Top 10?
JBF, is it top 5 in Finance ?
-
There are 3 A journals and they are equal.
There are a handful of B+ journals. These would include the two general interest ones cited above (JFQA, RoF) and the top field journals (JCF and JFI in corporate)
JBF is not in this set but is a step below. It would be alongside stuff like FM, FAJ and JFM. Probably good enough to matter marginally for tenure decisions outside of the top 30.
-
There are 3 A journals and they are equal.
People keep posting this here but it simply isn't true. At my top-5 department, there is no way an RFS counts as much as a JF. The JF is objectively more difficult to publish in because (1) it publishes fewer papers and (2) most people send their papers to the JF before they send them to the RFS.
-
JBF is certainly NOT #4; and, it is well known how they inflated their impact factor by demanding superfluous citations of other JBF articles. That said, this policy has ended.
I would say the top 4 is fairly clear: JF >= {RFS, JFE} > JFQA. After that, I would say that RoF is trying hard and MS might end up taking over where JB left off. Then, I would say you have the field journals: JBF >= {JFI, JCF, JFM, JFEC}. Somewhere in there/after that I would also put MF, FAJ, and FM.
Arguing that "RoF/JFQA/MS sux," "JBF>JFQA," "JFI>JFQA/JBF" and the like is wishful thinking or bitterness. The truth is that there is a lot of competition in the 4th-8th places and none of us know how it will come out. JFQA is not ascendant, but is above RoF which seems to be rising. MS has some stellar people; but, it is still too much of a niche. And we'll see if JBF ultimately falls due to the self-cites brouhaha.
-
Obviously, this is right, though I'd put FAJ and FM on par with JBF, JFI, JCF, etc... But really, that's just quibbling around the edges.
JBF is certainly NOT #4; and, it is well known how they inflated their impact factor by demanding superfluous citations of other JBF articles. That said, this policy has ended.
I would say the top 4 is fairly clear: JF >= {RFS, JFE} > JFQA. After that, I would say that RoF is trying hard and MS might end up taking over where JB left off. Then, I would say you have the field journals: JBF >= {JFI, JCF, JFM, JFEC}. Somewhere in there/after that I would also put MF, FAJ, and FM.
Arguing that "RoF/JFQA/MS sux," "JBF>JFQA," "JFI>JFQA/JBF" and the like is wishful thinking or bitterness. The truth is that there is a lot of competition in the 4th-8th places and none of us know how it will come out. JFQA is not ascendant, but is above RoF which seems to be rising. MS has some stellar people; but, it is still too much of a niche. And we'll see if JBF ultimately falls due to the self-cites brouhaha. -
This
There are 3 A journals and they are equal.
People keep posting this here but it simply isn't true. At my top-5 department, there is no way an RFS counts as much as a JF. The JF is objectively more difficult to publish in because (1) it publishes fewer papers and (2) most people send their papers to the JF before they send them to the RFS. -
JFQA and quickly RAPS are the only journals that for quality and/or reputation can be ranked "just below" the top 3. The new journal Critical Finance Review can be a 1st tier journal because of its editorial board and its different scope with respect to the top 3. However, it's hard to say now.
I would also say that Math. Fin., Fin. & Stoch. and J. of Fin. Econometrics are good and can be considered the top of the B journals. I say this since they publish papers with peculiarities (due to math and econometrics) that make these journals the first choice. Instead, most of papers in jfi jcf jfm rcfs (and even jfqa jbf and rof) are papers rejected (or potentially rejected) in the top 3/5.
Another thing to say is that corporate finance has a too big exposition in the top 3/5. Best asset pricing/macro-finance papers are recently published in econ journals (aer jpe res). I hope things will change with kenneth in the jf. I guess that jf policy can change by cascade the policy of the other journals too.
-
No please, not again the rof promoter!
JFQA matters for tenure requirements in many places and much more than other finance journals apart the top 3. When this will not be anymore the case, JFQA will not be the 4th finance journal.
It's simple.JFQA is a joke and it is overrated. just see the editorial board and who has published there in the last two years and compare with its 'competitors' below the top-3..