splitting firms also realize earnings improvement which is not reversed after the stock split. Consistent with these findings, market reaction is inversely related to the post-split target price and the size of firm. We interpret this as evidence in support, respectively, of the self-selection and “attention-gathering” hypotheses. As reported in other international studies, there is no evidence of liquidity improvement.     

Short-selling activities in the time of COVID-19

This study examines the daily short-selling activities in the U.S. market during the early 2020 outbreak of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Our findings indicate firms that are more sensitive to the shock (i.e., with high foreign exposure, low financial or operating flexibility, or high supply-chain exposure) were shorted more heavily. Moreover, short-selling activities during the COVID-19 pandemic, blamed for triggering stock market crashes, were primarily concentrated around overpriced stocks. This finding supports the argument that short selling plays a prominent role in improving price discoveries. Our research provides timely empirical evidence supporting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) non-intervention approach in banning short selling in the U.S. market.     

Heterogeneity of Funds and Information Disclosure: Evidence

Institutional investors, especially public funds, play an important role in governing listed firms as they grow in Chinese stock markets. We classify each fund as “dedicated,” “transient,” or “mixed,” according to the concentration, turnover, and profit sensitivity of their stock holdings. We find that listed firms with more shares held by dedicated funds have a higher disclosure quality, while firms with more shares held by transient funds have a lower disclosure quality. These findings are consistent in different model settings. In addition, dedicated funds improve the disclosure quality of non-state-owned enterprises more than state-owned enterprises. Dedicated funds can benefit from the lower debt-financing cost and higher stock liquidity of firms with better disclosure quality.     

Investor attention and global market returns during the COVID-19 crisis

The financial market response to the COVID-19 pandemic provides the first example of a market crash instigated by a health crisis. As such, the crisis provides a unique setting in which to examine the market response to changes in investor attention. We utilise Google search volume (GSV) as a proxy for investor attention. GSV for the “coronavirus” keyword increases markedly from late-February and peaks in mid-March before declining substantially. Our results are broadly consistent with Da, Engelberg, and Gao (2015), indicating that GSV is primarily a proxy for the attention of retail investors and confirming that investor attention negatively influences global stock returns during this crisis period. A rise in the number of internet searches during the COVID-19 crisis induces a faster rate of information flow into financial markets and so is also associated with higher volatility. The identified relationships are economically and statistically significant even after controlling for the number of COVID-19 cases and macroeconomic effects. Increases in GSV have less impact on government bond yields where the limited role of GSV is likely due to lower participation of retail investors. The results suggest that, rather than searching for information on potential stocks to buy (Barber & Odean, 2008), retail investors are searching for information to resolve uncertainty about household FEARS (Da et al., 2015) during the COVID-19 crisis.     

Impact of COVID-19 on stock market efficiency: Evidence from developed countries

This study investigates the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on stock market efficiency for six hard-hit developed countries, namely, the United States (US), Spain, the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, France, and Germany. Applying the wild bootstrap automatic variance ratio test on daily stock market data from July 29, 2019 to January 25, 2021, it is found that all stock markets used in this study deviate from market efficiency during some periods of the pandemic. Deviations from market efficiency are seen more in the stock markets of the US and UK during the COVID-19 outbreak than in other stock markets. These results are strengthened when a different econometric method, the automatic portmanteau test, is used. The findings of this study indicate an increasing chance for stock price predictions and abnormal returns during the COVID-19 pandemic.     

COVID-19 and A-share banks' stock price volatility: From the perspective of the epidemic evolution in China and the US

With a financial market dominated by indirect financing, China's banking system played a critical role in the government's response to COVID-19, which piqued our interest in the short-term impact of COVID-19 on the risk of China's banks. Examining the stock price of A-share listed banks and the number of confirmed cases in China and the US during the short time window surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic's outbreak, this study reveals that COVID-19 increased the A-share banking price volatility in both China and the US, reflecting a strong spillover effect of the US economic and financial system. Furthermore, COVID-19 in China has a smaller impact on the stock price volatility of China's state-owned banks (SOBs) than that of medium- and small-sized (M&S) banks, reflecting the higher risk resistance capability of large SOBs. Further analysis confirms that the impact primarily reflected systematic risk rather than idiosyncratic risk, as small and micro enterprises and M&S banks received more targeted financial support from the government. In contrast, large banks took on more responsibilities in the emergency financial stimulus, narrowing the idiosyncratic risk gap between the two types of banks and allowing the banking industry to better play its core role in the recovery of real economy in China. These findings will assist us in better understanding the effectiveness of financial assistance policies during the epidemic and will provide insights for future policymaking during similar crises.     

The Wealth Effect of Demutualization: Evidence From the U.S. Property-Liability and Life Insurance Industries

This study examines the wealth effect of demutualization initial public offerings (IPOs) by investigating underpricing and postconversion long‐run stock performance. Our results suggest that there is more “money left on the table” for demutualized insurers than for non‐demutualized insurers. We show that higher underpricing for demutualized firms can be explained by greater market demand, market sentiment, and the size of the offering. Further, contrary to previous research reporting an average underperformance of industrial IPOs, we show that demutualization IPOs outperform non‐IPO firms with comparable size and book‐to‐market ratios and non‐demutualized insurers. We present evidence that the outperformance in stock returns is mainly attributable to improvement in post‐demutualization operating performance and demand at the time of the IPOs. The combined results of underpricing and long‐term performance suggest that the wealth of policyholders who choose stock rather than cash or policy credits is not harmed by demutualization. Stockholders who purchase demutualized company shares either during or after the IPO have earned superior returns. Our findings are consistent with the efficiency improvement hypothesis.     

Does Risk Management Add Value? A Survey of the Evidence

The fact that 92% of the world's 500 largest companies recently reported using derivatives suggests that corporate managers believe financial risk management can increase shareholder value. Surveys of finance academics indicate that they too believe that corporate risk management is, on the whole, a valueadding activity. This article provides an overview of almost 30 years of broadbased, stock‐market‐oriented academic studies that address one or more of the following questions:

• ? Are interest rate, exchange rate, and commodity price risks reflected in stock price movements?
• ? Is volatility in corporate earnings and cash flows related in a systematic way to corporate market values?
• ? Is the corporate use of derivatives associated with reduced risk and higher market values?

The answer to the first question, at least in the case of financial institutions and interest rate risk, is a definite yes; all studies with this focus find that the stock returns of financial firms are clearly sensitive to interest rate changes. The stock returns of industrial companies exhibit no pronounced interest rate exposure (at least as a group), but industrial firms with significant cross‐border revenues and costs show considerable sensitivity to exchange rates (although such sensitivity actually appears to be reduced by the size and geographical diversity of the largest multinationals). What's more, the corporate use of derivatives to hedge interest rate and currency exposures appears to be associated with lower sensitivity of stock returns to interest rate and FX changes. But does the resulting reduction in price sensitivity affect value—and, if so, how? Consistent with a widely cited theory that risk management increases value by limiting the corporate “underinvestment problem,” a number of studies show a correlation between lower cash flow volatility and higher corporate investment and market values. The article also cites a small but growing group of studies that show a strong positive association between derivatives use and stock price performance (typically measured using price‐to‐book ratios). But perhaps the nearest the research comes to establishing causality are two studies—one of companies that hedge FX exposures and another of airlines' hedging of fuel costs—that show that, in industries where hedging with derivatives is common, companies that hedge outperform companies that don't.     

重大突发公共卫生事件下的金融市场反应

本文旨在评估金融市场对重大突发公共卫生事件的反应,尤其是上市公司所在地的公共治理能力是否会影响上市公司股票收益率。其中,城市公共治理能力以基于实时数据计算的防疫能力和复工复产能力指标来刻画。主要发现如下:第一,防疫能力会影响投资者情绪,但不会直接影响股票收益率;第二,所在地复工复产能力对股票收益率存在正向影响;第三,机制分析表明,经营基本面更容易受疫情影响的企业,如小企业、成长型企业、所在地数字金融基础设施较差的企业,其股票收益率对当地复工复产能力的反应更敏感。本文结论表明,在全国一盘棋的抗疫努力下,投资者对于战胜疫情有信心,短期内复工复产能力对金融市场更重要。从应对措施来看,短期内可对比较脆弱的企业实施精准果断的帮扶,长期内可考虑加强地区防疫能力建设和数字基础设施建设。     

Corporate governance and firm value during a financial crisis

The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effects of management ownership and other corporate governance variables on Hong Kong firms’ stock performance following the onset of the Asian Financial Crisis (1997–98). Our results show that Hong Kong firms with a more concentrated management (executive board) ownership displayed better capital market performance during the 13-month period of the Crisis. We also find that firms with more equity ownership by non-executive directors, and in which the positions of CEO and board chairperson were occupied by the same individual experienced a smaller stock price decline. Our findings are consistent with the notion that there is a greater alignment of insiders with outside owners, rather than the expropriation by insiders who have the opportunity to divert value, for firms with higher levels of management ownership during an unexpected capital market crisis.     

Credit Contagion Channels: Market Microstructure Evidence from Lehman Brothers’ Bankruptcy

Immediately after Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy, many firms disclosed their financial exposure (or lack thereof) to Lehman. This offers a clean setting to test two credit contagion channels through which a financial firm's bankruptcy can affect other firms—“counterparty risk” and “information transmission” channels. Using market microstructure variables to measure the various dimensions of contagion effects, we provide robust evidence supporting the significance of counterparty risk. Firms with exposure to Lehman suffered more severe negative effects—wider bid‐ask spread, higher price impact, greater information asymmetry, and greater selling pressure—than unexposed firms. We find mixed evidence regarding the information transmission hypothesis.     

The COVID-19 pandemic: How important is face-to-face interaction for information dissemination?

Does face-to-face interaction still facilitate information transfer despite proliferating communication technologies? We use the COVID-19 collapse in such interactions to examine their influence on information flow in the stock market around earnings announcements. Using daily, county-level abnormal mobility of U.S. residents to proxy for face-to-face interaction, we find that firms located in counties with lower abnormal mobility experience a weaker immediate price reaction to earnings announcements and a larger post-announcement drift. Our findings suggest that lower face-to-face interactions dampen price discovery in financial markets, and that investor attention is a potential mechanism of this effect.