Abstract
Abstract We document lead-lag effects on returns between coheadquartered firms in different sectors. Geographic lead-lags yield risk-adjusted returns of 5%–6% annually, half that observed for industry lead-lag effects. Whereas industry lead-lag effects are strongest among small, thinly traded stocks with low analyst coverage, geographic lead-lags are unrelated to these proxies for investor scrutiny. We propose an explanation linked to the structure of the investment analyst business, which is organized by sector, not by geographic region. Our findings suggest that in lead-lag relationships, analysts common to both leading and lagging firms are important, regardless of the number of analysts covering each individually.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
