Analysing the market–book value relation in large Australian and US firms: implications for fundamental analysis and the market–book ratio

This study compares the market–book relation of Australian and US firms using firm‐level dynamic analysis of using annual data for a long‐run period in error correction modelling. This paper contributes to a recent call for alternative ways of estimating Ohlson‐type linear valuation models (Ohlson and Kim, 2015). Log transformations of the data are used in this study to improve the statistical properties of the models. This study contributes to the findings on linear valuation model estimation for long‐run firms. Based on the returns model estimation, we find evidence of a higher level of co‐integration between market and book values for Australian firms.     

The degree of internationalization and the value of the firm: theory and evidence

A valuation approach is used to examine the effects of the degree of internationalization on the relation between the market value of a firm’s stock and the book value of equity. Degree of internationalization was measured by both foreign revenues over total revenues and foreign assets over total assets. Results on the “Most International” 100 U.S. firms indicate a consistent and positive relation between each measure of the degree of internationalization and the value of equity.     

Profitability,Value, and Stock Returns in Production‐Based Asset Pricing without Frictions

In a production‐based asset pricing model without adjustment costs and with decreasing returns to scale following Brock (1982), stock returns at the firm level are determined by profitability, the book‐to‐market ratio, and the change in future profitability prospects. Although firms with low book‐to‐market ratios are normally more profitable and profitable firms are predicted to have higher returns, the stylized fact that book‐to‐market ratios positively forecast returns still holds theoretically, but with specific predicted exceptions. These implications are confirmed empirically.     

What Do We Know about the Capital Structure of Privately Held US Firms? Evidence from the Surveys of Small Business Finance

This study examines the capital‐structure decisions of privately held US firms using data from four nationally representative surveys conducted from 1987 to 2003. Book‐value firm leverage, as measured by either the ratio of total loans to total assets or the ratio of total liabilities to total assets, is negatively related to firm age and minority ownership; and is positively related to industry median leverage, the corporate legal form of organization, and to the number of banking relationships. In general, these results provide mixed support for both the Pecking‐Order and Trade‐Off theories of capital structure.     

Labor cost voluntary disclosures and firm equity values: Is human capital information value-relevant?

This study examines the market value relevance of labor cost voluntary disclosures using a valuation model relating firm market values to book values of equity and to disclosed human capital information, such as labor costs, net pension liabilities (NPLs), and estimated average and marginal labor productivity and efficiency indicators. Results indicate that labor cost disclosing companies command higher equity market values in general, and that labor productivity and efficiency measures appear to be undervalued. Both findings suggest that there might be market opportunities for firms with valuable human capital to differentiate themselves from their industry peers, which might encourage further human capital disclosure in the future. More refined measures of human capital assets and investments are needed to assess firms’ human resource management decisions and performance impacts in the capital markets more adequately.     

Managerial flexibility and the wealth effect of new product introductions

This paper examines whether investors recognize the value of managerial flexibilities, as proxied by real options, in their valuation of new product introductions. We define a firm’s real options portfolio as the difference between the firm’s market value and its assets in place. A firm’s strategic flexibilities are modeled as the ratio of its real option portfolio to its book value. Using a sample of new product introductions from 1998–2007, we find our real options measure is positively related to announcement period abnormal returns. This result holds after we control for other variables known to be correlated with the announcement effect in previous studies. Our result is robust to alternative measures of real options based on analysts’ earnings expectations and whether a firm has one or multiple segments. In summary, our results suggest that a firm’s perceived strategic and operating flexibilities are an important factor in the valuation of new products.     

Dividends,research and development expenditures,and the value relevance of book value for UK loss-making firms

We extend prior research on the value relevance of accounting information for loss-making firms by allowing the coefficient of book value to vary across three distinct set of loss-making firm observations in our valuation model. Our key findings are, first, that book value is a less important determinant of equity value for either high R&D-intensive firms or dividend-paying firms, relative to firms with low R&D-intensity and zero dividends. Prior literature suggests that book value is a strong indicator of firm value for loss-making firms. This reasoning stems from book value's role as: (i) a proxy for the value of the possibility of abandoning or adapting the firms' net assets; and/or (ii) a proxy for expected future normal earnings. Our work suggests that this prior literature does not fully capture the valuation role of book value for loss-making firms. Second, we also find that dividends are value relevant, but generally only when the valuation role of book value is contextualised by allowing its coefficient to vary across high R&D-intensive firms, and dividend-paying, loss-making firms.     

IS THE BOOK‐TO‐MARKET RATIO A MEASURE OF RISK?

We develop a leverage‐based alternative to traditional asset pricing models to investigate whether the book‐to‐market ratio acts as a proxy for risk. We argue that the book‐to‐market ratio should act as a proxy because of the expected relations between (1) financial risk and measures of capital structure based on the market value of equity and (2) asset risk and measures of capital structure based on the book value of equity. We find no relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in all‐equity firms after controlling for firm size, and an inverse relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in firms with a negative book value of equity.     

Capital Structure Decisions: Which Factors Are Reliably Important?

This paper examines the relative importance of many factors in the capital structure decisions of publicly traded American firms from 1950 to 2003. The most reliable factors for explaining market leverage are: median industry leverage (+ effect on leverage), market-to-book assets ratio (−), tangibility (+), profits (−), log of assets (+), and expected inflation (+). In addition, we find that dividend-paying firms tend to have lower leverage. When considering book leverage, somewhat similar effects are found. However, for book leverage, the impact of firm size, the market-to-book ratio, and the effect of inflation are not reliable. The empirical evidence seems reasonably consistent with some versions of the trade-off theory of capital structure.     

Searching for value relevance of book value and earnings: a case of premium versus discount firms

We examine the premium/discount firm characteristic that fundamentally affects the value relevance of two key accounting line items, earnings and book values. We argue that from the perspective of both the residual income and option-style valuation models, the relative valuation roles of earnings and book values differ fundamentally between firms that trade at a premium vis-à-vis discount to book value. We find that book values play a significantly more important role in equity valuation than earnings when firms trade at a discount. We also find that other known influential conditions, such as the sign of earnings (Collins et al. in Acc Rev 74(1):29–61, 1999) or the relative levels of earnings and book value (Burgstahler and Dichev in Acc Rev 72(2):187–215, 1997), become inconsequential when the premium/discount condition of the firm is controlled for. The discovered relationships between the relative valuation roles of book values and earnings and the discount/premium characteristics of the firm are robust to the effect of time, information environment and the industry of the firm.     

Credibility Attributes and Investor Perceptions of Non‐GAAP Earnings Exclusions

Recent empirical evidence suggests that investors focus more on non‐GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) than on traditional GAAP earnings because non‐GAAP earnings are believed to proxy for a firm's ongoing profitability, a measure useful for valuation. Managers determine these non‐GAAP earnings by excluding certain items from their GAAP income. However, because these non‐GAAP earnings are both unaudited and may be disclosed by a firm to manage investors’ perceptions as opposed to inform, investors must infer the credibility of the disclosure through observable firm attributes. In this study we examine whether firms with stronger credibility attributes (corporate governance, higher‐quality auditors, and higher historical information quality) will be perceived as providing more credible non‐GAAP exclusions than those with weaker attributes. Our expectation is that the market reaction to non‐GAAP earnings exclusions of firms with stronger credibility attributes will be greater than for those with weaker attributes. Our results support our expectation.     

Mean Reversion in Profitability for Non‐listed Firms

The presence of mean reversion in profitability at the firm level is important for valuation and prediction of growth and earnings. We investigate the mean reversion in accounting profitability for Norwegian non‐listed firms for the period 1988–2006. We find a mean reversion rate of about 0.44 per year. This is higher than found in other studies. We also find that small firms have a higher mean reversion rate than large firms. Our results should have important practical implications for the difficult task of valuing non‐listed firms. Previously, price‐to‐book ratios have been used to investigate changes in profitability over time for listed firms. We examine bankruptcy risk as an alternative variable for unlisted firms. We find that bankruptcy risk may help explain changes in profitability, but the results are not as strong as found in previous work.     

The boundaries of firms as information barriers

When contracts are incomplete, the property‐rights theory of firms suggests that ownership of physical assets provides better outside options, which in turn strengthen the owner's incentives to invest in the enterprise. This approach is less suitable for human capital firms such as management consulting that lack physical assets. This article develops an alternative theory for integration that sheds light on the boundaries of human capital firms. In particular, when a relationship between parties includes large potential externalities, reducing the outside option of each party will be beneficial. Integration provides this reduction by blurring the contribution of individual parties within the firm, and thus lowering their independent market valuation. Unlike some results in the property‐rights literature, the results here are robust to variations in ex post bargaining solution.     

Book‐to‐Market Equity,Asset Correlations and the Basel Capital Requirement

This paper examines the effect of book‐to‐market equity (BE/ME) on asset correlations under the Basel capital requirement. We find that BE/ME captures variations in asset correlations after controlling for firm size, default probability and industry effects from 1987 to 2011. Obligors with higher BE/ME exhibit lower asset correlations compared to those with lower BE/ME. Decomposing BE/ME into assets‐in‐place and growth options based on the asset pricing literature shows that obligors with more assets‐in‐place or more fixed assets have higher BE/ME and lower asset correlations than those with more growth options. Overall, our findings suggest that BE/ME is an additional important factor that may improve the estimates of asset correlations and thereby banks’ capital adequacy.     

The Valuation Accuracy of the Price-Earnings and Price-Book Benchmark Valuation Methods

This paper evaluates the valuation accuracy of the price-earnings (P/E), the price-book (P/B) and a combined price-earnings and price-book (P/E-P/B) benchmark valuation methods. Performance of the benchmark valuation methods relies on the definition of comparable firms. In this paper, comparable firms are selected based on industry membership, size and return on equity as well as combinations of industry membership with size and with return on equity. We find that within the P/E and P/B benchmark valuation methods, the best definition of the comparable firms are based on industry membership combined with return on equity. However, only the industry membership is necessary to define the comparable firms for the combined P/E-P/B method. In sum, the results suggest that, when firm's value is unknown, the combined P/E-P/B valuation approach selecting comparable firms based on industry membership performs the best among all the approaches evaluated in this paper.We also find that the P/E benchmark valuation method performs better than the P/B benchmark valuation method and the combined method outperforms either the P/E or the P/B method. These results imply that earnings are more important than book value as a single-number firm valuator over our sample years (from 1973 to 1992) and that both earnings and book values are value relevant, one does not substitute perfectly for the other.     

Share Issuance and Factor Timing

We show that characteristics of stock issuers can be used to forecast important common factors in stocks' returns such as those associated with book‐to‐market, size, and industry. Specifically, we use differences between the attributes of stock issuers and repurchasers to forecast characteristic‐related factor returns. For example, we show that large firms underperform after years when issuing firms are large relative to repurchasing firms. While our strongest results are for portfolios based on book‐to‐market (i.e., HML), size (i.e., SMB), and industry, our approach is also useful for forecasting factor returns associated with distress, payout policy, and profitability.     

Future Realized Return,Firm‐specific Risk and the Implied Expected Return

In this paper, I propose a novel approach to derive a firm‐specific measure of expected return. It builds on recent accounting‐based valuation models developed by Clubb (2013) and Ashton and Wang (2013). The measure is intrinsically linked to commonly used financial ratios, including book‐to‐market, (forward) earnings yield, and dividend‐to‐price, as well as growth and past returns. The empirical evidence shows that it is significantly positively associated with future realized stock returns and also significantly correlated with commonly used risk characteristics in a theoretically predictable manner. The results are likely to be of interest to practitioners and managers in making capital allocation decisions and to academics in need of proxies for firms’ discount rates and expected returns.     

How does uncertainty influence target capital structure?

This study investigates how uncertainty affects firms’ target capital structure using a panel data set of U.S. public manufacturers between 2003 and 2018 and finds that high-uncertainty firms have 10.1 (8.1) percentage points lower mean book (market) targets than low-uncertainty firms. This study also shows that the uncertainty effect on leverage targets is greater than the impact of firm size, market-to-book ratio, assets tangibility, R&D intensity, and industry median leverage, making uncertainty the most critical among all time-varying determinants of leverage targets. Further, this study finds that heightened uncertainty decreases debt tax shields, increases potential financial distress costs, and exacerbates debtholder–shareholder conflicts, thereby leading to a lower optimal or target leverage ratio.     

Is the diversification discount caused by the book value bias of debt?

We analyze whether the diversification discount is driven by the book value bias of corporate debt. Book values of debt may be a more downward biased proxy of the market value of debt for diversified firms, relative to undiversified firms, as diversification leads to lower firm risk. Thus, measures of firm value based on book values of debt undervalue diversified firms relative to focused firms. Our paper complements recent literature which uses market values to test the risk reduction hypothesis for a subsample of firms for which debt is traded. Alternatively, we employ market value of debt estimates for the whole firm universe. Consistent with the above hypothesis, we show that the use of book values of debt underestimates the value of diversified firms. There is no discount for mainly equity financed firms and lower distress risk and equity volatility for diversified firms. More concentrated ownership increases firm valuation.     

Does corporate diversification reduce value in high technology firms?

We find that firm value is reduced via industrial diversification and this reduction in value depends upon a firm’s technology intensity. We consider that asymmetric information problems are more severe in technology intensive industries and find that high tech industry firms present distinctly larger value reduction when compared to low tech industry firms. The negative valuation effect is greater for firms that have a relatively larger amount of intangible assets and greater R&D capital. We determine that our findings are robust to different estimation methods and alternative excess value measures.