Causal Inference in Financial Event Studies

Financial event studies, ubiquitous in finance research, typically use linear factor models with known factors to estimate abnormal returns and identify causal effects of information events. This paper demonstrates that when factor models are misspecified -- an almost certain reality -- traditional event study estimators produce inconsistent estimates of treatment effects. The bias is particularly severe during volatile periods, over long horizons, and when event timing correlates with market conditions. We derive precise conditions for identification and expressions for asymptotic bias. As an alternative, we propose synthetic control methods that construct replicating portfolios from control securities without imposing specific factor structures. Revisiting four empirical applications, we show that some established findings may reflect model misspecification rather than true treatment effects. While traditional methods remain reliable for short-horizon studies with random event timing, our results suggest caution when interpreting long-horizon or volatile-period event studies and highlight the importance of quasi-experimental designs when available.