The information content of stock splits

This study examines whether stock splits contain information content about future operating performance or whether splits are undertaken by firms to realign their share prices and to improve trading liquidity. In the four years following split announcements, splitting firms do not experience improved operating performance relative to non-splitting firms. Furthermore, stock split signals are not related to future profitability. The positive announcement effect can be explained by lower share prices and improved market liquidity following stock splits but not by split signals and post-split operating performance. Our results show very little evidence that stock splits signal improvement in long-run operating performance and are more consistent with the trading range/liquidity hypothesis.     

REIT Stock Splits and Liquidity Changes

This study examines the motive of stock splits made by REITs. We find that REIT liquidity increases after the split announcement. However, the increase in liquidity is limited to days around the split announcement. After the ex-date, the liquidity tends to revert back to the pre-split level. We find that the positive market reaction around the announcement date is positively related to the change in short-term liquidity but not to the change in long-term liquidity. The announcement effect is also not correlated with future changes in operating performance. Overall, our results suggest that REITs split their share to attract investors’ attention rather than to signal or to improve trading liquidity in the long run.     

The Differences Between Stock Splits and Stock Dividends: Evidence on the Retained Earnings Hypothesis

Abstract:  This paper investigates stock dividends and stock splits on the Copenhagen Stock Exchange (CSE), which is of interest because several of the more recent explanations for a stock market reaction can be ruled out. The main findings are that the announcement effect of stock dividends as well as stock splits is closely related to changes in a firm's payout policy, but that the relationship differs for the two types of events. A stock dividend implies an increase in nominal share capital and hence a decrease in retained earnings. Firms announcing stock dividends finance growth entirely by debt (explaining the need for an increase in nominal share capital) and retained earnings. Basically all firms announcing a stock dividend with a split factor of less than two can also afford to increase their total cash dividends permanently, at least proportionally to the increase in share capital, leading to a significant announcement effect of 4.23%. Firms announcing a stock dividend with a split factor of two or more also increase total cash dividends permanently, but less than proportionally to the increase in share capital. This leads to an insignificant announcement effect of 0.08%. These findings support a retained earnings/signaling hypothesis. For stock splits, no separate announcement effect was found when a firm's payout policy was controlled for. This lends support to the idea that a stock split per se is a cosmetic event on the CSE and is also consistent with the fact that making a stock split on the CSE is virtually cost free.     

Stock splits, trading continuity, and the cost of equity capital

We hypothesize that managers use stock splits to attract more uninformed trading so that market makers can provide liquidity services at lower costs, thereby increasing investors’ trading propensity and improving liquidity. We examine a large sample of stock splits and find that, consistent with our hypothesis, the incidence of no trading decreases and liquidity risk is lower following splits, implying a decline in latent trading costs and a reduced cost of equity capital. Further, split announcement returns are correlated with the improvements in both liquidity levels and liquidity risk. Our analysis suggests nontrivial economic benefits from liquidity improvements, with less liquid firms benefiting more from stock splits.     

Surprise vs anticipated information announcements: Are prices affected differently? An investigation in the context of stock splits

We compare the long run reaction to anticipated and surprise information announcements using stock splits. Although there is underreaction in both cases, anticipated splits are treated differently to those that are unforeseen. After anticipated splits, cumulative abnormal returns peak at one-and-a-half times the level observed after unanticipated splits although the time taken for the announcement to be absorbed into prices is the same. We explain the difference in underreaction by the degree to which split announcements are believed and hence invested in. The favorable signal conveyed in forecast splits is more credible owing to their better pre-split performance, resulting in a far more pronounced underreaction effect.     

Do stock splits signal future profitability?

This study examines whether stock split announcements contain information content about future profitability, measured in terms of future earnings change, future earnings, or future abnormal earnings. We find that the split announcement year has the highest earnings change and the earnings change declines substantially over the subsequent five years. Our empirical results show little evidence that stock splits are positively related to future profitability. In fact, stock splits are in general negatively related to future profitability in subsequent years after the announcement, except for dividend-paying firms with a split factor less than 0.5. This negative relation holds regardless of future profitability measure. Therefore, our empirical finding suggests that stock splits are not useful signals of a firm’s future earnings prospects. JEL Classification G30     

Stock splits to profit insider trading: Lessons from an emerging market

Stock splits have long presented financial puzzles: Why are they undertaken? Why are they associated with abnormal returns? Abnormal returns, particularly those coming shortly before a split’s announcement date, should raise strong suspicions of insider trading, particularly in nations with weak regulatory structures. We examined the 718 split events in the emerging stock market of Vietnam from 2007 through 2011. We found evidence consistent with illegal insider trading, particularly in firms that were vulnerable to insider manipulation and, therefore, more likely to split their stocks. When vulnerable firms’ stocks did split, they provided significant excess short-term returns. Tellingly, the abnormal returns on those stocks prior to the split announcements were also extremely high, indeed higher than their abnormal post-announcement returns. Moreover, trading volume increased prior to the split announcement date. This suspicious pattern is what we would expect if insiders were trading on their knowledge. We propose that illegal insider trading in contexts where it is possible to escape serious penalty provides a previously undiscussed and cogent explanation for both stock splits and abnormal short-term returns.     

Stock‐Split Post‐Announcement Returns: Underreaction or Market Friction?

We explore the relationship between stock splits and subsequent long‐term returns during the period from 1950 to 2000. We find that, contrary to much previous research, firms do not exhibit positive long‐term post‐split returns. Instead, we find that significant positive returns after the announcement date do not persist after the actual date of the stock split. We also observe that abnormal returns are correlated with the price‐delay or market friction. We conclude that the stock‐split post‐announcement “drift” is only of short duration, and it is attributable to trading frictions rather than behavioral biases.     

Open‐Market Stock Repurchases by Insurance Companies and Signaling

The signaling hypothesis of share repurchases implies that management uses repurchases to signal either that their firm's future operating performance will improve or that shares of their stock are simply underpriced by the market. This study examines which of the two interpretations can better explain open‐market share repurchase programs announced by insurance companies. We find no evidence that future‐operating performance of insurers improves following the repurchase announcement. In addition, changes in future operating performance cannot explain the announcement‐period abnormal return. Instead, the stock undervaluation prior to the repurchase announcement can significantly explain the announcement‐period abnormal return, particularly for life insurers. Overall, our results suggest that the positive market reaction to insurers’ open‐market share repurchase announcements is due to the stock undervaluation by the market, but not due to positive information content about future operating performance conveyed in the repurchase announcement.     

The valuation effects of stock splits and stock dividends

This study presents evidence which indicates that stock prices, on average, react positively to stock dividend and stock split announcements that are uncontaminated by other contemporaneous firm-specific announcements. In addition, it documents significantly positive excess returns on and around the ex-dates of stock dividends and splits. Both announcement and ex-date returns were found to be larger for stock dividends than for stock splits. While the announcement returns cannot be explained by forecasts of imminent increases in cash dividends, the paper offers several signalling based explanations for them. These are consistent with a cross-sectional analysis of the announcement period returns.     

Did the 1986 Tax Reform Act Affect Market Reactions to Stock Splits?: A Test of the Tax-Option Hypothesis

This paper tests the prediction of the tax-option hypothesis that the market impact of stock splits would be reduced by the 1986 Tax Reform Act which eliminated the difference between long- and short-term capital gains tax rates. The results show significant excess returns on stock split announcement and ex-days even after 1986. The announcement and ex-day excess returns are similar in different periods before and after the Act. Further, there is no significant relationship between announcement excess returns and increase in returns volatility following splits. These findings are inconsistent with the tax-option hypothesis.     

The impact of regulation FD on the information environment: evidence from the stock market response to stock split announcements

This paper examines the information environment effects of regulation fair disclosure (Reg FD). We investigate the stock market response to stock splits in the pre- and post-regulation periods. We find that abnormal returns around split announcement are positive in both periods, but the magnitude of the returns is smaller in the post-FD period relative to the pre-FD period. The difference between the pre- and post-FD period abnormal returns persists even after we control for factors that may affect split announcement returns. We also find that the magnitude of the association between announcement returns and the unexpected portion of the split factor has increased post-regulation. Our analysis of performance trends for split firms reveals that patterns of profitability and changes in profitability in the years around stock splits are similar in the pre- and post-FD periods. However, we find that announcement returns are associated with lagged profitability changes in the pre-FD period, but with future profitability changes in the post-FD period. Collectively, our results imply that Reg FD has reduced information asymmetry and improved price efficiency.     

Corporate social responsibility and stock split

This study examines whether socially responsible companies are likely to conduct a stock split. We argue that these companies, compared to their counterparts, could use their strong corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance to reduce information asymmetry with shareholders, and therefore, are less likely to rely on stock splits to signal their future growth potentials. We find empirical evidence to support our hypothesis and investigate the reasons for the lower frequency of stock splits among CSR oriented firms. We find that more socially responsible firms experience a smaller increase in trading volume and a greater increase in bid-ask spread following a stock split than less socially responsible firms. Furthermore, our study finds that, when more socially responsible firms decide to conduct a stock split, they attract a greater proportion of institutional investors with long-term investment horizons.

     

Post-split underreaction: The importance of prior split history

The magnitude of the underreaction following a stock split is different depending on the number of splits that have already occurred. The first three splits are followed by abnormal profitability and significant underreaction, which are outcomes consistent with managers using splits to signal favorable information about the firm's prospects. However, abnormal profitability fails to materialize and the underreaction gradually dissipates with each subsequent split suggesting the efficacy of a split announcement as a vehicle to convey information is not constant but steadily reduces with each successive split. The underreaction is distinct from any short-term announcement effects and indicates the market does not immediately impound the split's information content. There is no significant change in liquidity around each consecutive split confirming that the underreaction is not explained by microstructure effects. As is the case with other corporate events, the market interprets the content of announcements already made multiple times differently from announcements made less often.     

Stock Splits as a Manipulation Tool: Evidence from Mergers and Acquisitions

We document that acquiring firms are more likely than nonacquiring firms to split their stocks before making acquisition announcements, especially when acquisitions are financed by stock and when the deals are large. Our findings support the hypothesis that some acquiring firms use stock splits to manipulate their equity values prior to acquisition announcements. Using earnings quality as a proxy for firms' intention to manipulate, we find that acquirers with low earnings quality (i.e., acquirers that are more likely to use stock splits to manipulate their stock values) have lower long‐run stock returns compared with their benchmarks, especially when the deals are financed with stock. In contrast, acquirers with high earnings quality do not show that pattern. Our evidence complements and extends the findings in the literature that some acquirers manipulate their stock prices before stock‐swap acquisitions. This study suggests that target shareholders should use information such as earnings quality and stock splits to discriminate among acquirers and ensure that exchanges are conducted on fair terms.     

Another January effect—Evidence from stock split announcements

This paper examines whether there is a January effect in the propensity and abnormal returns of stock split announcements. It provides primary evidence in the investigation of using monthly effects to explain the patterns of stock splits. The results show that the January effect exists in the likelihood of the occurrence of share splits and in the associated short-term abnormal returns. We also find that another monthly effect—the Halloween effect—exists in stock split announcements. However, the January effect has a much larger and considerably more significant impact on the probability and returns of these announcements. The results of this paper shed light on why we observe patterns in the announcement of corporate events.     

The Market Reaction to Stock Splits

In this paper, a model of market reaction to stock splits is presented and tested. We argue that the announcement of a split sets off the following chain of events. The market recognizes that, subsequent to the (reverse) split ex-day, the daily number of transactions along with the raw volume of shares traded will increase (decrease). This increase in volume results in an increase in the noisiness of the security's return process. The increase in noise raises the tax-option value of the stock, and it is this value that generates the announcement effect of stock splits. Empirical evidence using security returns, daily trading volume, and shareholder data strongly supports this theory. The evidence, in conjunction with this theory, also agrees with extant literature that splits result in decreased liquidity, but there is no evidence that this reduction in liquidity is priced.     

Stock Splits in Switzerland: To Signal or Not to Signal?

In Switzerland, the existence of a mandatory minimum par value inhibited many companies from splitting their stocks as they already traded at their minimum par value. These Swiss companies could split their stocks only after the legal minimum par value was lowered in July 1992 and again in May 2001. These two events provide rare opportunities to distinguish between stock splits that signal a permanent increase in stock price and splits that are merely a reaction to a regulatory change and thus have other motives. The significant return differences between the two samples are in line with the hypothesis that splits are a means to send positive signals to the stock market. Furthermore, while trading volumes remained largely unaffected after stock splits, relative tick sizes generally increased after a stock split, and bid-ask spreads often increased after a stock split.     

Corporate media connections and merger outcomes

We examine the relation between acquirer social ties with the media and merger outcomes. We find that, consistent with the media management hypothesis, media connectedness is associated with the higher bid announcement return, lower takeover premium, poorer post-merger operating performance, greater likelihood of deal closure, and greater acquisitiveness. The association between media connections and merger announcement returns is more pronounced for stock deals. Examining the underlying channel, we show that the media networks are positively related to acquirers' media coverage and sentiment of the news articles during the pre-bid announcement period. Our findings are robust to alternative variable measurement as well as tests for endogeneity.