Asset Allocation, Diversification, and Co-Movement Effects: A Global Analysis of Bonds and Equities Issued by the Same Firm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the asset return co-movement with the same issuer and examines the relationship between the correlation and agency conflicts. This study constructs a large unique panel dataset that consists of 2,089 firms from 2001 to 2019 across 50 countries. This research reveals a compelling positive correlation between the monthly returns of bonds and equities. Moreover, lower conflict of interest among stakeholders corresponds to a higher degree of co-movement between these financial instruments. This insightful discovery underscores the pivotal role of corporate governance and regulatory safeguards in harmonizing the interests of debtholders and equity holders. Notably, these results maintain their robustness when employing the rigorous two-stage least squares instrumental variable approach and conducting supplementary sub-sample tests. This study stands as a pioneering investigation into bond–equity co-movement from the same issuer, shedding light on its intricate connections to agency conflicts and regulatory influences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".