From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

From: An open day in the metric space

Advertisements

Figure 1. Heat Map Summarizing Question Types by Agency

From: Wages and Human Capital in the U.S. Finance Industry: 1909–2006*

From: Procyclical Leverage and Value-at-Risk

Panel C plots the effect of changes in employer pensions on total pension contributions and total saving using a threshold approach. The lower series (triangles)

From: Global Banking: Recent Developments and Insights from Research*

From: The World Price of Credit Risk

Figure 1. Flow diagram of participants recruited into the study.

Figure 1. FinHER dataset: distribution of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer according to the (A) three breast cancer subtypes and (B) HER2.

Fig. 3 Evolutionary game types as a function of relatedness and synergy where each plot is a different social group size. The payoffs used to generate.

Source:Rosnes and Vennemo 2009.

Figure 1. The Modified Dual Pathway Model.

Figure 1. Financial income in Germany (% of GDP)

From: Growing and Slowing Down Like China

Figure 1. Structural Equation Model: Effects of Valence Framing on Perceived Truth of Statements and Source Trustworthiness. Standardized path-coefficients.

Table 5 Village Characteristics Based on the Census of India 1991, by Mandate during which a First SHG was Created in the Village From: Public Good Provision.

Figure 3 Rule of law and cost of enforcement EBA

Notes: Figure 2a shows the average absolute distance in the mean 0–100 score by non-News Corp. affiliated outlets between 20th Century Fox movies and ten.

Figure 1. Mean recalled time (days) since the start of the last quit attempt by use of stop-smoking medications (SSM) and Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI)

From: Misinformed Speculators and Mispricing in the Housing Market

For each IPO stock, we construct a total return index (match-adjusted return index) based on its monthly raw returns (match-adjusted returns) within 2 years.

Figure 1 A decision tree diagram for problems and its German correspondences From: Corresponding lexical domains: A new resource for onomasiological.

Figure 3 An example plot with high error index values for the estimated diameter distributions: ML-estimation (48.5), parameter recovery (70.7), ALS-based.

Figure 1. Standardized coefficients for the SEM group model for heterosexual males. Latent constructs are shown in ellipses, and observed variables are.

Figure 1. Logos appearing in the choice experiment

This figure shows the fraction of total dollar volume of purchase mortgages in the HMDA data set originated by income quintile. In panel A we form quintiles.

Figure 1. Conceptual model of well-being related to involvement in theatre. From: Theatre Involvement and Well-Being, Age Differences, and Lessons From.

From: Learning by Working in Big Cities

From: What Drives Local Food Prices

From: Face Recognition is Shaped by the Use of Sign Language

Figure 2. Illustration of minimum cross-sectional area (a) and measurements for oropharynx and soft palate in sagittal plane (b, c). From: Airway volume.

From: Where do we go from here

Figure 1. Overall survival of patients receiving alternative medicine (solid lines) vs conventional cancer treatment (dashed lines). Overall survival of.

Example 14. Schubert, Quartet in G Major, D

Figure 1. Relationship between Log Transfers and Age of Eldest HH Member(a) Bandwidth 0.05(b) Bandwidth 0.1(c) Bandwidth 0.5 From: The Effect of a Transfer.

Figure 1. Single-Tree Model and BART Fits to Simulated Data.

Fig. 1 Flow diagram of patient selection and study design.

NOTES.— (1) Higher SVI (rank percentile score) indicates higher vulnerability. Therefore, +1 SD socioeconomic status (SES) SVI indicates counties with.

Figure 1 Flow of data processing

Figure 1: Changing American Attitudes toward Marijuana and Same-Sex Marriage. Mean support for marijuana and same-sex marriage legalization. N=4,079. Source:

Figure 3. Hypothalamic–Pituitary–Adrenal (HPA)-axis functioning moderates crime exposure: regions of significance on X (crime). The lines represent two.

Figure 1. Time of initiation of therapeutic hypothermia according to who initiated it. Note the logarithmic scaling of the vertical axis. From: Initiation.

Figure 1. Fractional polynomial regression of household WTP to stabilize at their means the prices of the seven commodities retained for analysis on household.

NOTE.—Error bars in all figures represent standard errors of the means. From: So Close I Can Almost Sense It: The Interplay between Sensory Imagery and.

Figure 1. Percentage of trainees is represented on the y-axis for each competency/knowledge item represented in the x-axis. Only Poor/Fair (P/F) ratings.

From: Dynamic Dependence and Diversification in Corporate Credit*

Figure 1. Distribution of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels at the baseline visit in a study population of adults aged 18–59 years (n = 309), Toronto,

From: Consumer Bankruptcy, Bank Mergers, and Information *

Figure 1 Map of the Mediterranean Sea showing the location of Lampedusa island and the main area in which the study was carried out. From: Anthropogenic.

Notes: Population-weighted

Figure 1: Part-of-speech distribution profiles of German entries (G), German entries with frequency information (Gf), selected German entries with frequency.

Figure 1. Percentage of participants in each group (holocaust survivors, prewar immigrants, and postwar immigrants) by the main coded strategies. From:

From: Refugee Migration and Electoral Outcomes

Figure 1 Weighted social networks for (a) chase behavior and (b) display behavior. Each node represents an individual, and individuals are in the same.

Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment

Figure 1 (a) Predicted dispersal success of hatchling turtles as a function of the interaction between hatchling body ... Figure 1 (a) Predicted dispersal.

Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific effect relative to active aggression but not display behavior in dominant males. ... Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific.

Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs per gram = epg) (A through C) and corresponding infection probabilities estimated by ... Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs.

Figure 1 Flow diagram detailing the systematic review process.

Figure 1 Schematic representation of the experimental design.

Figure 1 Relationships between probability of prey discard and each parameter explored. To show the most robust ... Figure 1 Relationships between probability.

Figure 1 Maternal relatedness between calves and non-calf unit members correlates with babysitting rate. Relatedness ... Figure 1 Maternal relatedness.

Figure 1 (a) The distribution of paternity amongst 84 hatchlings sampled at a HDS on the western coastline of Little ... Figure 1 (a) The distribution.

Figure 1 Mean ± standard error proportions of (a) courtship and (b) copulation by female-male type pairing. Error bars ... Figure 1 Mean ± standard error.

Figure 1. Human rights abuses by UN peacekeepers, 2000–2010 Note: Left panel shows abuses aggregated by country. Right ... Figure 1. Human rights abuses.

Figure 1 Relationships between pair indices of dance performance (joint entropy or mutual information) and the past ... Figure 1 Relationships between.

Figure 1: Yearly net investment flows from Japan

Figure 1: Trade shares of South Korea's major trading partners (% of South Korea's total trade in goods) Figure 1: Trade shares of South Korea's major.

Figure 1. Measuring respondent unhappiness with their child marrying someone from the other party and happiness with ... Figure 1. Measuring respondent.

Figure 1. Estimated weight functions (dotted-dashed lines) and pointwise 95% bootstrap confidence intervals (shaded ... Figure 1. Estimated weight functions.

Presentation transcript:

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The map shows the number of victims of the Madoff fraud by county. We count victims as the number of unique names on the list of victims supplied to the court. In some cases, the address corresponds to that of an investment advisory or accounting firm, in which case the victim may reside elsewhere. Counting victims by number of unique addresses—and therefore putting less weight on locations of firms representing victims—provides a very similar picture of the distribution of victims. Cities with high levels of Google searching for the term “Madoff” during 2009 are represented by circles; larger circles indicate more intense search interest. At the state level, the rank correlation between the Google search index and the number of victims is 0.77. From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The figure displays the average change in the natural log of RIA-level AUM since 2005 for two groups of RIAs based on their exposure to the Madoff fraud. RIAs that are more exposed to the Madoff fraud are those that averaged at least one victim in the ZIP codes where they have offices. This group is labeled the “treatment group.” All other RIAs are considered less exposed. This group is labeled the “control group.” From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The figure displays the average change in the natural log of ZIP-code-level aggregate bank branches deposits since 2005 for two groups of bank branches based on their exposure to the Madoff fraud. Bank branches whose clients were more exposed to the Madoff fraud are those with at least one Madoff victim in the ZIP code of the bank branch. This group is labeled the “treatment group.” Bank branches with no Madoff victims in their ZIP codes are considered less exposed and is labeled the “control group.” From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The figure displays coefficient estimates measuring the difference in one year changes in the natural logarithm of ZIP-code-level bank branch deposits attributed to branch exposure to the Madoff fraud. Estimates are for 12 separate cross-sectional regressions for the years 2001 to 2012. Specifically, plotted are the estimates of βM and their 95% confidence interval (based on standard errors clustered by county) from the following ZIP-code-level regression for each year where the year indicated in the figure on the x-axis is as of June 30th of year t: Δlog(deposits)i,s,t=δs+βMMadoff exposurei+∑m(βC,mControli,m)+ϵi,t, where Δlog(deposits)i,s,t is the change in the natural logarithm of deposits in bank branches in ZIP code i operating in county s from year t-1 to year t, δs is a county fixed effect, and Madoff Exposurei is the natural log of the number of victims in ZIP code i, and Controli,m are controls following those used in model 4 of Table 6. The sample includes the matched sample of ZIP codes used in the estimation in panel B of Table 6 from 2000 to 2012. Δlog(deposits)i,s,t is winsorized at the 1% level in both tails. From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The figure displays coefficient estimates measuring the difference in one year changes in RIA log (AUM) attributed to RIA exposure to the Madoff fraud. Estimates are for eleven separate cross-sectional regressions for the years 2002 to 2012. Specifically, plotted are the estimates of βM and their 95% confidence interval (based on standard errors clustered by state) from the following adviser-level regression for each year, where the year indicated in the figure on the x-axis is end of year t: Δlog(AUM)i,s,t=δs+βMMadoff exposurei+∑m(βC,mControli,m)+ϵi,t, where Δlog(AUM)i,s,t is the change in the natural logarithm of AUM for adviser i operating in state s from year t-1 to year t, δs is an adviser state fixed effect, Madoff Exposurei is the number of victims per 1,000 population in the states in which adviser i operates, and Controli,m are controls following those used in model 3 of Table 3. The sample includes all U.S.-based, SEC-registered money managers following the procedure outlined in Cection 1.2 from 2001 to 2012. Δlog(AUM)i,s,t is winsorized at the 1% level in both tails. From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior The figure displays estimates of distance from Madoff victims on changes in bank deposits around the Madoff event. Estimates and standard errors are estimated using the model estimated in Column 3 of Table 6, which includes ZIP code and state-year fixed effects and is estimated using data from 2007 to 2010. Also included in the model are indicator variables that indicate the closest victim to the ZIP code. Specifically, variables that indicate whether the closest Madoff victim is within 10 miles of the ZIP code, from 10 to 25 miles of the ZIP code, or from 25 to 50 miles of the ZIP code. The coefficient estimates on these indicators interacted with the post period indicator are plotted along with their 95% confidence intervals (based on heteroscedasticity-consistent standard errors clustered by ZIP code and state-year). From: Trust Busting: The Effect of Fraud on Investor Behavior Rev Financ Stud. Published online July 12, 2017. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhx058 Rev Financ Stud | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com