The Pricing of Relative Performance Based Incentives for Executive Compensation

Japanese firms report both parent-only and consolidated financial statements. Because of the unique business environment in Japan, there is a widely held view that parent-only data provides a better means for assessing the value of the entire firm. We find that both parent-only and subsidiary earnings are important in predicting future consolidated earnings. However, while stock prices accurately reflect the persistence of parent-only earnings, the Japanese stock market appears to underestimate the persistence of subsidiary earnings, causing a significant positive relation between changes in subsidiary earnings in year t and stock returns in year t +1. This relation between subsidiary earnings and future stock returns does not persist beyond year t 7plus;1. Taking a long (short) position in firms with large, positive (negative) changes in subsidiary earnings results in an average annual abnormal return of 7.06% with positive returns in 12 of the 13 years in the test period.     

Does earnings acceleration convey information?

Valuation theory, investment managers, financial analysts, and textbooks advocating horizontal financial statement analysis suggest that the change in earnings growth (earnings acceleration) conveys value relevant information. We test this assertion using a large sample of U.S. firms. Results from cross-sectional short-window (around earnings announcements) and long-window (annual) returns-earnings regressions reveal a strong association between contemporaneous returns and earnings acceleration after controlling for earnings levels and changes. Moreover, earnings acceleration is useful in predicting future earnings, and financial analysts appear to use the information in earnings acceleration in addition to earnings levels and changes in revising their forecasts. Furthermore, earnings acceleration conveys information incremental to that provided by changes in analysts’ forecasts of long-term earnings growth. This study extends the empirical returns-earnings model that includes only earnings levels and changes and shows that more useful information can be extracted from reported earnings numbers than has been previously documented.     

Can financial statement analysis beat consensus analysts’ recommendations?

We examine whether investors can exploit financial statement information to identify companies with a greater likelihood of future earnings increases and whether stocks of those companies generate 1-year abnormal returns that exceed the abnormal returns from following analysts’ consensus recommendations. Our approach summarizes financial statement information into a “predicted earnings increase score,” which captures the likelihood of 1-year-ahead earnings increases. We find that, within our sample of consensus recommendations, stocks with high scores are much more likely to experience future earnings increases than stocks with low scores. A hedge portfolio strategy that utilizes our approach within each consensus recommendation level generates average annual abnormal returns of 10.9 percent over our 12-year sample period, after controlling for previously identified risk factors. These abnormal returns exceed those available from following analysts’ consensus recommendations. Our results show that share prices and consensus recommendations fail to impound financial statement information that helps predict future earnings changes.     

Compliance with IFRS disclosure requirements and individual analysts’ forecast errors

We investigate the relationship between analysts’ earnings forecast errors and firm compliance with the disclosure requirements of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Using a comprehensive disclosure index of selected IFRS for which previous research has indicated significant noncompliance, we develop an unweighted and an innovative weighted measure of IFRS disclosure compliance. We document that forecast error is negatively related to IFRS compliance, and that the magnitude of this effect is larger when controlling for analyst fixed effects. Our findings suggest that compliance with the disclosure requirements of IFRS reduces information asymmetry and enhances the ability of financial analysts to provide more accurate forecasts. Our findings also support the viewpoint that the extent of compliance with accounting standards is as important as the standards themselves. Our results are robust to alternative model specifications.     

Regulation Fair Disclosure and analysts’ reliance on earnings announcements

Regulation Fair Disclosure prohibits corporations from selectively disclosing material information to groups of favored analysts and institutional investors. If information previously provided is excluded by the new regulation from analysts’ information set, it is plausible that the relative importance of the other information, such as earnings announcements, which remains could increase (Arya et al., 2005). The purpose of this study is to investigate whether analysts become more reliant on firm earnings announcements in revising their forecasts after implementation of the regulation. Our empirical results show that, after the regulation, more analysts issue forecasts immediately after earnings announcements. In addition, analysts’ earnings forecasts tend to converge more after observing earnings announcements in the post-regulation period. These results, in conjunction with the finding of higher overall level of forecast errors and dispersion, indicate that earnings announcements become more important information sources in the post regulation period. These findings suggest that analysts are more reliant on earnings announcements and there is an increase in analyst herding as a result of Regulation Fair Disclosure.     

The implications of ineffective internal control and SOX 404 reporting for financial analysts

The mandatory reporting of firms’ internal control effectiveness continues to be debated by equity market participants, U.S. regulatory agencies and oversight committees. We investigate the implications of material weaknesses in internal control and SOX 404 required reporting of such for financial analysts because analysts are important intermediaries in the U.S. capital market and it is not known whether analysts’ forecasts or coverage decisions are affected by firms’ internal control problems or reporting, respectively. Results of our empirical tests indicate that analysts provide less accurate forecasts and there is greater forecast dispersion for firms with ineffective internal control. We also find that firms that disclose internal control problems have less analyst coverage and that analyst following declines after the material weakness in internal control is disclosed. The results are robust to controlling for potential self-selection bias and management earnings guidance. Our study documents the consequences of ineffective internal control for an important class of financial statement users and suggests the required reporting on the effectiveness of internal control is beneficial to understanding the properties of analysts’ forecasts.     

Do Japanese Analysts Overreact or Underreact to Earnings Announcements?

Several recent studies have used U.S. analysts' forecasts to test for underreaction or overreaction to information in earnings announcements. These tests have provided mixed results. Evidence in Mendenhall (1991) is that analysts underreact. By contrast. results in De Bondt and Thaler (1990) show overreaction by U.S. financial analysts to earnings announcements. The current study contributes to this topic by examining over/underreaction by Japanese financial analysts. Test results show that Japanese analysts do not overreact to earnings announcements, market to book ratios and sales growth. Instead. there is strong evidence that Japanese analysts underreact to earnings announcements and that their underreaction is more pronounced for firms with mostly permanent earnings. Our results also show that Japanese analysts display larger forecast biases for earnings reported under U.S. GAAP as opposed to Japanese GAAP. Finally, we find that US. analysts discount information in earnings announcements to a larger degree (relying to a greater extent on information in past prices instead) when compared to their Japanese counterparts. Further, in contrast to their Japanese counterparts, these analysts display no optimistic bias. The results above suggest that the impact of each country's unique culture and capital norms will have to be taken into account by policy makers in evaluating the feasibility of harmonization of accounting standards.     

Chaebol-affiliated analysts: Conflicts of interest and market responses

Some Korean business groups, or chaebols, have a large stake in securities firms that issue analysts’ reports on their member companies. This structure is unique in that industrial companies and securities firms are affiliated and operate within the same group. We investigate the informational content of earnings forecasts, stock recommendations and target prices made by the chaebol-affiliated analysts, using data collected between 2000 and 2008. The chaebol analysts tend to make more optimistic earnings forecasts for the member companies. The mean EPS forecast error (5.36%) of the affiliated analysts for the same chaebol company are significantly larger than that (3.23%) of other chaebol and independent analysts. The chaebol analysts also assign better recommendations by almost one level and set target prices 2.5% higher to the member companies after controlling for company and analyst characteristics. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that chaebol analysts’ reports are biased by conflicts of interest. Stock market reactions do not differ in response to announcements of stock recommendations issued by affiliated vs. non-affiliated analysts. This suggests that capital markets do not recognize the conflicts of interest inherent in chaebol analysts’ reports.     

A discussion of “Do managers use earnings guidance to influence street earnings exclusions?”

It is well known that both managers and analysts frequently define earnings by excluding various amounts from GAAP earnings. Christensen et al. (Rev Account Stud, 2011) make a prediction of causality whereby managers actively influence how analysts define earnings. They argue that the mechanism through which managers accomplish this is guidance of analysts’ earnings forecasts within a fiscal period. Using a large sample of firms actively followed by analysts, the authors examine whether the existence of earnings guidance is associated with higher levels of total exclusions in analysts’ definition of earnings. The study provides suggestive evidence that managers actively influence analysts’ definition of earnings that they forecast. However, the indirect nature of the research design calls for additional work to specifically link directed guidance of GAAP earnings exclusions to amounts actually excluded by analysts.     

Product market pricing power, industry concentration and analysts’ earnings forecasts

This is the first study to establish a link between product market power and analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy and bias. Relating two different dimensions of market power to earnings forecastability, we document that (a) a firm’s relative pricing power and (b) its industry concentration are strong positive determinants of analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy. We find that forecasting earnings of higher market power firms is less complex due to their ability to withstand cost shocks as well as greater informational-efficiency enjoyed by such firms. Further, forecast optimism increases with weakening product market pricing power and with lower industry concentration. The knowledge derived from this study will hopefully improve the accuracy of equity valuation, and thereby engender better buy-side (stock selections) and sell-side recommendations by analysts. Our analysis also suggests that brokerage firms compensating analysts based on forecast accuracy need to adjust for the differential in the information complexity of different industries.     

Regulation fair disclosure and the market’s reaction to analyst investment recommendation changes

Previous research has shown that affiliated analysts (those who are working for investment banks that underwrite securities for companies) have an incentive to provide optimistically biased recommendations from selective information they are given by the firm. In an effort to halt such activities, as of October 2000, Regulation Fair Disclosure (RegFD) prohibits selective disclosure of material non-public information by public companies to privileged individuals (such as favored research analysts) and requires broad, non-exclusionary disclosure of such information. We examine firms’ stock price reactions to investment recommendation changes from affiliated analysts versus unaffiliated analysts from October 1998 to November 2002, around the passage of RegFD. Similar to previous research, we find that investors reacted more significantly to recommendation downgrades by affiliated analysts than to those by unaffiliated analysts prior to the passage of RegFD. However, we find that the difference in the reactions to recommendation changes is not present after the passage of RegFD. We also find that stock price reactions to analysts’ (both affiliated and unaffiliated) recommendation changes decreased significantly after the passage of RegFD. Thus, RegFD appears to have curbed the selective disclosure of information (particularly negative information) by firms to affiliated analysts. Further, the smaller reactions to recommendation changes by all analysts after RegFD may reflect a change in analysts’ behavior (irrespective of information that is available) or a response by corporate managers to withhold information rather than risking a violation of fair disclosure rules.     

Do Heterogeneous Beliefs Matter for Asset Pricing?

We study how heterogeneous beliefs affect returns and examinewhether they are a priced factor in traditional asset pricingmodels. To accomplish this task, we suggest new empirical measuresbased on the disagreement among analysts about expected earnings(short-term and long-term) and show they are good proxies. Wefirst establish that the heterogeneity of beliefs matters forasset pricing and then turn our attention to estimating a structuralmodel in which we use the forecasts of financial analysts toproxy for agents’ beliefs. Finally, we investigate whetherthe amount of heterogeneity in analysts’ forecasts canhelp explain asset pricing puzzles.     

Financial analysts' forecasts of earnings: A better surrogate for market expectations

The specification of the market expectation of accounting numbers is a common feature of many empirical studies in accounting and finance. Givoly and Lakonishok (1979) found that financial analysts' forecasts have information content. This study evaluates the quality of analysts' forecasts as surrogates for the market expectation of earnings and compares it with that of prediction models commonly used in research. Results indicate that prediction errors of analysts are more closely associated with security price movements, suggesting that analysts' forecasts provide a better surrogate for market expectations than forecasts generated by time-series models. The study also identifies factors that might contribute to the performance of the financial analysts'forecasts. The broadness of the information set employed by analysts and, to a lesser extent, their reliance on information released after the end of the fiscal year appear to be important contributors to their performance.     

Relative accuracy of analysts’ earnings forecasts over time: a Markov chain analysis

The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the time patterns of individual analysts’ relative accuracy ranking in earnings forecasts using a Markov chain model. Two levels of stochastic persistence are found in analysts’ relative accuracy over time. Factors underlying analysts’ performance persistence are identified and they include analyst’s length of experience, workload, and the size and growth rate of firms followed by the analyst. The strength and the composition of these factors are found to vary markedly in different industries. The findings support the general notion that analysts are heterogeneous in their accuracy in earnings forecasts and that their superior/inferior performance tends to persist over time. An analysis based on a refined measure of analysts’ forecast accuracy ranking that strips off firm-specific factors further enhances the empirical validity of the findings. These findings provide a concrete basis for researchers to further explore why and how analysts perform differently in the competitive market of investment information services.     

Analyst coverage and earnings management

What is the role of information intermediaries in corporate governance? This paper examines equity analysts’ influence on managers’ earnings management decisions. Do analysts serve as external monitors to managers, or do they put excessive pressure on managers? Using multiple measures of earnings management, I find that firms followed by more analysts manage their earnings less. To address the potential endogeneity problem of analyst coverage, I use two instrumental variables based on change in broker size and on firm's inclusion in the Standard & Poor's 500 index, and I find that the results are robust. Finally, given the number of covering analysts, analysts from top brokers and more experienced analysts have stronger effects against earnings management.     

Do star analysts know more firm-specific information? Evidence from China

Using a unique database in China, we extend the literature to further distinguish the information production role of star vs. non-star analysts. We confirm the general conclusion of a positive association between analyst coverage and stock return synchronicity measured by a firm’s R² in China. The findings from star analysts, however, show that star analyst coverage actually decreases stock return synchronicity. We contend that the firm-specific human capital in star analysts helps the analysts overcome the challenges of information production in an emerging market. The superior firm-specific human capital argument of star analysts is further supported by the negative association of star analysts’ firm-specific experiences and stock return synchronicity. Our conclusions are robust to different specifications of star analyst presence and different definitions of analysts’ firm-specific experiences. We also find that star analysts exhibit a more accurate earnings forecast than non-star analysts.     

Market uncertainty and disclosure of internal control deficiencies under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act

This study examines cross-sectional differences in stock market reactions to the disclosure of internal control deficiencies under Section 302 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act. We hypothesize that the market punishment for internal control problems will be less severe for internal control disclosure that helps reduce market uncertainty around the disclosure. We also predict that such a relation is dependent on the types of disclosure and the market’s prior knowledge of the credibility of firms’ financial reporting. Consistent with our hypothesis, we find that when firms disclose their internal control deficiencies, their abnormal stock returns are negatively associated with changes in market uncertainty (e.g., changes in the standard deviations of daily stock returns) around the disclosure. We also find that the impact of the uncertainty reduction is greater for voluntary disclosures of non-material weakness, especially those made in the context of previous suspicious events. The negative impact of changes in market uncertainty on the abnormal stock returns remains intact even after controlling for possible simultaneity. An analysis using financial analysts’ earnings forecasts dispersion as an alternative proxy for uncertainty confirms the results.     

Converging to International Accounting Standards: Views from Japan

Many countries, including the European Union member states and Australia, adopted international accounting standards in 2005. This year was also critical in Japan for convergence activities. Based on a review of 2005 financial statements and a survey of securities analysts, this study identifies key issues for convergence of Japanese and international accounting standards. We find that accounting requirements relating to fair value measurement, comprehensive income items, leases and business combinations are relevant to Japanese firms. A survey of 974 members of the Security Analysts Association of Japan about these issues indicated support for convergence and the use of fair value measurement, disclosure of comprehensive income, recognition of leases and use of the purchase method for consolidation. We report support for several positions favoured by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), a positive signal for achieving convergence goals in Japan, which will be of interest to capital market participants in Japan and other countries .     

The information content of financial analysts' forecasts of earnings: Some evidence on semi-strong inefficiency

The paper assesses the information content of revisions in financial analysts' forecasts of earnings by analyzing the relation between the direction of these revisions and stock price behavior. Abnormal returns during the months surrounding the revisions in analysts' forecasts are computed and evaluated. The results strongly indicate that information on revisions in forecasts of earnings per share is valuable to investors. It is also suggested that market reaction to the disclosure of analysts' forecasts is relatively slow and gives rise to potential abnormal returns to investors who act upon this type of publicly available information.     

Do analysts and investors fully understand the persistence of the items excluded from Street earnings?

Previous research has found that the items that are included in GAAP earnings but excluded from Street earnings to allow the firm to meet or beat analyst earnings forecasts (“MBF exclusions”) are more persistent than the other excluded items. In this study, I find that the difference in the levels of persistence between MBF and non-MBF exclusions declined after the introduction of Regulation G, which requires public companies that disclose non-GAAP earnings to also present GAAP earnings and a reconciliation of the two. Analysts underestimate the persistence of non-MBF exclusions, but the degree of this underestimation is lower in the post-regulation period. In contrast, there is little evidence to indicate that analysts underestimate the persistence of MBF exclusions in either time period. I also find strong (weak) evidence that investors underestimate the persistence of Street exclusions in the pre- (post-) regulation period. These results suggest that Regulation G constrains the practice of excluding recurring expenses from Street earnings to meet or beat analyst forecasts and helps analysts and investors to understand the persistence of Street exclusions.