Mimicking insider trades

We examine whether outside investors mimic insider trades by analyzing the daily transactions of foreign institutional investors (FII) in the Indian emerging market. We find that the value relevance of insiders' opportunistic buy trades is much higher in our context relative to that reported for developed markets. More importantly, we find that FII mimic opportunistic buy trades, which is more pronounced for firms that are informationally more opaque or have lower corporate governance quality. A long-short strategy based on FII's transactions after opportunistic trades generates an additional abnormal return of approximately 29% annually, compared to transactions based on routines trades.     

The role of cross-listing,foreign ownership and state ownership in dividend policy in an emerging market

In this paper, we investigate if dividend policy is influenced by ownership type. Within the dividend literature, dividends have a signaling role regarding agency costs, such that dividends may diminish insider conflicts (reduce free cash flow) or may be used to extract cash from firms (tunneling effect) – which could be predominant in emerging markets. We expect firms with foreign ownership and those that are listed in overseas markets to have different dividend policies and practices than those that are not, and firms with more state ownership and less individual ownership to be more likely to pay cash dividends and less likely to pay stock dividends. Using firms from an emerging economy (China), we examine whether these effects exist in corporate dividend policy and practice. We find that both foreign ownership and cross-listing have significant negative effects on cash dividends, consistent with the signaling effect and the notion of reduced tunneling activities for firms with the ability to raise capital from outside of China. Consistent with the tunneling effect, we find that firms with higher state ownership tend to pay higher cash dividends and lower stock dividends, while the opposite is true for public (individual) ownership. Further analysis shows that foreign ownership mediates the effect of state ownership on dividend policy. Our results have significant implications for researchers, investors, policy makers and regulators in emerging markets.     

Foreign institutional ownership and corporate cash holdings: Evidence from emerging economies

With the increased presence of foreign institutional investors in emerging stock markets, academic interest on the effects of foreign institutions on corporate managerial decisions has notably increased. This paper joins this debate by investigating the effects of foreign institutional ownership on cash holdings, a strategic corporate financing choice. Analysing a sample of firms from 23 emerging economies, the paper shows that, while foreign institutional ownership has a negative effect on cash holdings, it also increases the contribution of cash to firm valuation. These effects are potentially transmitted to cash through mitigation of agency conflicts and alleviation of financing constraints. In all, our findings suggest beneficial effects of foreign institutions on firms' financing structure, as foreign investors contribute to a more efficient and value-enhancing cash policy.     

Foreign Institutional Ownership and the Global Convergence of Financial Reporting Practices

This paper investigates whether foreign institutional investors affect the global convergence of financial reporting practices. Using several measures of reporting convergence, we show that U.S. institutional ownership is positively associated with subsequent changes in emerging market firms’ accounting comparability to their U.S. industry peers. We identify this association using an instrumental variable approach that exploits exogenous variation in U.S. institutional investment generated by the JGTRRA Act of 2003. Further, we provide evidence of a specific mechanism—the switch to a Big Four audit firm—through which U.S. institutional investors affect reporting convergence. Finally, we show that, for emerging market firms, an increase in comparability to U.S. firms is associated with an improvement in the properties of foreign analysts’ forecasts.     

Does banks’ dual holding affect bank lending and firms’ investment decisions? Evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of banks’ dual holding on bank lending and firms’ investment decisions using a sample of listed firms in China. We find that dual holding leads to easier access to bank loans, a result that is more pronounced for non-state-owned enterprises (non-SOEs) than SOEs. We also find that dual holding distorts banks’ lending decisions and harms the investment efficiency for SOEs, while resulting in optimal lending decisions and enhanced investment efficiency for non-SOEs. For non-SOEs, further analysis suggests that optimal lending decisions and efficient investment can be achieved for firms with higher ownership concentration, and firms in which the family and foreign investors are the controlling shareholders. We argue that, in emerging markets, whether a bank plays a monitoring role by directly holding the debt and equity claims of companies relies heavily on whether the potential collusion between firm executives and bank managers can be averted, which in turn is determined by the firms’ governance framework and ownership structure.     

Foreign Institutional Investment,Ownership, and Liquidity: Real and Informational Frictions

The literature widely documents the negative liquidity impact of foreign participation in firms that permit high foreign institutional ownership. This paper employs a unique setting for the limited participation of qualified foreign institutional investors (QFIIs) in China's A-share market and examines how this impacts on stock liquidity in emerging markets. Contrary to the findings in the literature, foreign investor participation helps enhance the liquidity of affected stocks by promoting trade activities and price discovery. The improvement in liquidity does not occur through the information friction channel, but rather the real friction channel. Our results are robust to endogeneity issue and the possible influence of the global financial crisis, industry effects and the stock exchange. Further, the liquidity improving effects of QFII are even stronger when the analysis is performed on a subsample of QFII firms.     

Does institutional ownership increase stock return volatility? Evidence from Vietnam

The literature on institutional ownership and stock return volatility often ignores small emerging countries. However, this issue is more profound, due to the large size of institutional investors and small stock market size, in emerging equity markets. This paper examines the effects of the institutional ownership on the firm-level volatility of stock returns in Vietnam. Our data cover most of non-financial firms listed on the Ho Chi Minh City stock exchange for the period 2006–2012. Employing different analysis techniques for panel data and controlling for possible endogeneity problems, our empirical results suggest that institutional investors stabilize the stock return volatility. Moreover, we document that: i) the stabilizing effect of institutional investor ownership is higher in dividend paying firms, and ii) if firms are paying out more dividends, this stabilizing effect is greater. Our results outline the important role of institutional investors in maintaining the stability in emerging stock markets.     

How does the executive pay gap influence audit fees? The roles of R&D investment and institutional ownership

Using a sample of US firms from 2003–2014, this study examines how the executive pay gap affects audit fees for firms with different levels of R&D investment and institutional ownership. Consistent with managerial power theory, we find that the executive pay gap is positively associated with audit fees, and that the positive association is attenuated by intense R&D investment and higher institutional ownership. We also find that the executive pay gap more strongly affects audit fees after the passage of the 2010 Dodd–Frank Act and the PCAOB's 2012 call to identify the audit risk related to executive incentive compensation. Additional analyses show that the moderating effects of R&D investment and institutional ownership on the pay gap–audit fees association are not conditional on auditor tenure, but the moderating effect of institutional ownership is stronger for firms hiring specialist auditors. Collectively, our findings suggest that auditors consider the business context, such as innovation initiative and external monitoring, when assessing audit risk related to the executive pay gap.     

Foreign Investment in Emerging Markets: International Diversification or Familiarity Bias?

This study empirically tests whether foreign investors take advantage of international diversification when investing in emerging Asian markets. Using the 2007–2008 financial crisis as identification, we find that firms with higher foreign ownership had better stock returns during the financial crisis. Moreover, the diversification effect exists in five out of the eight emerging markets and is stronger in markets with a lower dynamic conditional correlation with the global market index. We also find that foreign investors prefer firms with a lower international sales ratio. In conclusion, the evidence consistently suggests that foreign investors take advantage of diversification effects.     

Do foreign investors improve stock price informativeness in emerging equity markets? Evidence from Vietnam

Most of previous studies on stock price informativeness tend to focus on the context of mature stock markets while this issue is more acute in emerging equity markets where regulatory and institutional structure are weak. This paper examines the relationship between foreign ownership and stock price informativeness in Vietnam stock market. We utilize a data set covering firm attributes of non-financial firms listed on the Ho Chi Minh City stock exchange over the period 2007–2015. Employing different estimation techniques for panel data, the empirical results indicate that foreign investors improve stock price informativeness in Vietnam stock market. The finding from this paper confirms the important role of foreign investors in emerging equity markets.     

Stock Market Valuation,Foreign Investment,and Cross-Country Arbitrage

This study investigates the role of stock market valuation and cross-country arbitrage in shaping foreign direct and indirect investments, contingent upon a country's stage of development. This paper is built upon the mispricing-driven foreign investment hypotheses developed by Baker, Foley, and Wurgler (2009). Interesting findings emerge when developed and emerging markets are considered separately. Empirical evidence indicates that the use of relatively cheap financial capital for foreign investment is prominent among developed countries, but not so in emerging markets. This is largely due to the extremely low level of foreign investment outflows in emerging markets and the inability of unsophisticated emerging market managers to successfully time the market. Further investigation shows that host-country stock market valuation is an important determinant of the mode of foreign investment; investors tend to choose indirect or portfolio investment, as opposed to direct investment, when the stock market is perceived to be undervalued. This is especially the case in emerging markets, where there is more room for misvaluation and potential arbitrage. These findings suggest that the unique institutional features of the markets involved play an important role in shaping foreign investment and cross-country arbitrage.     

Foreign institutional ownership and stock market liquidity: Evidence from Indonesia

From January 2002 to August 2007, foreign institutions held almost 70% of the free-float value of the Indonesian equity market, or 41% of the total market capitalization. Over the same period, liquidity on the Jakarta Stock Exchange improved substantially with the average bid–ask spread more than halved and the average depth more than doubled. In this study we examine the Granger causality between foreign institutional ownership and liquidity, while controlling for persistence in foreign ownership and liquidity measures. We find that foreign holdings have a negative impact on future liquidity: a 10% increase in foreign institutional ownership in the current month is associated with approximately 2% increase in the bid–ask spread, 3% decrease in depth, and 4% rise in price sensitivity in the next month, challenging the view that foreign institutions enhance liquidity in small emerging markets. Our findings are consistent with the negative liquidity impact of institutional investor ownership in developed markets.     

Portfolio preferences of foreign institutional investors

This paper examines the investment allocation choices of actively-managed US mutual funds in emerging market equities after the market crises of the 1990s. We analyze both country- and firm-level disclosure and institutional policies that influence mutual funds’ allocation choices relative to major stock market indices. At the country level, we find that US funds invest more in open emerging markets with stronger accounting standards, shareholder rights, and legal frameworks. At the firm level, US funds are found to invest more in firms that adopt discretionary policies such as greater accounting transparency and the issuance of an ADR. Our results suggest that steps can be taken both at the country and the firm level to create an environment conducive to foreign institutional investment.     

Corporate finance and governance in emerging markets: A selective review and an agenda for future research

There are important organizational and behavioral differences between firms in emerging markets and those in developed markets. We propose a top-down approach to understand how key institutional forces shape the structures and policies of firms in emerging markets. We review a selective set of prior studies as well as papers included in this Special Issue in identifying government quality, state ownership, and financial development as critical institutional forces that shape the financing and governance of firms in emerging markets. We suggest that future research should pay attention to several important but unanswered topics related to informal enforcement, government incentives, family firms, and network organizations.     

Foreign ownership and the enforcement of corporate governance reforms

This study examines whether a stronger corporate governance enforcement regime influences the investment decisions of foreign portfolio investors in an emerging market context. Using a natural experiment provided by an Indian corporate governance regulatory reform introduced in 2000, but for which stricter sanctions for non-compliance were imposed in 2004 our results provide strong evidence that governance reforms that include stricter sanctions for non-compliance lead to higher foreign ownership. Depending on specifications, the difference-in-differences estimates show that, on average, the effect is up to 2.8% increased foreign ownership post regulatory reform of 2004. The paper adds to the debate on simultaneity between foreign ownership and corporate governance as we show that in the context of an emerging market corporate governance regulations are extremely important in attracting foreign investors. In the context of prevalence of weak enforcement (of existing regulations) in emerging markets, this study provides empirical support to the notion that strictly enforcing the existing governance regulations has the potential to attract higher level of foreign investment. The results suggest that policy measures aimed at attracting foreign investors in emerging markets should not only concentrate on adopting the best international corporate governance practices but should also signal strong enforcement of these regulations by assigning significant penalties for non-compliance.

     

Does foreign institutional ownership motivate firms in an emerging market to increase voluntary disclosure? Evidence from Taiwan

This study examines the relationship between foreign institutional ownership and voluntary disclosure in an emerging market. By exploiting a unique dataset of daily foreign investment flow and ownership data from Taiwan, this paper examines whether foreign ownership is associated with the likelihood of holding conference calls and investigates whether conference calls are informative to foreign market participants. After controlling for other characteristics of a firm??s information environment, we find that the decision to hold conference calls is positively associated with foreign institutional ownership. We also provide evidence that the trading turnover by foreign institutional investors immediately increases after the conference calls, indicating that conference calls are informative for foreign institutional investors. Our results are robust, after controlling for endogeneity.     

Domestic and foreign institutional investors’ behavior in China

This paper compares the investment characteristics between foreign funds operating under Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (QFIIs) in China and domestic Chinese funds and analyzes the firm-level drivers that influence their allocation choices. The analysis reveals that foreign funds have a preference for a range of sectors such as transportation, metals and non-metals, and machinery, as opposed to industries with a requirement for local knowledge. The portfolios of domestic Chinese funds are distributed more evenly than those of the foreign funds. The comparative analysis indicates that foreign funds invest in firms that are significantly different from those favored by domestic funds in terms of size, profit, and compensation of management. Finally, we find that when making investment decisions, foreign funds tend to rely on some corporate governance indicators, which is not consistent with the results obtained from previous studies examining developed markets. In particular, foreign funds have a preference for firms with a high percentage of state-owned shares, while the reverse is the case for domestic funds. These empirical findings highlight the differences between QFII and domestic fund investment preferences and will be of value to policy-makers in emerging markets, and China, in particular, in gauging the important drivers of foreign investment.     

Are CEOs compensated for value destroying growth in earnings?

Prior research shows that firms generating earnings growth by improving profitability create shareholder value, while firms generating earnings growth through investment destroy value. This paper examines whether compensation committees consider this while determining CEO compensation. We first confirm prior results that growth from increased profitability is perceived by markets to add value while growth from investment does not. While growth from increased profitability is positively associated with compensation, so is growth from investment. The presence of institutional ownership increases the weight on growth from increased profitability, but does not reduce the weight on growth from investment. Further, value-oriented institutional ownership increases the sensitivity of compensation growth to growth from increased profitability and reduces the sensitivity to growth from investment. Contrarily, growth-oriented institutional ownership increases the sensitivity of compensation growth to growth from investment. Our results highlight the importance of understanding the nature of earnings growth in determining executive compensation.     

Can foreign suppliers act as “innovation springboards” for firms? Evidence from China

This study provides a new approach for measuring supplier characteristics by distinguishing the countries where they are located. Using data of Chinese listed companies, we explore how firms' R&D investment and innovation efficiency (patents and citations) are affected by having foreign suppliers in their top five suppliers. Our findings suggest that foreign suppliers acting as transmitters of international technology increase firms' innovation efficiency based on organizational learning theory. Moreover, a series of uncertainties caused by foreign suppliers encourages firms to invest more in R&D based on strategic growth option theory. Mechanism tests show that foreign suppliers from countries with high innovation capacity and a similar Eastern culture have a greater impact on corporate innovation. Firms conduct more R&D activities to mitigate the uncertainties caused by foreign suppliers when they have insufficient overseas channels to acquire international knowledge and a high degree of dependence on foreign suppliers. These results are consistent with a series of robustness tests after accounting for endogeneity.     

Do institutional ownership and innovation influence idiosyncratic risk?

Business decisions influence the level of idiosyncratic risk. Several factors that contribute to idiosyncratic risk must be explored. Therefore, we examine the impact of innovation and institutional ownership on idiosyncratic risk for NYSE- and NASDAQ-listed firms. The sample contains 30,888 firm-year observations based on annual data from 2003 to 2016. We use a dynamic panel approach to address potential endogeneity difficulties when analyzing the results. Large-scale innovation activity, institutional investors, and innovation reduce idiosyncratic risk. Furthermore, the interactions between institutional investors and high-level ownership stakeholders considerably minimize idiosyncratic risk. Our study demonstrates that the degree to which firms adopt innovation and institutional ownership may affect firm-specific hazards.