This thesis provides an in-depth comparison of the attractiveness of leveraged buyout (LBO) transactions under low versus high interest rates. In particular, our analysis focuses on how London Interbank Offered Rates (LIBOR) affect internal rates of return for hypothetical LBO transactions, assuming financing structure and operational enhancements for the individual transactions are held constant. Given that LIBOR rates are currently at historically low levels, we model four hypothetical LBO transactions in the specialty retail space using both historically high and currently low LIBOR rates (for a total of eight model outputs). We quantify the extent to which high rates have the potential to decrease LBO value, while low rates may enhance value. Through this thesis, we have obtained a better understanding of LBO transaction modeling, an understanding that will make us more effective as professionals in investment banking. Finally, this thesis can serve as a step-by-step guide to LBOs for undergraduate finance students, particularly for members of the Investment Banking Industry Scholars (IBIS) program at Arizona State University.

This paper provides evidence through an event study, portfolio simulation, and regression analysis that insider trading, when appropriately aggregated, has predictive power for abnormal risk-adjusted returns on some country and sector exchange traded funds (ETFs). I examine ETFs because of their broad scope and liquidity. ETF markets are relatively efficient and, thus, the effects I document are unlikely to appear in ETF markets. My evidence that aggregated insider trading predicts abnormal returns in some ETFs suggests that aggregated insider trading is likely to have predictive power for financial assets traded in less efficient markets. My analysis depends on specialized insider trading data covering 88 countries is generously provided by 2iQ.

I study how the density of executive labor markets affects managerial incentives and thereby firm performance. I find that U.S. executive markets are locally segmented rather than nationally integrated, and that the density of a local market provides executives with non-compensation incentives. Empirical results show that in denser labor markets, executives face stronger performance-based dismissal threats as well as better outside opportunities. These incentives result in higher firm performance in denser markets, especially when executives have longer career horizons. Using state-level variation in the enforceability of covenants not to compete, I find that the positive effects of market density on incentive alignment and firm performance are stronger in markets where executives are freer to move. This evidence further supports the argument that local labor market density works as an external incentive alignment mechanism.

I examine the determinants and implications of the level of director monitoring. I use the distance between directors' domiciles and firm headquarters as a proxy for the level of monitoring and the introduction of a new airline route between director domicile and firm HQ as an exogenous shock to the level of monitoring. I find a strong relation between distance and both board meeting attendance and director membership on strategic versus monitoring committees. Increased monitoring, as measured by a reduction in effective distance, by way of addition of a direct flight, is associated with a 3% reduction in firm value. A reduction in effective distance is also associated with less risk-taking, lower stock return volatility, lower accounting return volatility, lower R&D; spending, fewer acquisitions, and fewer patents.

Mutual monitoring in a well-structured authority system can mitigate the agency problem. I empirically examine whether the number 2 executive in a firm, if given authority, incentive, and channels for communication and influence, is able to monitor and constrain the potentially self-interested CEO. I find strong evidence that: (1) measures of the presence and extent of mutual monitoring from the No. 2 executive are positively related to future firm value (Tobin's Q); (2) the beneficial effect is more pronounced for firms with weaker corporate governance or CEO incentive alignment, with stronger incentives for the No. 2 executives to monitor, and with higher information asymmetry between the boards and the CEOs; (3) such mutual monitoring reduces the CEO's ability to pursue the "quiet life" but has no effect on "empire building;" and (4) mutual monitoring is a substitute for other governance mechanisms. The results suggest that mutual monitoring by a No. 2 executive provides checks and balances on CEO power.

This paper examines dealers' inventory holding periods and the associated price markups on corporate bonds from 2003 to 2010. Changes in these measures explain a large part of the time series variation in aggregate corporate bond prices. In the cross-section, holding periods and markups overshadow extant liquidity measures and have significant explanatory power for individual bond prices. Both measures shed light on the credit spread puzzle: changes in credit spread are positively correlated with changes in holding periods and markups, and a large portion of credit spread changes is explained by them. The economic effects of holding periods and markups are particularly sharp during crisis periods.

This dissertation analyzes the reliability of reported employee stock option (ESO) expense, the determination of expected life of ESOs, motivations to manipulate ESO expense, and the impact of noise in ESO expense on subsequent stock price returns. Based on unique data, this is the first paper to measure average historical ESO life for all employees of a broad set of firms. I find average life has a mean of 4.12 years. Average life is reduced by 0.38 years per 10 percentage point increase in volatility, and industry effects explain an additional 7% of the variation. Reported expected life increases 0.37 years per year of historical life and an additional 0.16 years per year of age of the outstanding options. Deviations of reported volatility and life from benchmarks have positive correlations with deviations from own reporting history. Using stated assumptions rather than benchmark assumptions drops (increases) ESO expense by 8.3% (17.6%) for the 25th (75th) percentile firm. The change in earnings per share decreases (increases) by $0.019 ($0.007) for the 25th (75th) percentile firm. Tests for motivations to manipulate stock option expense downward have mixed results. Absolute values of deviations from benchmarks have a positive relationship with subsequent stock price volatility suggesting noise in reported stock option expense results in stock price noise. Deviations from benchmarks and subsequent cumulative abnormal returns have statistically significant results but are difficult to interpret.

This study investigates the impact of portfolio disclosure on hedge fund performance. Using a regression discontinuity design, I investigate the effect of the disclosure requirements that take effect when an investment company's assets exceed $100 million; when that occurs, a fund is required by the SEC to submit form 13F disclosing its portfolio holdings. Consistent with the argument that portfolio disclosure reveals "trade secrets" and also raises front running costs thus harms the funds that disclose, I find that there is a drop in fund performance (about 4% annually) after a fund begins filing form 13F, as well as an increase in return correlations with other hedge funds in the same investment style. The drop in performance cannot be explained by a change in the assets under management or a mean reversion in returns. Consistent with the idea that funds with illiquid holdings tend to employ sequential trading strategies, which increase the likelihood of being taken advantage of by free riders and front runners, the drop in performance is more dramatic for funds that have more illiquid holdings. In addition, I find that the incentive fees paid to fund managers are 1% higher when portfolio disclosure is required, which supports the hypothesis that investors' monitoring of portfolio holdings disciplines adverse risk-taking by fund managers and allows for higher convexity in the optimal compensation structure. Finally, there is a drop in flows into funds that file 13F, which suggests that hedge fund investors negatively value 13F disclosure. Overall, this study suggests that the cost of portfolio disclosure is economically large. It contributes to the policy debate over what constitutes optimal disclosure.

In this dissertation, I examine the source of some of the anomalous capital market outcomes that have been documented for firms with high accruals. Chapter 2 develops and implements a methodology that decomposes a firm's discretionary accruals into a firm-specific and an industry-specific component. I use this decomposition to investigate which component drives the subsequent negative returns associated with firms with high discretionary accruals. My results suggest that these abnormal returns are driven by the firm-specific component of discretionary accruals. Moreover, although industry-specific discretionary accruals do not directly contribute towards this anomaly, I find that it is precisely when industry-specific discretionary accruals are high that firms with high firm-specific discretionary accruals subsequently earn these negative returns. While consistent with irrational mispricing or a rational risk premium associated with high discretionary accruals, these findings also support a transactions-cost based explanation for the accruals anomaly whereby search costs associated with distinguishing between value-relevant and manipulative discretionary accruals can induce investors to overlook potential earnings manipulation. Chapter 3 extends the decomposition to examine the role of firm-specific and industry-specific discretionary accruals in explaining the subsequent market underperformance and negative analysts' forecast errors documented for firms issuing equity. I examine the post-issue market returns and analysts' forecast errors for a sample of seasoned equity issues between 1975 and 2004 and find that offering-year firm-specific discretionary accruals can partially explain these anomalous capital market outcomes. Nonetheless, I find this predictive power of firm-specific accruals to be more pronounced for issues that occur during 1975 - 1989 compared to issues taking place between 1990 and 2004. Additionally, I find no evidence that investors and analysts are more overoptimistic about the prospects of issuers that have both high firm-specific and industry-specific discretionary accruals (compared to firms with high discretionary accruals in general). The results indicate no role for industry-specific discretionary accruals in explaining overoptimistic expectations from seasoned equity issues and suggest the importance of firm-specific factors in inducing earnings manipulation surrounding equity issues.