(Journal of Financial Economics, Volume 144, Issue 1, April 2022)
Presented at: (*by Coauthor)
FIRS 2021; 28th Finance Forum; SFS Calvacade 2020*; AFA 2020 ; AFA 2019 Poster Session; EFMA 2019; FMA Europe 2019; 2nd CESC; FMA Asia/Pacific 2019; IV Madrid-Barcelona Workshop on Banking and Corporate Finance*
Summary: We show that institutional shareholders with a diversified industry portfolio can have different incentives compared to concentrated shareholders when evaluating firm-level decisions
(Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Volume 9, Issue 1, March 2020)
Summary: When institutional investors hold both the debt and the equity of the same firm, they reduce firm investment distortion because 1) they are more incentivized and better equipped to monitor managers; 2) they align shareholder-creditor incentives and lead to less risk-shifting between the two parties.
(Finance Research Letters, Volume 44, January 2022)
Summary: Prior studies have shown evidence that common ownership improves governance since common owners are more incentivized and better equipped to monitor. I show that creditors, who often bear monitoring responsibilities, account for the governance benefits by common owners and exert less monitoring effort in firms with high common ownership.
(Revise and Resubmit at Journal of Corporate Finance)
LSE; IESE; 28th Finance Forum PhD Day (Awarded Best Paper Prize); AFA Poster Session 2021; Fudan FISF; CEIBS; UC3M; SKEMA; SYSU; Bristol; HEC Montreal; Stevens Institute of Technology
Summary: Using mergers between the firm's existing lenders as shocks to monitoring incentives and bargaining power, I show that increased lender concentration deters substantial risky investments, yet also induces investment policies that can be over-conservative for shareholders.
Featured at the Duke University School of Law FinReg Blog
33rd Australasian Banking and Finance Conference*; Asian-FA Annual Meeting 2021*; 28th Finance Forum*
Summary: While creditors' simultaneous equity holdings in their borrowers have been shown to be beneficial as shareholder-creditor incentives are more aligned, we show that a new type of conflict arises in syndicates with such dual holders, due to the heterogeneity across syndicate members’ equity-to-loan positions.
28th Finance Forum*; IESE; INSEAD*; NTU*; Paris December Finance Meeting 2021; MFA 2022
Summary: Using institutional dual holding as a setting for lower shareholder-creditor conflicts, we show that equity lending supply increases in firms with dual holders. Shareholders are less likely to recall shares before a vote when dual holders are present. Our results indicate that shareholder-creditor conflicts can give rise to limits to arbitrage, because shareholders tend to hold on to their shares to retain bargaining power against creditors.