View All Issues

Volume 56: Issue 4 (August 2001)


Front Matter

Pages: i-vii  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2001.tb00689.x  |  Cited by: 0


Back Matter

Pages: viii-xxiii  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2001.tb00692.x  |  Cited by: 0


Do Financial Institutions Matter?

Pages: 1165-1175  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00361  |  Cited by: 78

Franklin Allen

In standard asset pricing theory, investors are assumed to invest directly in financial markets. The role of financial institutions is ignored. The focus in corporate finance is on agency problems. How do you ensure that managers act in shareholders' interests? There is an inconsistency in assuming that when you give your money to a financial institution there is no agency problem, but when you give it to a firm there is. It is argued that both areas need to take proper account of the role of financial institutions and markets. Appropriate concepts for analyzing particular situations should be used.


Merton H. Miller

Pages: 1177-1177  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00362  |  Cited by: 0

George M. Constantinides


Merton H. Miller: Memories of a Great Mentor and Leader

Pages: 1179-1182  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00363  |  Cited by: 0

Myron S. Scholes


Merton H. Miller: His Contribution to Financial Economics

Pages: 1183-1206  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00364  |  Cited by: 5

Bruce D. Grundy

Merton Miller's status as a father of finance reflects the academic depth, breadth, and rigor of his writings and two important facets of his character. Merton was a man of great warmth and humor. He communicated his often challenging views via memorable phrases and anecdotes that have become part of the everyday language of the profession. Merton was also a man of great dedication. The whole profession has benefited from his devotion to his doctoral students, to his colleagues, and to his coauthors. This essay demonstrates how Merton's admiration for markets provided the foundation for all his research.


The Equity Premium and Structural Breaks

Pages: 1207-1239  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00365  |  Cited by: 91

Ľluboš Pástor, Robert F. Stambaugh

A long return history is useful in estimating the current equity premium even if the historical distribution has experienced structural breaks. The long series helps not only if the timing of breaks is uncertain but also if one believes that large shifts in the premium are unlikely or that the premium is associated, in part, with volatility. Our framework incorporates these features along with a belief that prices are likely to move opposite to contemporaneous shifts in the premium. The estimated premium since 1834 fluctuates between 4 and 6 percent and exhibits its sharpest drop in the last decade.


Discussion

Pages: 1240-1245  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00366  |  Cited by: 4

Zhenyu Wang


Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns

Pages: 1247-1292  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00367  |  Cited by: 275

Nicholas Barberis, Ming Huang

We study equilibrium firm‐level stock returns in two economies: one in which investors are loss averse over the fluctuations of their stock portfolio, and another in which they are loss averse over the fluctuations of individual stocks that they own. Both approaches can shed light on empirical phenomena, but we find the second approach to be more successful: In that economy, the typical individual stock return has a high mean and excess volatility, and there is a large value premium in the cross section which can, to some extent, be captured by a commonly used multifactor model.


Discussion

Pages: 1292-1295  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00368  |  Cited by: 2

M.J. Brennan


Variable Selection for Portfolio Choice

Pages: 1297-1351  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00369  |  Cited by: 149

Yacine AÏT-SAHALI, Michael W. Brandt

We study asset allocation when the conditional moments of returns are partly predictable. Rather than first model the return distribution and subsequently characterize the portfolio choice, we determine directly the dependence of the optimal portfolio weights on the predictive variables. We combine the predictors into a single index that best captures time variations in investment opportunities. This index helps investors determine which economic variables they should track and, more importantly, in what combination. We consider investors with both expected utility (mean variance and CRRA) and nonexpected utility (ambiguity aversion and prospect theory) objectives and characterize their market timing, horizon effects, and hedging demands.


Discussion

Pages: 1351-1355  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00370  |  Cited by: 0

Jessica A. Wachter


Expectations Hypotheses Tests

Pages: 1357-1394  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00371  |  Cited by: 104

Geert Bekaert, Robert J. Hodrick


Discussion

Pages: 1394-1399  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00372  |  Cited by: 0

Matthew Richardson


Contagion as a Wealth Effect

Pages: 1401-1440  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00373  |  Cited by: 281

Albert S. Kyle, Wei Xiong

Financial contagion is described as a wealth effect in a continuous‐time model with two risky assets and three types of traders. Noise traders trade randomly in one market. Long‐term investors provide liquidity using a linear rule based on fundamentals. Convergence traders with logarithmic utility trade optimally in both markets. Asset price dynamics are endogenously determined (numerically) as functions of endogenous wealth and exogenous noise. When convergence traders lose money, they liquidate positions in both markets. This creates contagion, in that returns become more volatile and more correlated. Contagion reduces benefits from portfolio diversification and raises issues for risk management.


Discussion

Pages: 1440-1443  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00374  |  Cited by: 2

Stephen A. Ross


Automated Versus Floor Trading: An Analysis of Execution Costs on the Paris and New York Exchanges

Pages: 1445-1485  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00375  |  Cited by: 83

Kumar Venkataraman

A global trend towards automated trading systems raises the important question of whether execution costs are, in fact, lower than on trading floors. This paper compares the trade execution costs of similar stocks in an automated trading structure (Paris Bourse) and a floor‐based trading structure (NYSE). Results indicate that execution costs are higher in Paris than in New York after controlling for differences in adverse selection, relative tick size, and economic attributes across samples. These results suggest that the present form of the automated trading system may not be able to fully replicate the benefits of human intermediation on a trading floor.


Discussion

Pages: 1485-1488  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00376  |  Cited by: 4

Ananth Madhavan


The Bright Side of Internal Capital Markets

Pages: 1489-1528  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00377  |  Cited by: 80

Naveen Khanna, Sheri Tice

We examine capital expenditure decisions of discount firms in response to WalMart's entry into their markets. Before WalMart's entry, focused incumbents and discount divisions of diversified incumbents are similar in size, geographic dispersion, and firm debt levels. However, discount divisions of diversified firms are significantly more productive. After WalMart's entry, diversified firms are quicker to either exit the discount business or stay and fight. Also, their capital expenditures are more sensitive to the productivity of their discount business. Internal capital markets function well, as transfers are away from the worsening discount divisions. It appears diversified firms make better investment decisions.


Discussion

Pages: 1528-1531  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00378  |  Cited by: 0

Paola Sapienza


Investor Psychology and Asset Pricing

Pages: 1533-1597  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00379  |  Cited by: 652

David Hirshleifer

The basic paradigm of asset pricing is in vibrant flux. The purely rational approach is being subsumed by a broader approach based upon the psychology of investors. In this approach, security expected returns are determined by both risk and misvaluation. This survey sketches a framework for understanding decision biases, evaluates the a priori arguments and the capital market evidence bearing on the importance of investor psychology for security prices, and reviews recent models.


Addendum to the 2001 Minutes

Pages: 1601-1601  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2001.tb00693.x  |  Cited by: 0


Report of the Editor ofThe Journal of Financefor the year 2000

Pages: 1607-1620  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00382  |  Cited by: 0

Richard C. Green


Report of the Representative to the National Bureal of Economic Research

Pages: 1621-1622  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/0022-1082.00383  |  Cited by: 0

Robert S. Hamada


ANNOUNCEMENTS

Pages: 1623-1625  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2001.tb00690.x  |  Cited by: 0


ASSOCIATION MEETINGS

Pages: 1627-1628  |  Published: 8/2001  |  DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2001.tb00691.x  |  Cited by: 0