The information content of R&D reductions

An extensive literature shows that R&D intensities and increases are positively related to firm performance, but little research examines the valuation of R&D reductions. This paper fills the void by studying long-term performance following R&D reductions. We find that, contrary to conventional wisdom, large R&D cuts are associated with positive future stock returns. This return drift cannot be explained by asset pricing factors, including R&D intensities and R&D increases. We explore two potential economic motives behind R&D reductions: R&D spillover and firm life cycle. We show that operating performance deteriorates immediately before R&D reductions but exhibits no abnormal pattern afterward. While firm growth falls substantially and variability in profitability reduces, firms with low or declining investment opportunities and mature firms outperform. These findings are inconsistent with the spillover hypothesis, but support the life cycle story that firms attempt to resolve overinvestment in R&D that arises over the course of firm life cycle.     

Board size and the variability of corporate performance

This study provides empirical evidence that firms with larger boards have lower variability of corporate performance. The results indicate that board size is negatively associated with the variability of monthly stock returns, annual accounting return on assets, Tobin's Q, accounting accruals, extraordinary items, analyst forecast inaccuracy, and R&D spending, the level of R&D expenditures, and the frequency of acquisition and restructuring activities. The results are consistent with the view that it takes more compromises for a larger board to reach consensus, and consequently, decisions of larger boards are less extreme, leading to less variable corporate performance.     

Intangible Assets and Corporate Signaling

Research and development (R&D) and advertising expenditures often result in patents, technologies and brand names which are difficult to accurately value. Under current generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) these intangible assets are generally not recognized in the financial statements, but instead are expensed in the period that they occur. Prior studies note that the market-to-book ratios of firms with significant levels of R&D and advertising expenditures suggest that investors, at least partially, value these assets. Researchers and practitioners argue that current GAAP, by not recognizing these intangible assets, reduces the usefulness and relevance of accounting reports.We investigate whether companies with significant levels of intangible assets are more likely to emphasize dividend increases and stock repurchases (which are generally perceived as signaling favorable investment opportunities), instead of traditional accounting disclosures, as a means of overcoming adverse selection. Because these assets are difficult to measure, cash distributions may be viewed as a more credible means of signaling firm value to investors. Using analysts' ratings of firms' accounting disclosures, we find that companies with higher levels of R&D and advertising expenditures are less likely to provide extensive accounting disclosures and instead tend to employ dividend and stock repurchase signals. We obtain these results even after controlling for other firm attributes, such as size, stock returns performance, leverage, liquidity and investors' expectations of growth opportunities. We also find that the market reaction to dividend increase and stock repurchase announcements is greater for firms with higher levels of R&D and advertising expenditures, indicating that these announcements are more informative for such firms.     

The Relation Among Targets' R&D Activities, Acquirers' Returns, and In-Process R&D in the US

Abstract:  Using a sample of 129 mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in the US between publicly traded acquirers and targets in research and development (R&D) intensive industries over the period of 1994-2004 and a size- and industry-matched sample, we examine the relation among targets' R&D activities, the probability of acquirers' writing-off in-process R&D (IPRD), and acquirers' returns around the time of M&A announcements. We find that firms acquiring targets with higher R&D investments tend to write off some of the acquired R&D assets upon the completion of the M&As. We also find that the median cumulative abnormal return during the three days around M&A announcements for acquirers with subsequent IPRD write-offs is −2.73% while the return for acquirers without IPRD write-offs is −0.60%. This suggests that acquirers' stock returns around M&A announcements are much lower when investors expect acquirers to expense IPRD. The results are consistent with our conjecture that acquirers tend to write-off IPRD when they acquire overvalued targets. We also find that IPRD write-offs do not increase earnings or stock returns of acquirers after M&As, which is inconsistent with an earnings management hypothesis.     

CEO risk incentives and firm performance following R&D increases

In this study we analyze how CEO risk incentives affect the efficiency of research and development (R&D) investments. We examine a sample of 843 cases in which firms increase their R&D investments by an economically significant amount over the period of 1995–2006. We find that firms with higher sensitivity of CEO compensation portfolio value to stock volatility (vega) are more likely to have large increases in R&D investments. More importantly, we find that high-vega firms experience lower abnormal stock returns and lower operating performance compared to their low-vega counterparts following the R&D increases. Our main results hold in a variety of robustness tests. The results are consistent with the conjecture that high-vega compensation portfolios may induce managers to overinvest in inefficient R&D projects and therefore hurt firm performance.     

THE WEALTH EFFECTS OF ANNOUNCEMENTS OF R&D EXPENDITURE INCREASES

We examine the effect of announcements of plans to increase R&D expenditures on the stock price of rival firms. We test two alternative hypotheses: the first-to-innovate hypothesis versus the free-rider of spillovers hypothesis. Analysis of 114 announcements of increases in R&D expenditures indicates that rival firms suffer a statistically significant negative abnormal return at announcement, which supports the first-to-innovate hypothesis. This result provides a rationale for the potentially costly voluntary disclosure of R&D expenditures. A cross-sectional analysis of the abnormal returns to rival firms reveals that a highly credible announcement has some spillover effects, and that the rival firm earns a much smaller but positive abnormal return. An important implication is that it is always strategically beneficial for the firm to disclose its future R&D plan.     

Innovative intensity and its impact on the performance of firms in Brazil

This article evaluates whether firms that invest in research and development (R&D) have better future performance and if stock market fully value such intangible investment. The results of annual cross-sectional regressions indicate a strong association between the intensity of R&D and future performance, even after controlling for other variables that affect future performance. However, after controlling for firm characteristics and risk factors, the innovative intensity was not significant in predicting future returns. In general, the results suggest that the R&D intensity is not useful for firm valuation in Brazil.     

Stock market reactions to R&D cuts used to manage earnings

Prior research shows that stock returns are positive when firms meet or beat analysts' consensus earnings forecasts but negative when they miss. Past studies also show that managers frequently cut research and development (R&D) expenses in order to meet the consensus forecast. This study shows that the stock market penalizes this behavior and exacts a discount to the market reward if beating the forecast requires cutting R&D. However, it is only a partial discount and firms are still better off managing R&D expenditures in the short run. This study also shows that the reductions in R&D are likely temporary, as firms tend to increase R&D spending in the subsequent periods. Investors appear to recognize these short-term cuts and treat them similarly to accruals.     

R&D Progress, stock price volatility, and post-announcement drift: An empirical investigation into biotech firms

I investigate the effects of R&D progress on the dynamics of stock price volatility and the post announcement drift to provide insights into whether or not and how capital markets react to corporate R&D progress in the context of the biotech industry. I find both stock price volatility and the post announcement drift decrease in R&D progress. More importantly, the decrease is proportional to the increase in the drug development success rate driven by R&D progress. Findings suggest that R&D progress conveys useful risk-relevant information, and plays an important role in explaining stock price volatility change and market anomalies.     

Mispricing and risk of R&D investment in European firms

We study whether R&D-intensive firms earn superior stock returns compared to matched size and book-to-market portfolios across several financial markets in Europe. Mispricing can arise if investors are not able to correctly estimate the long-term benefits of R&D investment or whether R&D firms are more risky than others. The results confirm that more innovative firms can earn future excess returns. Stocks listed on continental Europe markets and operating in high-tech sectors are more prone to undervaluation. This can be caused in the first case by information asymmetries that are more severe in bank-based countries. No evidence is found for a different risk pattern of R&D-intensive stocks.     

The explanatory power of R&D for the cross-section of stock returns: Japan 1985–2000

This paper examines the role of research and development (R&D) in explaining the cross-section of stock returns in Japanese market for the period from 1985 to 2000. Economic intuition suggests that expected stock return and the risk of return should be positively related to R&D. We find moderate evidence that the average stock return is positively related to R&D expenditure in that period. The relation, however, is not stable over three subperiods of the sample. In the bubble-forming period (1985–1989), the average return is in fact slightly negatively related to the R&D intensity. In the burst-of-bubble period (1990–1992), the relation is slightly positive. Only in the post-bubble period (1993–2000) is the R&D effect positive and significant. We also examine the relations of the total risk and systematic risk of returns with the R&D intensity and find that only in the post-bubble period the R&D intensity contributes positively to the risks and its explanatory power is low.     

The R&D-abnormal return anomaly: a transaction cost explanation

Previous research finds a positive and significant relation between current increases in R&D expenditures and future abnormal stock returns. While the existence of this anomalous pattern is well-established, its underlying causes are the subject of much debate. Recent research also shows that transaction costs can lead to apparent market anomalies such as the post-earnings-announcement drift. We combine these two lines of research and posit that the positive relation between R&D increases and future abnormal stock returns is due to transaction costs. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find that abnormal returns on R&D-based, zero-net-investment portfolios disappear after incorporating standard measures of transaction costs. Overall, our results show that the R&D-abnormal return anomaly is more likely due to transaction costs than to the alternative hypotheses of market inefficiency or omitted risk factors.     

Voluntary disclosure of corporate venture capital investments

In this paper, we investigate drivers of corporate venture capital investment announcements. Consistent with voluntary information disclosure theories, we find that a public announcement is less likely to be made when the start-up firm is in the seed stage but more likely when the parent company is large, active in concentrated markets and in non-high-tech industries; spends heavily on internal R&D and capital expenditures; has low leverage ratio; and faces more information asymmetry problems. In addition, corporate venture capital programs managed externally disclose more often than internal programs. We find that parent companies facing more severe asymmetric information problems enjoy the highest abnormal returns in response to announcements. This study contributes to the literature on voluntary information disclosure in that it evidences that larger corporations use disclosure of some of their investments in innovative startups strategically as a way to convey valuable information to the market.     

Technological innovations and aggregate risk premiums

In this paper, I propose that technological innovations increase expected stock returns and premiums at the aggregate level. I use aggregate patent data and research and development (R&D) data to measure technological innovations in the U.S., and find that patent shocks and R&D shocks have positive and distinct predictive power for U.S. market returns and premiums. Similar patterns are also found in international data including other G7 countries, China, and India. These findings are consistent with previous empirical studies based on firm-level data, and call for further theoretical explanations.     

Costly trade,managerial myopia,and long-term investment

The costly trade theory predicts that it is much more difficult to exploit long-term private information than short-term. Thus, there is less long-term information impounded in prices. The managerial myopia theory predicts that a variety of short-term pressures, including inadequate information on long-term projects, cause asymmetrically-informed corporate managers to underinvest in long-term projects. The introduction of long-term options called LEAPS provides a natural experiment to jointly test both theories, which are otherwise difficult to test. We conduct an event study around the introduction of LEAPS for a given stock and test whether corporate investment in long-term R&D/sales increases in the years following the introduction. We find that over a two year period of time LEAPS firms increase their R&D/sales between 23% and 28% ($125–$152 million annually) compared to matching non-LEAPS firms. The difference depends on the matching technique used. Two other proxies for long-term investment find similar increases. We find that the increase is positively related to LEAPS volume. We also find that the increase is larger in firms where R&D plays a larger and more strategic role. We test if a firm becomes less likely to beat analyst's quarterly earnings forecasts after LEAPS are introduced and find support for the hypothesis. These results provide both statistically and economically significant support for the costly trade and managerial myopia theories.     

The impact of state ownership,formal institutions and resource seeking on acquirers’ returns of Chinese M&A

We examine the effects of state ownership, institutions and resource-seeking behavior on post-acquisition stock price returns of Chinese cross-border mergers and acquisitions over the period 1998–2008. Chinese acquiring firms experience negative returns ranging from 2.92 to 10.80 % in 12- and 60-month post-event periods, respectively. State ownership (SOE), interaction between R&D and SOE, formal institutional distance and acquirer size have a positive and significant impact on the long-term acquirer returns. However, the interaction between tangible resources and SOE and acquirer cash holdings appears to have a negative and significant impact on long-term returns. Overall, our results suggest that the state and institutions constitute important sources of long-term value creation for Chinese acquirers.     

The effects of capital structure change on security prices: A study of exchange offers

This study considers the impact of capital structure change announcements on security prices. Statistically significant price adjustments in firms' common stock, preferred stock and debt related to these announcements are documented and alternative causes for these price changes are examined. The evidence is consistent with both corporate tax and wealth redistribution effects. There is also evidence that firms make decisions which do not maximize stockholder wealth. In addition, a new approach to testing the significance of public announcements on security returns is presented.     

Equity compensation and the sensitivity of research and development to financial market frictions

When financial market frictions exist, executives may have to decide which investment activities to reduce when internal funds decrease. Expenditures on research and development (R&D) may be particularly vulnerable because of the long-term nature of innovative activity. We find that equity compensation is associated with lower levels of firm R&D expenditures. Rewarding executives to incur more risk has little effect on R&D expenditures, but rewarding executives for higher returns reduces R&D expenditures and makes R&D expenditures more sensitive to financial market frictions. In contrast, cash compensation reduces the sensitivity of R&D expenditures to financial market frictions.     

Another January effect—Evidence from stock split announcements

This paper examines whether there is a January effect in the propensity and abnormal returns of stock split announcements. It provides primary evidence in the investigation of using monthly effects to explain the patterns of stock splits. The results show that the January effect exists in the likelihood of the occurrence of share splits and in the associated short-term abnormal returns. We also find that another monthly effect—the Halloween effect—exists in stock split announcements. However, the January effect has a much larger and considerably more significant impact on the probability and returns of these announcements. The results of this paper shed light on why we observe patterns in the announcement of corporate events.     

Beyond the blockchain announcement: Signaling credibility and market reaction

We study how signaling credibility of firms' announcements affects market reactions with the blockchain announcements as the research object. The blockchain announcements have led to a significantly positive increase in the value of listed firms since blockchain technology was valued in China. We find that high-tech firms with more technological attributes and reserves could be seen as more credible and trigger more significant stock returns than non-high-tech firms. In addition, state-owned high-tech firms with normal financial status and voluntary disclosure would augment such signaling credibility. In general, the results support that corporate announcements' signaling credibility is vital for market reaction.