Information disclosure,firm growth,and the cost of capital

We study how information disclosure affects the cost of equity capital and investor welfare in a dynamic setting. We show that a firm’s cost of capital decreases (increases) in the precision of public disclosure if the firm’s growth rate is below (above) a certain threshold. The threshold growth rate is higher when the firm’s cash flows are more persistent, or when other firms in the economy are growing at low rates. While current shareholders always prefer maximum public disclosure, future shareholders’ welfare decreases (increases) in the precision of public disclosure if the firm’s growth rate is below (above) the threshold.     

A Re-examination of Disclosure Level and the Expected Cost of Equity Capital

This paper examines the association between the cost of equity capital and levels of annual report and timely disclosure, and investor relations activities. We estimate the cost of equity capital using the classic dividend discount model. We find that the cost of equity capital decreases in the annual report disclosure level but increases in the level of timely disclosures. The latter result is contrary to theory but is consistent with managers' claims that greater timely disclosures may increase the cost of equity capital, possibly through increased stock price volatility. We find no association between the cost of equity capital and the level of investor relations activities. We conclude that aggregating across different disclosure types results in a loss of information. Failing to include all disclosure types in regression analyses may lead to a correlated omitted variable bias and erroneous conclusions.     

Incentives for risk reporting — A discretionary disclosure and cheap talk approach

This paper adopts and reviews discretionary disclosure and cheap talk models to analyze risk reporting incentives and their relation to regulation. Given its inherent discretion, risk reporting depends on disclosure incentives. To assess these incentives the analytical models consider risk reporting as an endogenous feature, thereby providing a benchmark to discuss regulatory attempts. Particularly, discretionary disclosure models refer to verified disclosure, e.g., on risk factors or risk management, whereas cheap talk models refer to unverified disclosure, like managerial forecasts on the impact of risk factors. This provides an analytically-based framework for discussion. Unlike prior literature, which focuses on disclosure cost, I argue that uncertainty of information endowment and issues of credible communication can explain restricted risk reporting observed empirically. Linking regulatory attempts to these restrictions implies that regulation may mitigate the incentives-driven restrictions to some extent, but can have adverse effects on risk reporting. I particularly discuss the link between effective risk monitoring and the precision of risk reporting; the ex post assessment and usefulness of managerial forecasts on impacts of risk factors; the claimed decreasing cost of capital by mandatory risk reporting; and the threat of self-fulfilling prophecies. While the discussion has implications for both specific risk reporting requirements and empirical research, overall results suggest that we should not overestimate the informativeness of risk reporting even in a regulated environment.     

Voluntary disclosure,mandatory disclosure and the cost of capital

We examine the association between a firm's cost of capital and its voluntary and mandatory disclosures. We include two types of mandatory disclosure: those that are a function of periodic reports that are realizations of ex‐ante reporting systems and those that arise due to specific corporate events. To capture a firm's voluntary and event‐driven mandatory disclosures, we use information the firm provides via 8K filings. To capture periodic mandatory disclosures, we use earnings quality measures derived from the literature. Consistent with endogenous relations predicted by theory, we find that voluntary disclosure and both types of mandatory disclosure are correlated, although only event‐driven mandatory disclosures are significant in models that explain voluntary disclosure. We also find that the cost of capital is generally influenced by each of these disclosure types. We also find that controlling for periodic mandatory disclosure does not affect the relationship between voluntary disclosure and the cost of capital, while controlling for event‐driven mandatory disclosure sometimes affects the relationship depending on the measures used. Our study suggests that a firm's disclosure environment includes the three types of disclosure examined, although the inclusion of mandatory disclosures does not affect the measured association between voluntary disclosure and the cost of capital.     

Management forecasts and the cost of equity capital: international evidence

We examine international differences in the effect of management forecasts (which we use to proxy for voluntary disclosure) on the cost of equity capital (COC) across 31 countries. We find that the issuance of management forecasts is associated with a lower COC worldwide but that the effect of management forecasts on the COC depends on country-level institutional factors. Specifically, management forecasts have a stronger effect on the COC in countries with stronger investor protection and better information dissemination and a weaker effect in countries with higher mandatory disclosure requirements. Further analyses reveal that these relations are more pronounced when management forecasts are more frequent, more precise, and more disaggregated. Overall, our findings suggest that the ability of management forecasts to reduce firms’ COC derives not only from country-level factors that enhance the credibility of their forecasts but also from factors that reflect the quality of the information environment in terms of the distribution of news and the availability and quality of alternative information. Thus, investor protection, media penetration, and mandatory disclosure requirements have an important effect on the ability of management forecasts to lower the COC.     

Disclosure and the cost of equity in international cross-listing

In this paper, we examine the relationship between disclosure level and the cost of equity capital for a sample of international firms cross-listing on the New York Stock Exchange. Increased disclosure has the potential to reduce information asymmetry, reduce the cost of financing and increase analyst following. Using an international asset pricing model, we find that listing firms experience a decrease in both disclosure risk and systematic risk while matching firms do not. Further, we find that the magnitude of the decrease is related to three types of disclosure: accounting standards; analyst following; and exchange/regulatory investor protection. Our results suggest that increased disclosure through accounting standards is beneficial to investors and that disclosure can be accomplished through information intermediaries, e.g., analyst following. For firms with the lowest levels of disclosure prior to cross-listing, all three types of disclosure appear to be valuable.

Creditor rights and the corporate bond market

This study examines whether investor protection affects capital markets, specifically the development of corporate bond markets versus equity markets. Using a dataset of 42 countries, we show that countries with strong creditor rights have more developed corporate bond markets than equity markets. However, we find only weak evidence that countries with stronger shareholder protection have more developed equity markets than corporate bond markets. Additionally, we find that the effect of financial reforms on capital markets is strongly dependent on the strength of investor protection and on the associated information disclosure in a given country.     

EVIDENCE THAT GREATER DISCLOSURE LOWERS THE COST OF EQUITY CAPITAL

The effect of corporate disclosure on the cost of equity capital is a matter of considerable interest and importance to both corporations and the investment community. However, the relationship between disclosure level and cost of capital is not well established and has proved difficult for researchers to quantify. As described in this article, the author's 1997 study (published in The Accounting Review) was the first to measure and detect a direct relationship between disclosure and cost of capital. After examining the annual reports of 122 manufacturing companies, the author concluded that companies providing more extensive disclosure had a lower (forward‐looking) cost of equity capital (measured using Value Line forecasts with an EBO valuation formula that derives from the dividend discount model). For companies with extensive analyst coverage, differences in disclosure do not appear to affect cost of capital. But for companies with small analyst followings, differences in disclosure do appear to matter. Among this group of companies, the firms judged to have the highest level of disclosure had a cost of equity capital that was nine‐percentage points lower than otherwise similar firms with a minimal level of disclosure. Closer analysis of some of the specific disclosure practices also suggests that, for small firms with limited analyst coverage, there are benefits to providing more forward‐looking information, such as forecasts of sales, profits, and capital expenditures, and enhanced disclosure of key non‐financial statistics, such as order backlogs, market share, and growth in units sold. In closing, the article also discusses an interesting new study (by Lang and Lundholm) that suggests there is an important distinction between effective corporate disclosure and “hyping the stock.” The findings of this study show that while higher levels of disclosures are associated with higher stock prices, sudden increases in the frequency of disclosure are viewed with skepticism.     

Voluntary disclosure of information when firms are uncertain of investor response

A firm may prefer not to disclose its private information if it is uncertain of investor response. In the setting under consideration, a firm needs to acquire capital from an investor. The investor can choose to invest in the firm, the risk free asset or in some alternative risky investment opportunity. It is shown that in a partial disclosure equilibrium, the firm discloses average information and withholds bad and good information. Disclosure of average information arises to attract the investor's capital away from the risk free asset.     

企业社会责任信息披露与资本成本的互动关系——基于信息不对称视角的一个分析框架

信息不对称是增加企业资本成本的一个重要因素,企业社会责任信息披露有助于降低信息不对称,从而降低资本成本,但该作用的发挥受制于企业是否真实、适当地进行了社会责任信息披露;而基于较低的资本成本约束,企业社会责任信息披露动机、水平和质量也会受到影响,企业社会责任信息披露与资本成本之间存在互动关系。     

Policy and oversight of corporate political activities and the cost of equity capital

This paper investigates the effect of voluntary adoption and disclosure of policies/oversight of corporate political activities/spending on the cost of equity capital for S&P 500 firms over the period 2015–2018. Using the CPA-Zicklin Index to measure the level of policies, oversight, and disclosure of corporate political activities, we find that firms with a greater level of policies and oversight enjoy a lower cost of equity capital. We also document that a higher index is associated with higher stock liquidity. The negative relation is more pronounced among firms with higher exposure to political risk and firms with higher dependence on government spending. We also find that a firm’s information environment plays an important role in moderating the relation between policies and oversight of corporate political activities and the cost of equity capital. Our findings suggest that voluntary adoption and disclosure of policies and oversight mitigates risks and uncertainties related to firms’ political activities, thereby reducing information asymmetry and the cost of equity capital.     

Dynamic Effects of Information Disclosure on Investment Efficiency

This paper studies how information disclosure affects investment efficiency and investor welfare in a dynamic setting in which a firm makes sequential investments to adjust its capital stock over time. We show that the effects of accounting disclosures on investment efficiency and investor welfare crucially depend on whether such disclosures convey information about the firm's future capital stock (i.e., balance sheet) or about its future operating cash flows (i.e., earnings). Specifically, investment efficiency and investor welfare unambiguously increase in the precision of disclosures that convey information about the future capital stock, since such disclosures mitigate the current owners' incentives to underinvest. In contrast, when accounting reports provide information about future cash flows, the firm can have incentives to either under‐ or overinvest depending on the precision of accounting reports and the expected growth in demand. For such disclosures, investment efficiency and investor welfare are maximized by an intermediate level of precision. The two types of accounting disclosures act as substitutes in that the precision of capital stock disclosures that maximizes investment efficiency (and investor welfare) decreases as cash flow disclosures become more informative and vice versa.     

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Sustainability Disclosure: Findings from a Recent SASB Study

Early research into the relationship between corporate sustainability programs and financial performance suggests a positive relationship between strong sustainability performance and a lower cost of capital. As investors increasingly incorporate sustainability information into financial decisionmaking, the importance of high‐quality sustainability disclosure is growing. Just as investors have relied on financial disclosures based on generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) to assess corporate risk, a market standard is needed to help companies disclose comparable sustainability information. To address this issue, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) conducted a recent analysis of the current state of sustainability disclosure in annual Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings. The study reviewed the disclosures of over 700 U.S.‐and foreign‐domiciled companies, focusing on material sustainability topics as identified by SASB's industry‐specific accounting standards. The authors find large variations among different corporate sectors in the frequency and quality, as well as the focus, of their sustainability disclosures. Then, after examining in detail disclosures within the SASB Resource Transformation and Consumer Staples sectors, the authors suggest a number of possible drivers of this variation, including key sustainability and economic trends, while also presenting evidence of increasing investor interest in sustainability information. Although the authors' analysis was not intended to determine the extent to which the quality of sustainability disclosure affects investor returns, the findings provide a useful baseline for the as yet largely unexplored relationship between sustainability disclosure and corporate financial performance.     

Transparency,Liquidity, and Valuation: International Evidence on When Transparency Matters Most

We examine the relation between firm‐level transparency, stock market liquidity, and valuation across countries, focusing on whether the relation varies with a firm's characteristics and economic environment. We document lower transaction costs and greater liquidity (as measured by lower bid‐ask spreads and fewer zero‐return days) for firms with greater transparency (as measured by less evidence of earnings management, better accounting standards, higher quality auditors, more analyst following, and more accurate analyst forecasts). The relation between transparency and liquidity is more pronounced in periods of high volatility, when investor protection, disclosure requirements, and media penetration are poor, and when ownership is more concentrated, suggesting that firm‐level transparency matters more when overall investor uncertainty is greater. Increased liquidity is associated with lower implied cost of capital and with higher valuation as measured by Tobin's Q. Finally, a mediation analysis suggests that liquidity is a significant channel through which transparency affects firm valuation and equity cost of capital.     

Cost of Capital for Exempt Foreign Private Issuers: Information Risk Effect or Earnings Quality Effect? It Depends

We examine whether the information risk accompanying Foreign Private Issuers' (FPIs) exemptions from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting requirements is associated with capital market penalties (measured by a higher cost of equity capital) and, further, the extent to which this information risk is mitigated by earnings quality. Our overall results indicate that exempt FPIs exhibit a higher cost of equity capital than reporting FPIs, and this relation still persists after controlling for earnings quality. Furthermore, we partition our sample into firms from strong and weak investor protection environments. Interestingly, similar to the results in Francis et al. (2008), for FPIs from strong investor protection regimes we find no difference in the cost of capital between exempt and filing FPIs, even after controlling for earnings quality. To the contrary, for FPIs from weak investor protection regimes, we find that the exemption is associated with a higher cost of equity capital, and that earnings quality does not significantly reduce the premium paid by these issuers.     

Types of investor uncertainty and the cost of equity capital

We jointly test the effects of two types of investor uncertainty, one related to future firm performance and unrelated to accruals (cash flow uncertainty) and one directly related to accrual estimation errors (accounting quality uncertainty). Distinct from prior studies, our uncertainty estimates are based on a matched‐firm design that minimizes the mechanical relationship between the two uncertainty variables. We find a strong negative relationship between cash flow uncertainty and multiple estimates of the cost of equity capital. With respect to accounting quality uncertainty, we find a strong positive association with both expected stock returns and implied costs of equity, but only in settings that control for cash flow uncertainty. Collectively, our results suggest the need to consider different types of investor uncertainty when examining how investor uncertainty affects the cost of equity capital.     

Disclosure and the cost of capital: A discussion

In this discussion I comment on the contribution of two papers toward our understanding of how disclosure affects the cost of capital. Specifically, in the context of these papers, I comment on whether disclosure ameliorates or exacerbates the cost of capital that arises from the existence of information asymmetries in capital markets. This is a notion that should be of fundamental interest in that it provides an economic basis for evaluating the costs and benefits of accounting information.     

Overconfidence and Investor Size

Recent research documents that institutional or large investors act as antagonists to other investors by showing opposite trading behaviour following the disclosure of new information. Using an extremely comprehensive official transactions data set from Finland, we set out to explore the interrelation between investor size and behaviour. More specifically, we test whether investor size is positively (negatively) correlated with investor reaction following positive (negative) news. We document robust evidence of that investor size affects investor behaviour under new information, as larger investors on average react more positively (negatively) to good (bad) news than smaller investors. We furthermore find that the performance of smaller, or more overconfident, investors is in general hurt by their behaviour.     

Toward Real‐Time Financial Reporting: How to Reduce Investors' Information Gap and the Cost of Capital

Public companies are struggling to provide detailed and accurate guidance in a turbulent world. Many have dropped guidance altogether, or substantially reduced the precision of their guidance. However, they pay a price for the resulting increase in investor uncertainty in the form of a higher cost of capital and reduced equity valuations. This article provides evidence that improving investors' information can help to reduce the cost of capital of public companies. A look at market data for the years 2007 through 2009 for German DAX 30 companies suggests that investor uncertainty stemming from current financial reporting practices appears to be amplifying the expected association between increases in the beta coefficient and the volatility of fundamentals such as revenues and income, which in turn could be increasing the cost of equity capital. The article explores ways for both individual companies and financial regulators to improve investor information and reduce the cost of capital. For individual companies, the proposed solution is more frequent and voluntary provision of information about actual performance in lieu of more extensive financial guidance. A look at market data for the years 2007 through 2009 for German DAX 30 companies suggests that investor uncertainty stemming from current financial reporting practices appears to be amplifying the expected association between increases in the beta coefficient and the volatility of fundamentals such as revenues and income, which in turn could be increasing the cost of equity capital. Quarterly reporting is a matter of tradition while today's information technology could easily provide investors with real‐time, or close to real‐time, financial information. Internal financial controls, the quality of financial reporting, and the cost of capital might all be improved by mandating faster reporting cycles.     

Segment Disclosure and Cost of Capital

We investigate whether segment disclosure influences cost of capital. Improved segment reporting is expected to decrease cost of capital by reducing estimation risk. However, in a competitive environment segment disclosure may also generate uncertainties about future prospects and lead to a larger cost of capital. Asset‐pricing tests confirm that segment disclosure is a priced risk factor. Also, segment disclosure reduces ex‐ante estimates of cost of equity capital and other measures connected to risk. These results suggest a negative relation between segment disclosure and cost of capital. Our results also show that competition reduces, but does not eliminate, the previous relationship.