The strong bias in favor of domestic securities is a well-documented characteristic of international investment portfolios, yet we show that the preference for investing close to home also applies to portfolios of domestic stocks. Specifically, U.S. investment managers exhibit a strong preference for locally headquartered firms, particularly small, highly levered firms that produce nontraded goods. These results suggest that asymmetric information between local and nonlocal investors may drive the preference for geographically proximate investments, and the relation between investment proximity and firm size and leverage may shed light on several well-documented asset pricing anomalies.

This paper examines asset fire sales, and institutional price pressure more generally, in equity markets, using market prices of mutual fund transactions caused by capital flows from 1980 to 2003.Funds experiencing large outflows (inflows) tend to decrease (increase) existing positions, which creates price pressure in the securities held in common by these funds. Forced transactions represent a significant cost of financial distress for mutual funds. We find that investors who trade against constrained mutual funds earn highly significant returns for providing liquidity when few others are willing or able. In addition, future flow-driven transactions are predictable, creating an incentive to front-run the anticipated forced trades by funds experiencing extreme capital flows.

This paper examines expected option returns in the context of mainstream assetpricing theory. Under mild assumptions, expected call returns exceed those of the underlying security and increase with the strike price. Likewise, expected put returns are below the risk-free rate and increase with the strike price. S&P index option returns consistently exhibit these characteristics. Under stronger assumptions, expected option returns vary linearly with option betas. However, zero-beta, at-the-money straddle positions produce average losses of approximately three percent per week. This suggests that some additional factor, such as systematic stochastic volatility, is priced in option returns.ASSET-PRICING THEORY CLAIMS that options, like all other risky securities in an economy, compensate their holders with expected returns that are in accordance with the systematic risks they require their holders to bear. Options which deliver payoffs in bad states of the world will earn lower returns than those that deliver their payoffs in good states. The enormous popularity of option contracts has arisen, in part, because options allow investors to precisely tailor their risks to their preferences. With this in mind, a study of option returns would appear to offer a unique opportunity in which to investigate what kinds of risks are priced in an economy. However, although researchers have paid substantial attention to the pricing of options conditional on the prices of their underlying securities, relatively little work has focused on understanding the nature of option returns.Understanding option returns is important because options have remarkable risk-return characteristics. Option risk can be thought of as consisting of two separable components. The first component is a leverage effect. Because an option allows investors to assume much of the risk of the option's underlying asset with a relatively small investment, options have characteristics similar to levered positions in the underlying asset. The BlackScholes model implies that this implicit leverage, which is ref lected in option betas, should be priced. We show that this leverage should be priced under

Applying a geographic lens to mutual fund performance, this study finds that fund managers earn substantial abnormal returns in nearby investments. These returns are particularly strong among funds that are small and old, focus on few holdings, and operate out of remote areas. Furthermore, we find that while the average fund exhibits only a modest bias toward local stocks, certain funds strongly bias their holdings locally and exhibit even greater local performance. Finally, we demonstrate that the extent to which a firm is held by nearby investors is positively related to its future expected return. Our results suggest that investors trade local securities at an informational advantage and point toward a link between such trading and asset prices.

No abstract