Characterizing the Risk of IPO Long‐Run Returns: The Impact of Momentum,Liquidity, Skewness,and Investment

We study 6,686 initial public offerings (IPOs) spanning the period 1981‐2005 and find that the new issues puzzle disappears in a Fama‐French three‐factor framework. IPOs do not underperform in the aftermarket on a risk‐adjusted basis and do not underperform a matched sample of nonissuers. IPO underperformance is concentrated in the 1980s and early 1990s, and IPOs either perform the same as the market or outperform on a risk‐adjusted basis from 1998 to 2005. We find that outperformance in the later period is driven by large firms. Factors for momentum, investment, liquidity, and skewness help to explain aftermarket returns, although size and book‐to‐market tend to proxy for skewness. IPO investors receive smaller expected returns due to negative momentum and investment exposure and in exchange for higher liquidity.     

Whither IPOs? Toward an Ecosystem Perspective on Corporate Financing: A Commentary

This commentary reviews the Canadian initial public offering (IPO) market and positions it within global capital market trends. Our views and comments reflect discussions with several market participants whom we have met over the years. Essentially, the falling number of IPOs in Canada during the last decade mimics trends in other developed countries such as the United States. In our view, five underlying factors underlie that decline. The picture that emerges is that capital markets are now widely viewed as a global integrated ecosystem where all actors are interconnected and an IPO represents but one way to raise capital.     

Long‐term Performance of Greek IPOs

We analyse the long‐run performance of 254 Greek IPOs that were listed during the period 1994–2002, computing buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns (BHAR) and cumulative abnormal returns (CAR) over 36 months of secondary market performance. The empirical results differ from international evidence and reveal long‐term overperformance that continues for a substantial interval after listing. Measuring these returns in calendar time, we find statistical significance with several of the benchmarks employed. We also find that long‐term overperformance is a feature of the mass of IPOs conducted during a pronounced IPO wave. Cross‐sectional regressions of long‐run performance disclose several significant factors. The study demonstrates that although Greek IPOs overperform the market for a longer period, underperformance eventually emerges, in line with much international evidence. Our interpretation is that the persistence of overperformance over a significant interval is due to excessive supply of issues during the ‘hot IPO period’. Results associated with pricing during the ‘hot IPO period’ indicate positive short‐ (1‐year), medium‐ (2‐year) and negative long‐term (3‐year) performance.     

An empirical investigation of whether Australian capital gains tax reforms influence individual investor behaviour

This paper examines whether an asset's qualification for discounted tax treatment is associated with positive abnormal trading volumes and negative abnormal returns, as would be predicted if investors modified their behaviour to reduce their tax liability. Our examination of 152 initial public offerings (IPOs) documents that there is an incremental increase in abnormal trading volume for those IPOs that have experienced a significant increase in price since listing over those IPOs that have increased only marginally. Although we provide only limited evidence to suggest that this increase in trading volume is accompanied by a decrease in returns, this is not unexpected in a market that has anticipated this type of behaviour by the relatively small proportion of individual investors able to benefit from the discounted tax treatment.     

The Initial Public Offerings of Listed Firms

A number of firms in the United Kingdom list without issuing equity and then issue equity shortly thereafter. We argue that this two‐stage offering strategy is less costly than an initial public offering (IPO) because trading reduces the valuation uncertainty of these firms before they issue equity. We find that initial returns are 10% to 30% lower for these firms than for comparable IPOs, and we provide evidence that the market in the firm's shares lowers financing costs. We also show that these firms time the market both when they list and when they issue equity.     

Re‐assessing the long‐term underperformance of UK Initial Public Offerings

Previous work has identified that IPOs underperform a market index, and the purpose of this paper is to examine the robustness of this finding. We re‐examine the evidence on the long‐term returns of IPOs in the UK using a new data set of firms over the period 1985–92, in which we compare abnormal performance based on a number of alternative methods including a calendar‐time approach. We find that, using an event‐time framework, there are substantial negative abnormal returns to an IPO after the first 3 years irrespective of the benchmark used. However, over the 5 years after an IPO, abnormal returns exhibit less dramatic underperformance, and the conclusion on negative abnormal returns depends on the benchmark applied. Further if these returns are measured in calendar time, we find that the (statistical) significance of underperformance is even less marked.     

The Pricing of Equity Carve-Outs

This article examines the pricing of stock for 251 equity carve‐outs during the 1986–1995 period. We document a mean initial‐day return of 5.83% and a mean one‐week return of 5.43%. Among carve‐outs, the initial underpricing is lower for issues represented by high prestige investment bankers and those that have a lower offer price. In comparison with 251 initial public offering (IPO) firms matched by size and book‐to‐market ratio of equity, carveouts exhibit significantly lower initial‐day returns, but their buy‐and‐hold returns for sixmonth and one‐year periods are not significantly different from IPOs. The IPO firms have a three‐year return of 28.82% which is significantly higher than the 21.07% return for the carve‐out firms.     

The Performance of Internet Firms Following Their Initial Public Offering

We find that initial returns were more favorable for Internet initial public offerings (IPOs) than non–Internet firm IPOs. Since the demise of the Internet sector, the underpricing of Internet–firm IPOs is not significantly different from other IPOs.
Initial returns of Internet firms are positively and significantly related to underwriter prestige and to pre–IPO market conditions. However, initial returns after the demise of the Internet sector are not significantly related to these characteristics.
The aftermarket performance of Internet firms is initially favorable but weakens over time. Firms that experienced higher initial returns during the strong Internet cycle experience weaker aftermarket performance.     

Initial Public Offerings: CFO Perceptions

We examine four issues pertaining to initial public offerings (IPOs) using a survey of 438 chief financial officers (CFOs). First, why do firms go public? Second, is CFO sentiment stationary across bear and bull markets? Third, what concerns CFOs about going public? Fourth, do CFO perceptions correlate with returns? Results support funding for growth and liquidity as the primary reasons for IPOs. CFO sentiment is generally stationary in pre‐ and post‐bubble years. Managers are concerned with the direct costs of going public, such as underwriting fees, as well as indirect costs. We find a negative relation between a focus on immediate growth and long‐term abnormal returns.     

An investigation of the short-term performance of the Canadian IPO market.

This article explores the short-term return performance of the Canadian initial public offering (IPO) market. Historically, the Canadian IPO market has shown to be one of the least underpriced markets in the world. This paper uses recent IPOs from 2010 to 2017, and the results confirm that the Canadian IPO market remains one of the least underpriced IPO markets in the world. The mean (median) first-day returns show that Canadian IPOs are marginally underpricing at only 1.45% (0.24%) during the sample period. Additional short-run return measures indicate that Canadian IPOs underperform the market in their 1-month, 6-month, and 12-month holding periods. This research also contributes to the existing IPO literature by showing that restricted voting share offerings tend to be more underpriced and perform poorly over the short-term.     

The Performance of Private Equity‐Backed IPOs

My paper examines the aftermarket performance of private equity‐backed initial public offerings (IPOs) and compares it to the performances of equivalent samples of venture capital‐backed and other nonsponsored issues on the London Stock Exchange during the period 1992‐2005. The evidence suggests marked differences across the three groups in terms of market size, industry classification, first‐day returns, and key operating characteristics at the time of flotation. In fact, private equity‐backed IPOs are larger firms in terms of sales and assets, more profitable, and relatively modest first‐day returns. In the three years following the public listing, they display better operating and market performance when compared to other IPOs and the market as a whole.     

The under-pricing of IPOs in the Gulf cooperation council countries

We document the phenomenon of under-pricing initial public offerings (IPOs) for 47 Gulf firms that went public between 2001 and 2006. The IPOs had, on average, initial abnormal returns of 290 percent, far exceeding those documented for both developed and emerging markets. In aftermarket performance, we find that these IPOs provide investors with negative abnormal returns over a one-year period, which seems to be consistent with findings in other industrial and emerging markets. The empirical models fail, however, to provide us with a satisfactory explanation using the common independent variables employed in the literature. Nevertheless, it appears that country- and industry-specific characteristics, in addition to the timing of the offers, play a key role in explaining IPO behavior in the region. This paper's empirical findings support the hypothesis that investors are initially over-optimistic about an IPO's performance, but grow more pessimistic over time.     

The negative news threshold—An explanation for negative skewness in stock returns

Abstract

A vast literature documents negative skewness in stock index return distributions on several markets. In this paper the issue of negative skewness is approached from a different angle to previous studies by combining the Trueman's 1997 model of management disclosure practices with symmetric market responses in order to explain negative skewness in stock returns. Empirical tests reveal that returns for days when non-scheduled news items are disclosed are the source of negative skewness in stock returns, as predicted. These findings suggest that negative skewness in stock returns is induced by asymmetries in the news disclosure policies of firm management. Furthermore, it is found that the returns are negatively skewed only for non-scheduled firm-specific news disclosures for firms where the management is compensated with stock options.     

Do Privatization IPOs Outperform in the Long Run?

This paper investigates the long-run stock returns of privatization initial public offering (IPO) firms using a sample of 241 privatization IPOs from 42 countries during the period 1981-2003. We compare one-, three-, and five-year holding period returns of privatization IPOs to those of the domestic stock market indices and to size and size- and book-to-market equity ratio (BM)-matched firms from the same countries. Consistent with previous studies, we find that privatization IPOs significantly outperform their domestic stock markets in the long run. However, they show less consistent abnormal long-term stock performance relative to their size or size- and BM-matched benchmark firms.     

Cybersecurity Disclosure by the Companies on the S&P/TSX 60 Index

Cybersecurity has become a topic of great interest since 2010. Accounting issues surrounding cybersecurity governance, management, and disclosure have gained attention from accounting standard setters, large accounting firms, and professional associations, but only a limited number of studies have looked at cybersecurity disclosure. In this study, we examine whether the content of cybersecurity disclosures of Canadian firms comprising the S&P/TSX 60 index is aligned with best practices—that is, financial regulators' guidelines in that matter. A content analysis was performed of documents issued between January 2017 and mid‐2018, consisting of recent annual information forms (AIFs), annual and quarterly management's discussion and analysis (MD&As), proxy circulars, material change reports, and news releases. To assess the nature and extent of cybersecurity disclosure, we developed a scoring grid featuring 40 items based on financial regulators' guidelines. Results show that cybersecurity disclosure levels are low. Companies vary widely in the amount of detail they provide, and the information is often not company‐specific. The variations among industrial sectors involve the categories related to cybersecurity risk, cybersecurity risk mitigation, and other items. Most of the companies provided cybersecurity disclosures in the annual MD&A, and several reiterated some disclosure items in the AIF and proxy circular. The results of this study highlight some areas where cybersecurity disclosures have evolved and others where they could be improved. They suggest that some firms strive to avoid boilerplate language and be more company‐specific. The findings also suggest that financial regulators could issue more stringent requirements.     

IPO first‐day returns: Skewness preference,investor sentiment and uncertainty underlying factors

In this paper, we investigate the initial public offering (IPO) first-day returns. Our focus is to examine the irrational component of the agent behavior towards IPO lotteries. Based on 234 French IPOs performed between 2002 and 2012, we find that IPOs with high initial returns have higher idiosyncratic skewness, turnover and momentum. This finding provides empirical evidence for investors' preference for stocks with lottery-like features and investor sentiment. In addition, we show that the skewness preference and the investor sentiment effect are stronger during periods of favorable market conditions. Our results are robust to the integration of uncertainty underlying factors.     

Divergence of Opinion Surrounding Extreme Events

This paper examines the stock market performance of a large sample of new issues (IPOs and SEOs) following an extreme price movement during the first three years after the offering. Strong underperformance follows either a positive or negative (at least +/?15%) one‐day return event. This poor performance cannot be explained by the Fama‐French four‐factor methodology, or by the generally low stock returns of growth firms. Unlike recent issuers, non‐issuers report no poor performance following a similar extreme event using the four‐factor methodology. The extreme event date shows very high levels of turnover, a measure of divergence of opinion. Finally, there is a strong negative linkage between higher levels of divergence of opinion and subsequent stock performance.     

The Wealth Effect of Demutualization: Evidence From the U.S. Property-Liability and Life Insurance Industries

This study examines the wealth effect of demutualization initial public offerings (IPOs) by investigating underpricing and postconversion long‐run stock performance. Our results suggest that there is more “money left on the table” for demutualized insurers than for non‐demutualized insurers. We show that higher underpricing for demutualized firms can be explained by greater market demand, market sentiment, and the size of the offering. Further, contrary to previous research reporting an average underperformance of industrial IPOs, we show that demutualization IPOs outperform non‐IPO firms with comparable size and book‐to‐market ratios and non‐demutualized insurers. We present evidence that the outperformance in stock returns is mainly attributable to improvement in post‐demutualization operating performance and demand at the time of the IPOs. The combined results of underpricing and long‐term performance suggest that the wealth of policyholders who choose stock rather than cash or policy credits is not harmed by demutualization. Stockholders who purchase demutualized company shares either during or after the IPO have earned superior returns. Our findings are consistent with the efficiency improvement hypothesis.     

THE EFFECT OF THE TRADING SYSTEM ON IPO UNDERPRICING: EVIDENCE FROM THE 1997 ORDER‐HANDLING RULES

We use a natural experiment resulting from the 1997 Securities and Exchange Commission rule mandating a change in the order‐handling rules (OHR) for all NASDAQ stocks to test whether secondary market structure affects initial public offering (IPO) underpricing. We find that the increase in liquidity that the OHR represent led to a decrease in underpricing for cold NASDAQ IPOs, suggesting that when liquidity is lowest, changes in market liquidity display a negative relation to initial returns.     

Underwriter learning about unfamiliar firms: Evidence from the history of biotech IPOS

This study examines the ability of underwriters to properly value unfamiliar firms prior to issuance. I use a sample of IPOs in biotechnology, a relatively new but thriving industry. The first American biotech IPO was in 1980. Through the end of 2004, almost 500 biotech IPOs have appeared in the public market. I find that biotechnology differs from other industries in the attributes of individual firms valued by the market. In particular, R&D and the quality of human capital (e.g., star scientists on the staff) are much more important for biotech valuations. I find also that underwriters appeared not to appreciate this distinction for early biotech IPOs; in those cases, first-day market returns were predictable by firm attributes not used by underwriters to establish IPO issue prices. I also find that underwriters have learned over time, albeit slowly. Over the 20+ years of biotech history, IPO issue prices have become more dependent on firm attributes unique to biotechs while first-day market returns have become less predictable.