In the United States, finance has become something of a national obsession. The Wall Street Journal sells more copies than The New York Times. And when the markets are open, CNBC routinely draws more viewers than CNN. As investors have flooded into the markets – some 83 million Americans are believed to own stock today – the level of popular attention devoted to corporate finance and personal finance has intensified. With every passing day, more and more of our citizens are attuned to the latest change in the Federal Funds rate, the fate of the 30-year bond, and the debate over whether to invest Social Security funds in equities.

To a large degree then, this is an era in which finance really matters – and not just to bankers and traders in lower Manhattan. It has become democratized, relevant, and pervasive. And many of the trends and forces that have roiled the frequently topsy-turvy world of finance are somewhat bewildering.

One of the most distinguishing features of the personal finance revolution has been the growing ability of individuals to trade stocks and buy mutual funds online. Chris Stefanadis traces the emergence of the online discount brokerage industry and describes how they helped improve conditions for consumers (p. 18). The next step in the revolution: “The creation of an online financial supermarket that offers a broad array of services.” Of course, that’s a tactic many off-line firms have tried over the years; few have succeeded.

When they trade stocks, online investors frequently rely on the news and analysis they find on websites like TheStreet.com, which was co-founded by former hedge fund manager James Cramer. As part of our chief executive lecture series, the voluble – and occasionally volatile – Cramer engaged students and faculty in a wide-ranging conversation about the business of picking stocks, and about the business of running an online magazine devoted to the business of picking stocks (p. 2).

Aside from logging on to TheStreet.com and its rivals, Internet investors have flocked to bulletin boards and chat rooms, where they can interact and swap ideas with other investors. By focusing on one site – RagingBull.com – and systematically analyzing the action, Robert Tumarkin draws some interesting conclusions about the relationship between the volume and content of online posts about certain stocks and their trading volume and performance (p. 42).

These days, following stocks can be a 24-hour-a-day preoccupation, especially as barriers to trading stocks on foreign exchanges continue to fall. But in the last decade, investors large and small have been stung by a series of crises in emerging markets such as Mexico, Russia, and those in Asia. Stockholders were frequently frustrated to find that the stocks they had carefully chosen were pulled down by the activity in the broader market. In fact, as Professors Randall Morck and Bernard Yeung argue, stocks in emerging markets tend to exhibit greater price synchronicity than those in developed markets – they tend to move in the same direction (p. 32). By deploying some rather sophisticated techniques, the authors have managed to offer some compelling reasons as to why that may be.

In the 1980s, high-yield bonds – also known as junk bonds – became one of the most exciting and controversial tools in the world of corporate finance. Entrepreneurs relied on high-yield bonds to finance rapid growth, and leveraged buy-out artists and corporate raiders used them to take over companies. But in the early 1990s, as junk-bond default rates soared, returns declined and the bonds fell out of favor. In the late 1990s, high-yield bonds similarly rode the crest of exuberant capital markets and then crashed to earth as excesses entered the system. Professor Edward Altman, a veteran high-yield market analyst, provides some valuable perspective on the rollercoaster ride of the high-yield market. “Although storm clouds hang over today’s high-yield market, the current situation differs in a number of important respects from a decade ago,” he notes (p. 10). And just as the years after the crisis in the early 1990s were characterized by outsized returns, he suggests that “returns will be substantial after the peak of defaults, and perhaps even before the peak – whenever it occurs.”

In 2000, several telecommunications companies defaulted on their high-yield debt. Of course, telecommunications is an industry that has long depended on engineering for advances. But in recent years, financial engineering has become an equally important discipline for these companies, which must navigate the shifting shoals of regulation and competition. Professor Nicholas Economides provides an excellent primer on why once-stolid companies such as AT&T have been merging, spinning off units, and breaking up at a dizzying pace (p. 38). The unanticipated outcome? “The remonopolization of telecommunications.”

In his years as a partner at Goldman Sachs, Professor Roy Smith ran across his share of financial moguls. And his highly readable new book, The Wealth Creators: The Rise of Today’s New Rich and Super-Rich, contains some valuable insights as to what separates run-of-the-mill business owners from big shots. In his article, which is adapted from The Wealth Creators, Smith reaches the (perhaps) surprising conclusion that it’s not just a matter of money and financial expertise.

To be sure, numbers don’t lie. But numbers certainly leave room for debate and interpretation. Two analysts can look at the same security, after all, and one can declare it undervalued while the other declares it overvalued. And that makes finance such a rich, complex, and intriguing area of study.

This constant tension, the way that financial questions invite interpretation and foster innovative analysis, provides the animating spirit of this issue. Whether you’re a raging bull or a cautious bear, the articles that follow will certainly challenge your preconceptions and influence the way you think about finance.

Daniel Gross is editor of Sternbusiness.