Front-Running by Mutual Fund Managers: A Mixed Bag

This paper evaluates the welfare implications of front-runningby mutual fund managers. It extends the model of Kyle (1985)to a situation in which the insider with fundamentals-informationcompetes against an insider with trade-information and in whichnoise trading is endogenized. Noise traders are small investorstrading through mutual funds to hedge non-tradable or illiquidassets. The insider with trade-information is one of the fundmanagers. We find that her front-running activity reduces theliquidity costs of her customers, but it also reduces theirhedging benefits. As a result, the customers of the front-runningmanager may be worse off and place smaller orders. The oppositeis true, however, for those investors who are not subject tofront-running. In aggregate, front-running has either no orpositive consequences for welfare. JEL Classification. G14,G23.     

Leveraged investor disclosures and concentrations of risk

We analyze a model where investors (e.g., hedge funds) need to borrow from lenders with heterogeneous risk-exposures and risk-management motives. Investors may obtain advantageous terms of borrowing by disclosing their investment strategy, thereby revealing its correlation to the lender's existing risk exposure. Investors risk being “front-run” by their lender if they disclose, however. We show that in the presence of front-running, the “unraveling” result of full disclosure may not hold. In addition, disclosure regulation results in a loss of welfare since investors compelled to disclose will mitigate front-running by choosing a lender with sufficiently high correlation, thus exacerbating concentrations of risk.