Analyst Firm Coverage and Forecast Accuracy: The Effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure

In this study, we revisit the relationship between analyst firm coverage and forecast accuracy. In contrast to the proposed negative association in Clement (1999) owing to the portfolio complexity effect, we hypothesize an ‘economy‐of‐scale effect’ that is likely to dominate when analysts rely mostly on public information. In support of the latter effect, we find a positive association between firm coverage and forecast accuracy after the enactment of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD), which substantially reduces the flow of material private information to analysts. Such a result survives a battery of robustness analyses. We further show that, in the post‐Reg FD period, covering more firms increases an analyst's probability of being selected as a star analyst in the subsequent year. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of the information environment in shaping the economic link between an analyst's firm coverage and forecast accuracy.     

Does Regulation Fair Disclosure affect analysts’ forecast performance? The case of restructuring firms

The main purpose of this paper is to investigate how the enactment of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg. FD) influences analysts?? forecast characteristics for restructuring firms. The Reg. FD requires all firms disseminate material information not only to some institutional investors and certain financial analysts, but to all market participants simultaneously. We expect that the regulatory effect of Reg. FD on financial analysts?? forecast performance would be pronounced because of uncertain earnings signals and information complexity produced by restructuring activities. Particularly, we examine how the enactment of Reg. FD affects the relationship between analysts?? earnings forecast attributes and the occurrence and magnitude of restructuring charges. Our general finding is that analysts?? forecast errors and forecast dispersion have declined in the post-FD period for restructuring firms. However, such an impact cannot be persistent with an increase in the relative magnitude of restructuring charges, the proxy for restructuring complexity. This study provides additional evidence that Reg. FD has limited private information, and attempts to provide all users with the same access to information within the context of firms reporting restructuring charges.     

Changes in analyst following for less covered firms accompanying Regulation Fair Disclosure: the roles of ability and industry experience

We examine how Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) affects the decisions of analysts with various levels of ability and industry experience to add or drop less covered firms (LCFs), which are followed by only a few analysts. We use the analysts who continue to follow the same LCFs after Reg FD was implemented as a comparison group to explore the differences in the forecast properties of analysts who add LCFs and those who drop LCFs. We find that, after the implementation of Reg FD, analysts with greater ability or more industry experience are more likely to follow an LCF, and analysts with less ability are more likely to drop coverage of an LCF. In addition, we propose that analysts who add LCFs provide more accurate forecasts and are more likely to issue long-term forecasts. Moreover, compared with analysts who continue to cover the same LCFs, the analysts who drop coverage of LCFs issue more optimistic forecasts for LCFs in the pre-Reg FD period.     

Regulation Fair Disclosure and the timeliness of long-horizon management forecasts

We examine the effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure (hereafter Reg FD) on the timeliness of long-horizon management forecasts of annual earnings, especially those conveying bad news. We expect that managers are less timely in issuing bad news forecasts than good news forecasts prior to Reg FD when they can disclose bad news to selected analysts and institutional investors privately. As Reg FD prohibits private disclosures of material information, managers are expected to accelerate the issuance of long-horizon bad news forecasts after Reg FD due to concerns of litigation risk from institutional investors and loss of analyst coverage, leading to a decrease in timeliness asymmetry between bad news and good news forecasts. We also expect that the effect of Reg FD is stronger among firms with lower ex-ante litigation risk or higher information asymmetry as they are more likely to withhold bad news prior to Reg FD. In addition, we expect that investors and analysts react more to bad news forecasts than to good news forecasts prior to Reg FD, and this asymmetry decreases after Reg FD. Our results are consistent with our predictions and suggest that managers provide long-horizon forecasts conveying bad news more timely after Reg FD.     

Regulation FD and analysts’ vs. investors’ weightings of the cash components of earnings

This paper investigates whether investors’ bias in processing the information contained in the cash components of annual earnings has been reduced, and whether the difference in bias between financial analysts and investors has decreased subsequent to Regulation Fair Disclosure (hereafter, Reg FD). We compare analysts’ and investors’ weightings of the three cash flow components of earnings, defined by Dechow, Richardson, and Sloan (2008), from 1985 to 2008, using historical weightings as benchmarks. Our results show that, in the post Reg FD period, the magnitude of investors’ (analysts’) mis-weightings has decreased (increased), and the differences between analysts’ and investors’ mis-weightings have become smaller. Overall, these results suggest that financial analysts’ information advantages over investors declined after Reg FD took effect, and that investors consequently are less biased in assessing the persistence of the cash flow components of earnings following the implementation of Reg FD.     

Information, Selective Disclosure, and Analyst Behavior

This paper examines whether the prohibition of selective disclosures to equity research analysts mandated by Regulation FD alters the amount of information and the manner in which it is revealed to the market. We demonstrate that equity research analysts are more responsive to information contained in company-initiated disclosures after Reg FD, suggesting that regulation has affected the importance of various channels of communication. We also present evidence consistent with the notion that managers use earnings guidance as a substitute for selective disclosure following the passage of Reg FD.     

The changing relationship between earnings expectations and earnings for value and growth stocks during Reg FD

Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) altered the voluntary disclosure practices of firms with publicly traded securities, thereby affecting relationships between value and growth stock expectations and actual earnings. The results show that earnings forecasts for both stock groups are biased but that bias is less after the introduction of Reg FD. In fact, the difference in pre/post FD forecast bias is larger for growth stocks, suggesting that before Reg FD, analysts did not just misinterpret news but consciously tried to maintain relationships with growth firm managers. However, Reg FD limited these relationships severing the monetary advantage that might be gained from manipulating forecasts.     

Analyst rounding of EPS forecasts and stock recommendations

We examine the association between analysts' stock recommendations and their tendency to round annual EPS forecasts to nickel intervals (i.e. placing a zero or five in the penny location of the forecast). We find that prior to Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD), analysts were more likely to provide rounded EPS forecasts in association with unfavorable (underperform and sell) recommendations. However, after Reg FD, we find no significant association between rounded forecasts and unfavorable stock recommendations. Further, other regulations (NASD 2711, NYSE 472, and Global Research Analyst Settlement) have no impact on analyst rounding behavior. The findings in this study suggest that analyst rounding behavior is a particular form of forecasting optimism motivated, at least in part, by management relations incentives. Further, Reg FD appears partially successful at curbing the influence of management relations incentives on analysts' research.     

Selective disclosure and the role of Form 8-K in the post-Reg FD era

We investigate the impact of Form 8-K filings on cross-firm differences in analysts’ private or idiosyncratic information in the post-Reg FD era. Using firms’ connections to the investment community to identify the likelihood of selective disclosure, we document differences in analysts’ idiosyncratic information arising from selective disclosure before 8-K filings. While filings of 8-Ks pursuant to Reg FD attenuate the link between connections and analysts’ idiosyncratic information, they do so only after selective disclosures have already resulted in some analysts having better private information. In addition, the connections continue to facilitate private information search after the filings of non-Reg FD-specific 8-Ks.     

Mutual Fund Family Size and Mutual Fund Performance: The Role of Regulatory Changes

We examine whether the previously documented positive association between fund family size and fund performance is affected by significant regulatory changes (i.e., Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD), the Global Settlement (GS), and increased scrutiny as a result of trading scandals) that have occurred in the last decade. Using Reg FD as a beginning point for these structural changes, we find that, while fund family size was positively associated with fund performance in the period prior to the regulatory changes, this advantage is significantly weaker in the period subsequent to the regulatory changes. Consistent with the weakened advantage of fund family size in fund performance, we find that the greater stock‐picking skill of larger fund families, measured using the earnings announcement returns of the stocks they trade, also weakened subsequent to the regulatory changes. Using narrower event windows around the regulatory changes, we find that the previously documented superior return of large fund families was partly attributable to selective disclosure. We also find that fund families implicated in the trading scandals experienced a decline in their performance during the scandal period. Finally, we examine the role of large investment banks in providing an advantage to large fund families. Family size was positively associated with the extent to which funds traded in the same direction as forecast revisions by analysts from large investment banks in the period prior to Reg FD and the GS and this association declined significantly after the two regulatory events.     

SEC Regulation Fair Disclosure,information, and the cost of capital

Regulation Fair Disclosure (“Reg FD”), adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in October 2000 was intended to stop the practice of “selective disclosure”, in which companies give material information only to a few analysts and institutional investors prior to disclosing it publicly. Our analysis shows that the adoption of Reg FD caused a significant shift in analyst attention, resulting in a welfare loss for small firms, which now face a higher cost of capital. The loss of the “selective disclosure” channel for information flows could not be compensated for via other information transmission channels. This effect was more pronounced for firms communicating complex information and, consistent with the investor recognition hypothesis, for those losing analyst coverage. Moreover, we find no significant relationship of the different responses with litigation risks and agency costs. Our cross-sectional results suggest that Reg FD had unintended consequences and that “information” in financial markets may be more complicated than current finance theory admits.     

Does Regulation Fair Disclosure Reduce the Information Quality of Managerial Guidance?

We examine an effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) on voluntary public managerial guidance information quality. Results suggest that the information quality of public guidance has not deteriorated after Reg FD. We also examine separately the effect of Reg FD on information efficiency before earnings releases for firms that provide public managerial guidance and those that do not. We find that when we control for the impact of Reg FD on firm characteristics, information efficiency deteriorates for firms that do not provide public guidance and for new guiders, while it does not change for firms that continue issuing public guidance after Reg FD.     

Regulation fair disclosure and the cost of equity capital

We examine the effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) on the cost of equity capital. We find some evidence that (1) the cost of capital declines in the post-Reg FD period relative to the pre-Reg FD period, on average, for a broad cross-section of US firms, (2) the decrease in the cost of capital post Reg FD is mainly for medium and large firms but is insignificant for small firms, and (3) the decrease in the cost of capital post Reg FD is systematically related to firm characteristics indicative of selective disclosure before Reg FD. In contrast, we find little evidence of a decrease in the cost of capital for American Depositary Receipts and US-listed foreign firms, which are legally exempt from Reg FD. Overall, our findings do not support a conclusion in recent studies that the cost of capital has increased post Reg FD and, if anything, suggest the opposite.     

Do financial analysts' long-term growth forecasts matter? Evidence from stock recommendations and career outcomes

Prior literature portrays long-term growth (LTG) forecasts as nonsensical from a valuation perspective. Instead, we hypothesize that LTG forecasts signal high effort and ability to analyze firms' long-term prospects. We document stronger market response to stock recommendation revisions of analysts who publish accompanying LTG forecasts. We also hypothesize and find that these analysts are less likely to leave the profession or move to smaller brokerage houses. Consistent with Reg. FD's intention to promote fundamental analysis of long-term earnings prospects, post-Reg. FD observations drive our results. Overall, we identify previously undocumented benefits accruing to analysts who publish LTG forecasts.     

The Effect of Regulation FD on Transient Institutional Investors' Trading Behavior

We assess the impact of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) on the trading behavior of transient institutional investors in the quarter prior to a bad news break in a string of consecutive earnings increases. Bad news breaks are defined as breaks that are by growth firms, preceded by longer strings of consecutive earnings increases, followed by longer strings of consecutive earnings decreases, and associated with larger declines in earnings. Pre–Reg FD transient institutions have abnormal selling of stocks in the quarter immediately preceding a bad news break. This abnormal selling is confined to firms that hold conference calls in the pre–Reg FD period. However, in the post–Reg FD period transient institutions do not exhibit similar abnormal selling of stocks in the quarter before a bad news break. Furthermore, after Reg FD transient institutions allocate less of their stock portfolios to conference call firms relative to non–conference call firms in the quarters prior to a bad news break. These results demonstrate that Reg FD has had an impact on management's selective disclosure behavior and significantly changed the trading behavior of transient institutions.     

Changes in the Information Efficiency of Stock Prices: Additional Evidence

Previous research shows, using data from three quarters after the implementation of regulation fair disclosure (Reg FD), that there is an improvement in the informational efficiency of stock prices after Reg FD. We compare the informational efficiency of stock prices in four pre-Reg FD quarters (1999–2000) and 12 post-Reg FD quarters (2002–2005). The improvement in the informational efficiency of stock prices previously reported in the immediate aftermath of Reg FD persists in later periods.     

Did Regulation Fair Disclosure affect credit markets?

This study assesses whether the implementation of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) has affected the quantity and quality of information in credit markets. We find that, after Reg FD, borrowing from new lenders was associated with a higher loan spread. We also document that, after Reg FD, (1) borrowers became more dependent on relationship lending; (2) lead lenders retained a higher loan share; and (3) a typical loan syndicate involved a smaller number of participating lenders. We interpret these results as evidence of an increased level of information asymmetry in credit markets after Reg FD.     

An Examination of the Differential Impact of Regulation FD on Analysts' Forecast Accuracy

Regulation fair disclosure (FD) requires companies to publicly disseminate information, effectively preventing the selective pre‐earnings announcement guidance to analysts common in the past. We investigate the effects of Regulation FD's reducing information disparity across analysts on their forecast accuracy. Proxies for private information, including brokerage size and analyst company‐specific experience, lose their explanatory power for analysts' relative accuracy after Regulation FD. Analyst forecast accuracy declines overall, but analysts that are relatively less accurate (more accurate) before Regulation FD improve (deteriorate) after implementation. Our findings are consistent with selective guidance partially explaining variation in the forecasting accuracy of analysts before Regulation FD.     

The effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure on expectations management: International evidence

We examine whether Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) was effective in limiting the expectations management of US firms as well as ADR and foreign-listed firms to meet or beat analysts’ earnings forecasts. Domestic US firms are required to comply with Reg FD; however, ADR firms are explicitly exempted from its provisions. Thus, ADR firms are thought to represent a control against which US firm expectations management is measured. We find a decrease in expectations management for both US and ADR firms. We find that the post-Reg-FD changes for US and ADR firms are not significantly different. This suggests Reg FD was not effective in limiting forecast guidance or, alternatively, both US and ADR firms responded to Reg FD by reducing forecast guidance. We provide additional evidence that ADR firms experienced a significant decrease in expectations management relative to other foreign-listed firms suggesting that ADR firms voluntarily complied with Reg FD. Overall, our evidence suggests that Reg FD worked to reduce expectations management to meet or beat expectations for both US and ADR firms.