We show that both the number of institutional investors and the percentage of shares that are held by institutional investors increase significantly after reverse splits with a presplit price lower than $5 and a target price higher than $5. This effect is larger than for other comparable reverse splits. These results suggest institutional holdings are affected by the prudent-person rule and reverse splits are used by firms to alleviate this constraint. We also show that an increase in institutional holdings that results from reverse splits is associated with an increase in share price.Despite its frequent occurrence, the reverse stock split has been the subject of relatively few studies. In this paper, we shed further light on the causes and consequences of the reverse stock split by analyzing its effects on institutional holdings and shareholder wealth using data from 1980 through 2010 for a large sample of reverse stock splits in the US markets.The level of institutional ownership in US companies has risen significantly in recent decades and corporate managers are paying increasingly greater attention to institutional preference to attract more institutional investments in their stocks. 1 Prior research shows that institutional investors are more likely to hold stocks of companies with higher share prices and larger market capitalizations (Faulkenstein, 1996;Gompers and Metrick, 2001), higher quality ratings (Del Guercio, 1996), better governance structures (McCahery, Sautner, and Starks, 2010; Chung and Zhang, 2011), stable payout policies (Grinstein and Michaely, 2005), better managerial performances (Parrino, Sias, and Starks, 2003), and higher pay-for-performance sensitivity (Hartzell and Starks, 2003). The present study offers new insight into institutional preference by analyzing the effect of the reverse stock split on institutional holdings.Anecdotal evidence suggests that companies use reverse splits as a means to expand and broaden their investor base by attracting more institutional investors and financial analysts. For example, Martin Brauns, chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) of Interwoven Inc., stated that, "We believe that the reverse stock split will position our stock in a price range more attractive to a broader range of institutional investors . . . Realigning our share base is one more step in our process of delivering long-term shareholder value." 2 More recently, Vikram Pandit, CEO of Citigroup, told shareholders that its recent announcement of a 1-for-10 reverse stock split willWe are grateful to an anonymous referee, Marc Lipson (Editor), and Laura Starks for their valuable comments and suggestions. We also thank Maria Kasch, Kenneth Kim, session participants at the FMA annual conference, and seminar participants at the State University of New York at Buffalo for useful comments and discussions. We are solely responsible