We examine the effects of the world’s first comply-or-explain dividend regulation in China’s Shanghai Stock Exchange, which requires firms to either pay at least 30% of profits as dividends or explain the use of funds. We find that many firms increased their payout ratio to comply, by increasing dividends or decreasing earnings. Firms with high profitability, state ownership, and fewer agency conflicts were more likely to comply. However, complying firms subsequently issued more debt and had a decline in accounting performance and firm valuation. The evidence suggests that the comply-or-explain regulation increased firms’ dividends at substantial costs.

By analyzing a hand-collected transaction-level dataset on the finance leases of China’s public firms for the period 2007-2019, this paper sheds light on China’s financial leasing industry. We find that banks use their affiliated leasing firms to provide credit to constrained clients in order to circumvent the government’s targeted monetary tightening policy. Finance Lease offsets the expected decline in traditional bank loans in affected industries, and therefore hampers the effectiveness of the monetary policy. Although this regulatory arbitrage may accumulate systemic risk at the macro level, bank-affiliated leasing firms charge lower leasing rate and exert tighter risk control than non-bank-affiliated leasing firms at the micro level. This finding indicates that banks use finance leases as a channel to keep low-risk clients rather than to make excessive profit.

International debt financing is important for the development of emerging economies, as it allows firms from emerging markets (EMs) to have access to greater liquidity, a wider investor base, and more effective laws and regulations. However, the financial crisis in the late 1990s, coupled with recent rapid growth in corporate leverage in emerging markets, have forced policy makers to re-evaluate the risk of offshore financing and its role in EMs’ development. In this paper, we investigate the bonding/signaling effect of offshore financing to those firms in subsequent domestic market financing through the improvement of information disclosure and creditability. With a comprehensive database covering bond issuances by Chinese firms both in domestic and offshore markets over the period of 2010 to 2015, we find that: 1) The offshore bond issuance has a positive bonding/signaling effect on firm’s subsequent debt-raising in the domestic market in terms of longer maturity of corporate issuance and lower funding cost. 2) If the offshore issuance occurs in a stricter jurisdiction providing more effective investor protection and stringent disclosure, or with an international investment-grade rating, it will have a positive influence on firm’s subsequent debt-raising domestically. 3) Offshore debt financing improves the long-term firm performance, especially for financially-constrained companies. Our study presents new evidence for the role of the offshore market in promoting both the domestic institutional environment as well as firm growth, and provides policy implications for developing a broad offshore corporate bond market in emerging economies.

We compare the differences between the Chinese and U.S. bond risk premia. We find that the expectations hypothesis fails in the two bond markets: We identify the Chinese and U.S. bond time-varying risk premia by forecasting the corresponding excess return of n-year bond using the n-year forward rate and n-year forward spread, respectively. To focus on the systematical forecasts, we then combine the forward rates at different maturities as the return-forecast factors. Unlike the one-factor model introduced by Cochrane and Piazzesi (2005), a two-factor model including level- and slope-based factors explains significantly Chinese bond premia with R2 up to 68%. More importantly, the slope-based factor sharply improves the performance of test. The results are robust with respect to measurement errors, multicollinearity and small-sample biases. Out-of-sample tests show that, in recent years, the U.S. bond market changes drastically, and tends to be like the Chinese market. We use the empirical results to calibrate the parameters of affine model, and find that the differences of bond premia between the two markets are caused by the differences of dynamics of state variables and risk attitude of investor.

This paper studies the information interpretation of return synchronicity in the context of corporate bond market and examines the specific event intensity rationale that underlie the relationship between bond synchronicity and bond level information environment. We find that investment-grade bonds, bonds without rating splits, and bonds issued by public firms present higher levels of bond return synchronicity. These results hold after we control for bond level characteristics, industry and year fixed effects. By using credit rating change announcements as a unique measure of bond specific event intensity, we corroborate that security under better information environment has lower likelihood of specific event surprise occurrence, and thus is more synchronous with the market. We also verify that once rating change announcements did take place, the corresponding return synchronicity would be lower. Such impact would be more pronounced when the rating is downgraded compared with upgrade rating changes.

Using a proprietary dataset from 2016 to 2019, we find that order flows from foreign investors, facilitated by regulatory liberalization through several channels, present strong predictive power for future stock returns in the Chinese market. Most surprisingly, foreign investors possess the ability to process local firm-level public news, whereas their informational advantages regarding global market-level information are relatively muted. Further, the predictive power of foreign investors is particularly strong on large price movement days when the implications of firm-level information is likely most pronounced. Finally, regulatory reforms that generally relax investment access requirements further improve foreign investors’ predictive power

We examine how sell-side equity analysts strategically disclose information of differing quality to the public versus the buy-side mutual fund managers to whom they are connected. We consider cases in which analysts recommend that the public buys a stock, but some fund managers sell it. We measure favor trading using mutual fund managers’ votes for analysts in a Chinese “star analyst” competition. We find that managers are more likely to vote for analysts who exhibit more “say-buy/whisper-sell” behavior with these managers. This suggests that analysts introduce noise in their public recommendations, making the more-precise information provided to their private clients more valuable. Analysts’ say-buy/whisper-sell behavior results in information asymmetry: the positive-recommendation stocks bought by the managers who vote for the analysts outperform the stocks sold by these managers after the recommendation dates. Our findings help explain several puzzles regarding analysts’ public recommendations.

We document a novel platform effect caused by the emergence of FinTech platforms in financial intermediation. In China, platform distributions of mutual funds emerged in 2012 and grew quickly into a formidable presence. Utilizing the staggered entrance of funds onto platforms, we find a marked increase of performance-chasing, driven by the centralized information flow unique to FinTech platforms. This pattern is further confirmed using proprietary data from a top platform. Examining the platform impact on fund managers, we find that, incentivized by the amplified performance-chasing, fund managers increase risk taking to enhance their probability of getting onto the top ranking.

Exploiting staggered COVID-19 lockdowns and reopening across different regions in China, we study how lockdowns affect the investment decisions of venture capital (VC) investors and whether such changes are temporary or enduring in the post-pandemic era. Contrary to the conventional wisdom that lockdowns exacerbate the “tyranny of distance” (i.e., VCs avoid investing in remote ventures), our findings suggest the “death of distance”: VCs invest in remoter ventures during a lockdown and such effects persist even after the economy reopens. Such lockdown effects are more pronounced when there is better internet infrastructure, when the level of information asymmetry between VCs and entrepreneurs is lower, and when VCs are more experienced. The lockdown effects can be explained by the advancement and adoption of remote communication technology as a response to the social distancing requirements. As geographic boundaries of VC investment are shattered by remote communication technology, local competition among VCs has been intensified, the monopoly power of VCs has been curtailed, and the regional inequality of entrepreneurial access to VC financing has been mitigated.

We examine the impact of mixed ownership on the performance of venture capital (VC) firms in China. We use successful/unsuccessful exits from VC-financed entrepreneurial companies and number of patent applications by VC-financed companies as proxies for VC firms’ performance. Consistent with existing research on the inferior performance of SOEs relative to non-SOEs, we find that on average government-controlled VC firms (GVCs) underperform domestic private investors-controlled VC firms (PVCs). More importantly, we find that introducing minority private investors (i.e., mixed ownership) helps improve the performance of GVCs. However, we find no evidence that introducing minority government investors (i.e., mixed ownership) helps improve the performance of PVCs. Our results provide relevant information to the ongoing debate on the role of the government investors and private investors in developing the VC industry in emerging markets.