We test for firm-level asset investment effects in returns by examining the crosssectional relation between firm asset growth and subsequent stock returns. Asset growth rates are strong predictors of future abnormal returns. Asset growth retains its forecasting ability even on large capitalization stocks. When we compare asset growth rates with the previously documented determinants of the cross-section of returns (i.e., book-to-market ratios, firm capitalization, lagged returns, accruals, and other growth measures), we find that a firm's annual asset growth rate emerges as an economically and statistically significant predictor of the cross-section of U.S. stock returns.ONE OF THE PRIMARY FUNCTIONS OF CAPITAL MARKETS is the efficient pricing of real investment. As companies acquire and dispose of assets, economic efficiency demands that the market appropriately capitalizes such transactions. Yet, growing evidence identifies an important bias in the market's capitalization of corporate asset investment and disinvestment. The findings suggest that corporate events associated with asset expansion (i.e., acquisitions, public equity offerings, public debt offerings, and bank loan initiations) tend to be followed by periods of abnormally low returns, whereas events associated with asset contraction (i.e., spinoffs, share repurchases, debt prepayments, and dividend initiations) tend to be followed by periods of abnormally high returns.

We test overreaction theories of short-run momentum and long-run reversal in the cross section of stock returns. Momentum profits depend on the state of the market, as predicted. From 1929 to 1995, the mean monthly momentum profit following positive market returns is 0.93%, whereas the mean profit following negative market returns is −0.37%. The up-market momentum reverses in the long-run. Our results are robust to the conditioning information in macroeconomic factors. Moreover, we find that macroeconomic factors are unable to explain momentum profits after simple methodological adjustments to take account of microstructure concerns. SEVERAL BEHAVIORAL THEORIES have been developed to jointly explain the shortrun cross-sectional momentum in stock returns documented by Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) and the long-run cross-sectional reversal in stock returns documented by DeBondt and Thaler (1985).1 Daniel, Hirshleifer, and Subrahmanyam (1998; hereafter DHS) and Hong and Stein (1999; hereafter HS) each employ different behavioral or cognitive biases to explain these anomalies.

We develop a new and comprehensive database of firm-level contributions to U.S. political campaigns from 1979 to 2004. We construct variables that measure the extent of firm support for candidates. We find that these measures are positively and significantly correlated with the cross-section of future returns. The effect is strongest for firms that support a greater number of candidates that hold office in the same state that the firm is based. In addition, there are stronger effects for firms whose contributions are slanted toward House candidates and Democrats. Copyright (c) 2010 the American Finance Association.

We document a striking positive stock price reaction to the announcement of corporate name changes to Internet-related dotcom names. This "dotcom" effect produces cumulative abnormal returns on the order of 74 percent for the 10 days surrounding the announcement day. The effect does not appear to be transitory; there is no evidence of a postannouncement negative drift. The announcement day effect is also similar across all firms, regardless of the firm's level of involvement with the Internet. A mere association with the Internet seems enough to provide a firm with a large and permanent value increase.The popular financial press has long argued that corporate name changes result in permanent value creation for firms. Analysts claim that investors prefer certain types of names, and that the value of a company's name should be ref lected in the stock price. However, the academic literature has found little evidence that the announcement of a name change results in a positive stock price reaction for the firm. Karpoff and Rankine~1994! find that companies changing their names earn a statistically insignificant excess return of 0.4 percent over a 2-day window around the announcement date. They also find that corporate name changes do not correspond to changes in the covariances of the firm's stock returns with other firms' returns in the same industry nor do they correspond to changes in earnings. Bosch and Hirscheỹ 1989! report that firms announcing name changes earn a statistically insignificant excess return of 1.62 percent in a 21-day period around the announcement date. They find a positive preannouncement effect followed by a negative postannouncement drift, which largely cancels the announcement effect.We investigate the valuation effects of one particular form of corporate name change-those of companies who add ".com" to their names. A number of popular press articles have reported extremely large returns earned

No abstract