THE EFFECTS OF STOCK SPLITS ON THE OWNERSHIP MIX OF A FIRM

This paper examines the relationship between stock splits and the ownership mix of firms. Previous studies suggest that firms issue stock splits to lower their stock price into an optimal range so small investors can more easily afford to buy round lots. The results of this paper show a positive relationship between stock splits and institutional ownership but no effect on the firm's number of shareholders. Thus, the percentage of shares owned by individual investors decreases after a stock split. The inverse relationship between institutional ownership and a firm's total assets suggests that small firms use stock splits to attract attention from Wall Street.     

The Effect Of Stock Splits On Liquidity And Excess Returns: Evidence From Shareholder Ownership Composition

We examine the influence of firm ownership composition on both the abnormal returns at the announcement of a stock split and liquidity changes following a stock split. We find three results. First, the largest post‐split increase in institutional ownership occurs for firms that had low institutional ownership before the split. Second, changes in liquidity are negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. Last, the abnormal return following a split is negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. These findings are important as they shed new light on the source of stock split announcement returns.     

Liquidity, analysts, and institutional ownership

In this paper, we investigate the empirical relationship between institutional ownership, number of analysts following and stock market liquidity. We find that firms with larger number of financial analysts following have wider spreads, lower market quality index, and larger price impact of trades. However, we find that firms with higher institutional ownership have narrower spreads, higher market quality index, and smaller price impact of trades. In addition, we show that changes in our liquidity measures are significantly related to changes in institutional ownership over time. These results suggest that firms may alleviate information asymmetry and improve stock market liquidity by increasing institutional ownership. Our results are remarkably robust to different measures of liquidity and measures of information asymmetry.     

The Effect of Managerial Ownership on Stock Split-Induced Abnormal Returns

This paper tests the proposition that split announcements are informative signals that play a greater information role for widely held firms. We present evidence for an inverse relationship between managerial ownership and the magnitude of stock split-induced abnormal returns. After controlling for industry and firm size, we find that splitting firms have lower managerial ownership, on average, than nonsplitting firms. We also find no evidence that managers trade on inside information prior to announcing splits.     

Investor Sophistication and the Mispricing of Accruals

This paper examines the role of institutional investors in the pricing of accruals. Using Bushee;s (1998) classification of institutional investors, we show that firms with a high level of institutional ownership and a minimum threshold level of active institutional traders have stock prices that more accurately reflect the persistence of accruals. This result holds after controlling for differences in the persistence of accruals between firms with high and low institutional ownership, and after controlling for other characteristics that are correlated with institutional ownership and future returns. Additionally, firms with low institutional ownership are smaller, less profitable, and have lower share turnover, suggesting that limits to arbitrage impede institutional investors from exploiting the seemingly large abnormal returns for these firms.     

Does foreign institutional ownership increase return volatility? Evidence from China

This paper investigates the impact of foreign institutional ownership on firm-level stock return volatility in China, based on our study of a sample of 1458 firms between 1998 and 2008. The empirical results show that share ownership by foreign institutions (both financial and non-financial) increases firm-level stock return volatility, even after controlling for a complete ownership structure, firm size, turnover, and leverage, and correcting for potential endogeneity problems. However, the results also show that foreign individual shareholdings reduce volatility. Furthermore, we document a positive relationship between domestic shareholdings (individual, institutional, and governmental) and firm-level stock return volatility. Empirical results with interaction terms show that foreign institutional ownership increases firm-level return volatility by strengthening the positive impact of liquidity on volatility. The volatility reduction effect of foreign individual ownership is attenuated by government ownership suggests a poor governance environment as a result of the involvement of the Chinese government.     

The impact of institutional ownership on corporate operating performance

This paper examines the relation between institutional investor involvement in and the operating performance of large firms. We find a significant relation between a firm’s operating cash flow returns and both the percent of institutional stock ownership and the number of institutional stockholders. However, this relation is found only for a subset of institutional investors: those less likely to have a business relationship with the firm. These results suggest that institutional investors with potential business relations with the firms in which they invest are compromised as monitors of the firm.     

Institutional ownership and commonality in liquidity

We investigate the relation between institutional ownership and commonality in liquidity and whether this relation differs across country-level institutional and information environments. Using a comprehensive dataset for firms across 40 countries for the period between 2000 and 2016, we find that institutional ownership is negatively associated with stock liquidity commonality. In addition, a firm’s information environment plays the moderating role in the relation between institutional ownership and commonality in stock liquidity. Importantly, we document that the negative association between institutional ownership and liquidity commonality is stronger for firms in countries with weak institutional characteristics or less transparent information environments. Our findings provide additional insights into the role of institutional investors as a demand-side factor of liquidity commonality in international financial markets.     

Insider ownership and signals: evidence from stock split announcement effects

This study examines whether investors regard the level of insider ownership of a firm as useful for evaluating stock split decisions. Results show that the abnormal returns at the announcement of stock splits are positively related to the level of insider ownership. The results prevail even after controlling for other relevant factors. Further analysis indicates the positive relation exists for small firms, but not for large firms. This indicates the market evaluates stock split decisions within the context of both insider ownership and information asymmetry.     

Does institutional ownership increase stock return volatility? Evidence from Vietnam

The literature on institutional ownership and stock return volatility often ignores small emerging countries. However, this issue is more profound, due to the large size of institutional investors and small stock market size, in emerging equity markets. This paper examines the effects of the institutional ownership on the firm-level volatility of stock returns in Vietnam. Our data cover most of non-financial firms listed on the Ho Chi Minh City stock exchange for the period 2006–2012. Employing different analysis techniques for panel data and controlling for possible endogeneity problems, our empirical results suggest that institutional investors stabilize the stock return volatility. Moreover, we document that: i) the stabilizing effect of institutional investor ownership is higher in dividend paying firms, and ii) if firms are paying out more dividends, this stabilizing effect is greater. Our results outline the important role of institutional investors in maintaining the stability in emerging stock markets.     

Does the investment horizon of institutional investors matter for stock liquidity?

This paper examines the role of the investment horizon of institutional investors on stock liquidity of firms. We show that an increase in long-term institutional ownership is negatively associated with firm liquidity, while an increase in short-term ownership is positively related to a firm's stock liquidity. We identify the ownership-liquidity relationship by examining two major channels: the trading activity channel and the informational friction channel. Long-term investors reduce stock liquidity through low frequency trading and access to value-enhancing and private information, which induces adverse selection bias. In contrast, short-term investors improve liquidity through trading activity and competition with other investors, which lowers transaction costs. Our findings further suggest that the effects of an increase in long-term (short-term) institutional investors on liquidity weaken (strengthen) when a firm has more publicly available information. Finally, we show that the positive impact of an increase in long-term ownership on valuation is more pronounced for firms with higher liquidity and the valuation effect is persistent.     

Lead-lag relationships in an embryonic stock market: Exploring the role of institutional ownership and liquidity

This paper investigates the influence of institutional ownership and liquidity on stock return relationships for an embryonic and relatively illiquid stock market. Using daily, individual stock data for Trinidad and Tobago from 2001 to 2015 and a VAR modelling approach, we find for firms of all sizes and levels of analyst coverage that the returns of more institutionally favoured stocks lead those with less institutional ownership. Distinctively, greater institutional coverage is shown not to be associated with greater liquidity, though liquidity levels do condition the influence of institutional ownership. This indicates that institutional owners have information advantages relative to other stock owners.     

Does Shareholder Composition Matter? Evidence from the Market Reaction to Corporate Earnings Announcements

We examine whether institutional ownership composition is related to parameters of the market reaction to negative earnings announcements. When firms report earnings below analysts' expectations, the stock price response is more negative for firms with higher levels of ownership by momentum or aggressive growth investors. There is no evidence, however, that these institutions cause an “overreaction” to earnings news. Ownership structure is also related to trading volume and to stock price volatility on days around earnings announcements. Our findings are consistent with the idea that the composition of institutional shareholders effects stock price behavior around the release of corporate information.     

Split Share Structure Reform,corporate governance,and the foreign share discount puzzle in China

We examine the impact of the Split Share Structure Reform on the well-known foreign share discount puzzle in China. Existing literature confirms that foreign investors are more concerned about insider expropriation because of their information disadvantage relative to domestic investors. The split share structure of the ownership of Chinese listed firms created a conflict of interests between state and private shareholders. Since, before the reform, state shareholders held restricted shares that denied them any wealth effect from share price movements, they had a limited incentive to work with private shareholders to ensure that managers maximized the stock market value of the firm. By abolishing the trading restrictions for state shareholders, this reform has increased the incentive alignment between state and private shareholders, encouraging them to monitor managers. If foreign investors’ concerns over the corporate governance implications of the split share structure at least partly contributed to their discounting of Chinese listed firms, then this discount should be reduced following the reform. Indeed, our evidence confirms this prediction, especially among Chinese listed firms with more state ownership or restricted shares. Our findings imply that this significant institutional reform of the Chinese stock market has benefitted minority investors.     

Institutional ownership and the choice of equity issue method

We examine how institutional ownership, which reflects the informational efficiency of stock prices (Boehmer and Kelley, 2009), impacts the seasoned equity offering (SEO) issue method choice between shelf offerings and traditional SEOs. We find that firms with greater institutional ownership, particularly long term ownership, tend to choose shelf offerings. We control for issue method choice and find that the offer discount decreases with institutional ownership for both shelf and traditional issuers and that higher institutional ownership reduces direct issue costs and is related to a shorter due diligence process for traditional SEOs. This suggests that underwriters are more likely to be able to perform the certification function (and with less effort) for issuers whose stock is priced more efficiently.     

Why are Stock Splits Declining?

The percentage of firms undertaking stock splits has fallen from a peak of 23% in 1982 to less than 1% in 2009. Controlling for time trends and other economic determinants, the declining incidence of stock splits is significantly associated with a drop in household investors’ equity holdings and with a rise in household income. We also report a decline in the size of split factors that is associated with an increase in institutional ownership of equity and with an increase in household income. Collectively, the evidence is consistent with firms responding rationally to changes in investor characteristics.     

Shareholder composition,share turnover,and returns in volatile markets: The case of international REITs

The shareholder composition of listed property companies has changed from the fragmented, retail ownership, to more concentrated, institutional ownership over the past decade. In this paper, we first document significant variation in the composition of the shareholder base across the world's five largest listed property markets. We then examine the relation between the composition of the shareholder base and stock market performance and share turnover during the turbulent trading days of 2008 and 2009. By directly relating the shareholder base of firms to excess returns and turnover on these volatile days, we are able to isolate the importance of shareholder composition during periods when trading behavior is most likely to vary across different types of shareholders. We find that both large block holdings and high levels of institutional ownership decrease trading volumes and moderate stock returns; however, the effects largely occur when stock prices move sharply downward. Moreover, these effects are strongest when ownership concentration and institutional ownership exceed 25 percent. We also find that the disaggregation of institutional investors into distinct categories (banks, pension funds, advisors, etc.) increases our understanding of stock trading and share price dynamics of listed property companies.     

The Market Reaction to Discontinuing Regular Stock Dividends

This paper investigates the behavior of returns to share-holders of NYSE and AMEX firms that publicly announce the discontinuance of regular stock dividends. Using event-type methodology, the results show that the average abnormal return for NYSE and AMEX firms is negative but not statistically significant on the event date. Partitioning the sample by stock-related characteristics shows that for small firms with low stock prices and low institutional ownership, management's decision to drop regular stock dividends conveys a significantly negative signal, which, in turn, causes stock prices to decline. Firms that drop a stock payment and simultaneously initiate or increase cash dividends experience a significant increase in shareholder wealth. However, firms that drop the stock dividend policy and do not begin a cash dividend policy experience a sharp decline in shareholder wealth.     

Ownership Differences and Firms' Income Smoothing Behavior

This paper examines the association between differences in ownership structure and income smoothing behavior in firms. The underlying constructs affecting this association include agency relationships, managerial incentives, information asymmetry, and firm profitability. A logistic regression model is used to test the association between income smoothing and variables related to inside ownership, institutional holdings, leverage, managerial compensation, profitability, and firm size. The evidence suggests that ownership differences, managers' incentive structures, and firm profitability are important in explaining income smoothing behavior in firms. By separating inside ownership and levels of debt into different levels, we are able to show the existence of a non-monotonic relationship between ownership differences and firms' income smoothing behavior.     

机构持股与会计稳健性

以我国A股具有机构持股的上市公司2007～2011年的数据为样本,采用Basu(1997)的盈余-回报率模型研究了机构持股对会计稳健性的影响。结果表明:机构持股比例越高,会计稳健性越好。考虑到产权性质后,国有公司的机构持股比例与会计稳健性具有显著的正相关关系,而在非国有公司中并不显著。另外,高成长性公司中机构持股对会计稳健性的影响显著为正,但在低成长性公司这一结果不显著。