Based on new IFs, FRL is now a top 5 finance journal. Here's a theory on how this happened.
Authors submitting to FRL will usually cite a few FRL papers, just to signal that they read FRL and that their paper fits with the theme and scope of FRL, or for whatever other reason.
As with all other journals, most submitted papers are rejected. HOWEVER, the editors will usually offer to "transfer" the rejected paper to another Elsevier journal. Many of these journals are also SSCI. One of these journals may finally accept the paper, and then, "tada", FRL gets a bunch of citations from an SSCI journal. Note that these citations are valuable because they are not self-citations (i.e., they are not FRL papers citing other FRL papers).
If this theory is true, then the burning question is to what extent is this being done intentionally or tacitly to ramp up FRL's IF? For example, the mafia running the C level finance journals for Elsevier is well known. Are they colluding to help their journals' IF?
And, if there is explicit or tacit collusion, then to what extent is Elsevier involved? It is well known among insiders that Elsevier loves editors that "transer" papers to other Elsevier journals. This is how DC at JCF got the appointment, and how other editors got their appointments, because they transferred papers all the time when they were editors of other Elsevier journals.
The irony of FRL becoming a top 5 is that it now has drawn huge attention to itself. This may not end well for FRL. They may have been over done it. Think about it. FRL being a top 5 is almost comical.