Liquidity: Urban versus rural firms |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Cass Business School, City University London, 106 Bunhill Row, EC1Y 8TZ London, UK;2. KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;3. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, One Exchange Square, EC2A 2JN London, UK;4. De Nederlandsche Bank, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;5. Tilburg University, Department of Finance, Warandelaan 2, 5037 AB Tilburg, the Netherlands;6. Centre for Economic Policy Research, 33 Great Sutton Street, EC1V 0DX London, UK;1. School of Finance, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 611130, China;2. East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, China;3. Research Institute of Economics and Management, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 611130, China;4. Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University, 178899, Singapore;1. Bank of Sharjah Chair, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates;2. Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, 1014 Greene Street, Columbia, SC 29208, USA;3. School of Accounting and Finance, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong;1. Harvard Business School, United States;2. UCSD Rady School of Management, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093, United States;3. Rotterdam School of Management, The Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | Our paper examines the impact of geographic location on liquidity for U.S. rural- and urban-based companies. Even after adjusting for size and other factors, rural firms trade much less, are covered by fewer analysts, and are owned by fewer institutions than urban firms. Trading costs are higher for rural Nasdaq firms, and volume that can be attributed to marketwide factors is lower for rural stocks. The findings add to our understanding of the way that access to information and familiarity affect liquidity. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
