My research explores the real-world implications of disclosure regulation for investors, consumers, and vulnerable populations, and examines how material information and financial incentives shape behavior in equity and debt markets. My work has been published in leading journals and helped inform SEC proposals, with coverage in major media outlets. I am routinely invited to present my research at leading universities such as Stanford, Yale, New York University (NYU), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), École des hautes études commerciales de Paris (HEC Paris), London Business School (LBS).
Journal of Accounting Research 59(1): 215–242 (March 2021)
with C. Cuny and E. Watts
Ever wonder what you’re really paying when you buy a corporate bond? We studied what happened when new rules forced brokers to reveal their hidden transaction costs (markups) to everyday investors. The result: markups dropped—especially for investors with less experience and in trickier bonds. Bottom line? A little transparency goes a long way in saving investors money and maintaining a fair playing field.
Journal of Accounting and Economics 75(2-3), (April–May 2023)
with M. Dambra and J. Naughton
What happens when governments are forced to be more transparent about their pension debts? After a new rule required counties to clearly report pension obligations, previously non-disclosing counties reduced public welfare, salaries, and hiring. Turns out, seeing the true costs on paper made local leaders rethink their spending. Sometimes, what you show in the books really does change what happens in the real world.
Forthcoming in The Accounting Review
with A. Su and K.P. Wang
What if all the regulators could finally talk to each other? When states started sharing mortgage enforcement records in one central hub, regulators got a lot better at spotting problem lenders—especially in places where information was hard to find or resources were tight. This led to more follow-up actions across state lines and made lenders think twice, often pulling back on risky lending elsewhere. Bottom line: Centralized info sharing really does make regulation smarter and more effective.
Forthcoming in the Review of Accounting Studies
with G. She, L. Wang, and D. Yang
When the government puts its money behind sustainability, companies pay attention. After new federal funding rules incentivized firms to win government contracts, those with big public sector ties boosted their climate disclosures and actually got greener—cutting emissions and investing in clean tech. The takeaway: Government procurement doesn’t just spark talk about climate action, it drives real change.
Working Paper
with G. She, L. Wang, and D. Yang
What happens when regulators stop telling the public how banks handle complaints? Banks that used to work harder to resolve issues started providing more explanations than monetary compensations—and complaints went up. Even more, fewer people applied for and got loans. Turns out, transparency keeps banks on their best behavior and helps keep the market fair.
Critical Finance Review 11(3-4): 431–471 (August 2022)
with P. Patatoukas and Y. Yoon
The JOBS Act was supposed to help young companies go public by cutting red tape and making it easier to raise money. But when firms used the Act’s shortcuts, like skipping certain financial disclosures, they often looked better on paper than they really were. The big takeaway? Less transparency might speed things up, but it also makes it easier for risky companies to slip through—putting everyday investors at risk and raising questions about whether easier always means better.
Journal of Accounting Research 62 (2): 551-587 (May 2024)
with B. Baik, R. Han, and D. Park
When companies had to come clean about sourcing minerals from conflict zones, it made a real difference. Thanks to new disclosure rules, more firms adopted responsible practices—and conflict in Central Africa actually declined. This shows that supply chain transparency isn’t just good for business, it can help promote peace and protect human rights around the world.
The Accounting Review 98 (7): 121-152 (November 2023)
with M. Dambra and K. Munevar
SPACs made headlines by letting companies go public with bold revenue forecasts—but those rosy projections often caught the eye of retail investors and social media, only to be followed by disappointing results and lawsuits. Our research showed that these forward-looking statements weren’t just hype—they actually predicted future underperformance. In response, the SEC stepped in with new rules: no more special protections for SPAC projections, stricter disclosure, and tighter marketing to protect everyday investors from being misled by flashy forecasts.
Review of Accounting Studies 29: 3907-3945 (July 2023)
with X. Li, C. Williams, and H. Wang
Sometimes it really is about who you know! Our research shows that strong personal ties between company managers and bank loan officers lead to cheaper loans and better loan quality—thanks to all the “soft info” they share. In a world where finance is becoming more digitized and less reliant on personal relationships, this highlights just how valuable real relationships can be, especially when the numbers don’t tell the whole story.
The Accounting Review (April 2025)
with AJ Chen, JK Kang, and R. Witternberg-Moerman
What happens when people in Kenya get access to digital loans—even if banks would have turned them down? Our research found that digital credit boosted borrowers’ financial well-being: borrowers moved more money, expanded their networks, and reported higher incomes and employment. The biggest gains went to those with limited credit access and entrepreneurs using loans for business. When done right, digital lending, can be a real game changer to promote financial inclusion in developing economies.
Forthcoming in The Accounting Review
with A. Su and K.P. Wang
What if all the regulators could finally talk to each other? When states started sharing mortgage enforcement records in one central hub, regulators got a lot better at spotting problem lenders—especially in places where info was hard to find or resources were tight. This led to more follow-up actions across state lines and made lenders think twice, often pulling back on risky lending elsewhere. Bottom line: Centralized info sharing really does make regulation smarter and more effective.
Journal of Accounting and Economics 64(1): 167–182 (August 2017)
This paper is based on my dissertation completed at UCL
Ever wonder which market reacts faster to earnings news—stocks or bonds? My research shows that bond prices, driven by savvy investors, often react to earnings surprises before stocks do—especially for riskier companies and when bonds are more actively traded. In fact, bond reactions can help predict where stock prices are headed next, proving there’s a lot to learn by watching both markets in action
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 53(2): 485–505 (April 2018)
with D. Aboody, R. Lehavy, and B. Trueman
What can overnight stock moves tell us? Turns out, a lot about investor sentiment! We found that after-hours returns—often driven by retail traders—signal which stocks are riding a wave of optimism (or pessimism). These sentiment-fueled moves tend to fade, with high overnight gainers underperforming later on. Bottom line: Watching overnight returns is a clever way to spot—and avoid—sentiment-driven mispricing.
Review of Accounting Studies 26: 1390–1427 (January 2021)
with B. Ozel
Ever notice that stocks move before a credit rating downgrade is even announced? Our research uncovered that credit rating analysts sometimes leak news to big investors—often in exchange for future job offers—giving them an unfair edge. This pattern of illegal trading disadvantages everyday investors and shows why strong enforcement is so important for fair markets.
Working Paper
with K. Munevar, S. Kogan, and E. So
What happens when trading goes fee-free? This study finds that removing commission fees encouraged retail investors to hit the “buy” button way more often—increasing trading by about 30%! People started making smaller trades, diversifying their portfolios, and even less experienced investors joined the market. While overall returns didn’t change much, investors enjoyed better net results thanks to zero commissions. Bottom line: Making trading fee-free not only saves money, but also invites more people to participate and reshapes how everyone invests.
Journal of Accounting Research 59(1): 215–242 (March 2021)
with C. Cuny and E. Watts
Ever wonder what you’re really paying for when you buy a corporate bond? We studied what happened when new rules forced brokers to reveal their hidden transaction costs (markups) to everyday investors. The result: Markups dropped—especially for in-experienced investors and in trickier bonds. Bottom line? A little transparency goes a long way in saving investors money and maintaining a fair playing field.
Critical Finance Review 11(3-4): 431–471 (August 2022)
with P. Patatoukas and Y. Yoon
The JOBS Act was supposed to help young companies go public by cutting red tape and making it easier to raise money. But when firms used the Act’s shortcuts, like skipping certain financial disclosures, they often looked better on paper than they really were. The big takeaway? Less transparency might speed things up, but it also makes it easier for risky companies to slip through—putting everyday investors at risk and raising questions about whether easier is always better.
PNAS (November 2023)
with K. Huang, J. Bogard, B. Trueman, and N. Goldstein
What’s in a name? More than you’d think! Our research found that when a CEO and analyst share the same first name, the analyst’s forecasts get more accurate—likely thanks to some off-the-record info sharing. While it might seem harmless, this kind of name-based favoritism can cross ethical lines and is surprisingly tricky to regulate. Sometimes, even small connections can have big consequences in the world of finance.
Review of Accounting Studies 29: 423-450 (September 2022)
How do buyers and sellers get more comfortable with big private company deals? Increasingly, they’re relying on representations and warranties (R&W) insurance to reduce uncertainty and smooth out risks. Our research shows that this insurance helps make private M&A deals more predictable, especially in industries with weak internal controls or heavy R&D spending, where risks are harder to assess upfront. By reallocating risk and improving transparency, R&W insurance supports clearer valuations and stronger deal outcomes. The bottom line: smart insurance isn’t just a safety net—it’s a tool for making complex deals work better for everyone involved.
Finance Research Letters
with B. Lourie, A. Nekrasov, and J. Zeng
What happens to a company’s value after a failed acquisition? If a deal falls through for reasons other than the target saying “no,” the target’s value usually drops—hinting at bad news uncovered during negotiations. But when a company rejects an offer, its value actually goes up, signaling confidence in its future. The impact is even bigger for companies that are tough to value, showing how much failed deals can reveal about what’s really under the hood.
with P. Patatoukas and Y. Yoon
The JOBS Act was supposed to help young companies go public by cutting red tape and making it easier to raise money. But when firms used the Act’s shortcuts, like skipping certain financial disclosures, they often looked better on paper than they really were. The big takeaway? Less transparency might speed things up, but it also makes it easier for risky companies to slip through—putting everyday investors at risk and raising questions about whether easier is always better.
The Accounting Review 98 (7): 121-152 (November 2023)
with M. Dambra and K. Munevar
SPACs made headlines by letting companies go public with bold revenue forecasts—but those rosy projections often caught the eye of retail investors and social media, only to be followed by disappointing results and lawsuits. Our research showed that these forward-looking statements weren’t just hype—they actually predicted future underperformance. In response, the SEC stepped in with new rules: no more special protections for SPAC projections, stricter disclosure, and tighter marketing to protect everyday investors from being misled by flashy forecasts.
Forthcoming in the Review of Accounting Studies
with G. She, L. Wang, and D. Yang
When the government puts its money behind sustainability, companies pay attention. After new federal funding rules incentivized firms to win government contracts, those with big public sector ties boosted their climate disclosures and actually got greener—cutting emissions and investing in clean tech. The takeaway: Government procurement doesn’t just spark talk about climate action, it drives real change.
Journal of Accounting Research 62 (2): 551-587 (May 2024)
with B. Baik, R. Han, and D. Park
When companies had to come clean about sourcing minerals from conflict zones, it made a real difference. Thanks to new disclosure rules, more firms adopted responsible practices—and conflict in Central Africa actually declined. This shows that supply chain transparency isn’t just good for business, it can help promote peace and protect human rights around the world.
The Accounting Review (April 2025)
with AJ Chen, JK Kang, and R. Witternberg-Moerman
What happens when people in Kenya get access to digital loans—even if banks would have turned them down? Our research found that digital credit boosted borrowers’ financial well-being: borrowers moved more money, expanded their networks, and reported higher incomes and employment. The biggest gains went to those with limited credit access and entrepreneurs using loans for business. When done right, digital lending, can be a real game changer to promote financial inclusion in developing economies.
Forthcoming in Accounting Horizons
with S. Clor-Proell, C. Lee, and S. Rajgopal
Why does accounting research so often stay in the ivory tower? Drawing on fresh insights from top experts, we dig into the gap between research and real-world practice—and what we can do about it. Our paper offers practical steps for researchers, editors, and business schools to make accounting scholarship more relevant, impactful, and accessible for the people who need it most.
