The influence of buy-side analysts on mutual fund trading

We present evidence on the trading and performance impact of buy-side analysts. Using data provided by a large global asset manager, we relate buy-side analysts’ recommendations to fund transactions on a daily basis. We show that buy-side analysts significantly influence trading decisions: Fund managers strongly follow recent recommendation revisions, even after controlling for other trading determinants. Positive abnormal returns to buy-side analysts’ revisions are also reflected in the performance of mutual fund trades: Trades triggered by buy-side recommendations have higher returns than other trades. Overall, the impact of buy-side analysts is more pronounced than that of sell-side analysts.     

A comparison of buy‐side and sell‐side analysts

There is very little research on the topic of buy-side analyst performance, and that which does exist yields mixed results. We use a large sample from both the buy-side and the sell-side and report several new results. First, while the contemporaneous returns to portfolios based on sell-side recommendations are positive, the returns for buy-side analysts, proxied by changes in institutional holdings, are negative. Second, the buy-side analysts' underperformance is accentuated when they trade against sell-side analysts' recommendations. Third, abnormal returns positively relate to both the portfolio size and the portfolio turnover of buy-side analysts' institutions, suggesting that large institutions employ superior analysts and that superior analysts frequently change their recommendations. Abnormal returns are also positively related to buy-side portfolios with stocks that have higher analyst coverage, greater institutional holding, and lower earnings forecast dispersion. Fourth, there is substantial persistence in buy-side performance, but even the top decile performs poorly. These findings suggest that sell-side analysts still outperform buy-side analysts despite the severe conflicts of interest documented in the literature.     

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.     

Advisors and asset prices: A model of the origins of bubbles

We develop a model of asset price bubbles based on the communication process between advisors and investors. Advisors are well-intentioned and want to maximize the welfare of their advisees (like a parent treats a child). But only some advisors understand the new technology (the tech-savvies); others do not and can only make a downward-biased recommendation (the old-fogies). While smart investors recognize the heterogeneity in advisors, naive ones mistakenly take whatever is said at face value. Tech-savvies inflate their forecasts to signal that they are not old-fogies, since more accurate information about their type improves the welfare of investors in the future. A bubble arises for a wide range of parameters, and its size is maximized when there is a mix of smart and naive investors in the economy. Our model suggests an alternative source for stock over-valuation in addition to investor overreaction to news and sell-side bias.     

Learning and incentive: A study on analyst response to pension underfunding

There is a long-standing debate on whether sell-side analysts learn from their experience to improve earnings forecast skills. This study shows that incentive is an important factor for understanding the “learning by doing” effect by analysts. We examine analysts’ response to a complex type of information – corporate pension underfunding. Pension underfunding negatively impacts future earnings and analysts on average underreact to such information in their earnings forecasts. More importantly, when there is a strong incentive for analysts to deliver accurate forecasts, analyst learning effectively reduces their underreaction to pension underfunding information. On the other hand, when such an incentive is absent, the analyst learning effect is not discernible in the data. Further evidence suggests that analyst learning and incentive jointly reduce stock market mispricing associated with corporate pension underfunding.     

IPO pricing: growth rates implied in offer prices

This paper studies the valuation of companies going public and defines a methodology to infer the growth expectations implicit in the prices of their Initial Public Offering (IPO). The proposed reverse-engineered DCF model is operable by individual investors, as it does not require access to private information or sell-side analysts’ forecasts. Applying the procedure to a sample of IPOs in three European countries (France, Italy, and Germany), we estimate the cash flow growth implied by offer prices and examine the bias of implied growth in comparison to the realized. We find that the estimated growth in cash flow is much higher than its actual realization, with the median IPO firm overvalued at the offering by 74%. Estimation errors increase with IPO firms’ leverage and underpricing, and decrease with age, size, and book-to-market ratios. Further tests find that post-IPO stock returns are lower for issues whose implied growth is more upward biased.     

Investor mood and the determinants of stock prices: an experimental analysis

We examine, in a controlled experimental setting, whether changes in investor mood cause changes in the determinants of stock prices. Our results show that a deterioration in mood, reflected in the negative dimensions of mood state, increases the level of risk aversion in male, but not female, investors. We find no evidence to suggest that a change in mood impacts on investors' forecasts of future earnings or future cash flows. By establishing the causal impact of a change in mood on risk aversion, our study provides support for archival research that relates various market anomalies to investor mood.     

Overconfidence,risk perception and the risk-taking behavior of finance professionals

This paper highlights the role played by overconfidence and risk perception in the risk-taking behaviors of finance professionals. We interviewed 64 high-level professionals and demonstrate that they are overconfident in both the general and the financial domains. Using a recent measure proposed by Glaser et al. (2013), we indicate that respondents are overconfident in forecasting future stock prices. We demonstrate that the risk they are willing to assume is positively influenced by overconfidence and optimism and negatively influenced by risk perception. However, the stock return volatility anticipated is, in most cases, an insignificant determinant of the risk that professionals are ready to assume.     

Do investment banks listen to their own analysts?

To what extent conflicts of interest affect the investment value of sell-side analyst research is an ongoing debate. We approach this issue from a new direction by investigating how asset-management divisions of investment banks use stock recommendations issued by their own analysts. Based on holdings changes around initiations, upgrades, and downgrades from 1993 to 2003, we find that these bank-affiliated investors follow recommendations from sell-side analysts in general, increasing (decreasing) their relative holdings following positive (negative) recommendations. More importantly, these investors respond more strongly to recommendations issued by their own analysts than to those issued by analysts affiliated with other banks, especially for recommendations on small and low-analyst-coverage firms. Thus, we find that investment banks “eat their own cooking,” showing that these presumably sophisticated institutional investors view sell-side recommendations as having investment value, particularly when the recommendations come from their own analysts.     

Dispersion in Analyst Forecasts and the Profitability of Earnings Momentum Strategies

This paper shows that the dispersion in analysts' consensus forecasts contains incremental information to predict future stock returns. Consistent with prior research, stock prices in the German market underreact to news about future earnings and drift in the direction suggested by analysts' forecasts revisions. Even higher abnormal returns can be achieved by applying such an earnings momentum strategy to stocks with a low dispersion in analyst forecasts. These results support one of the recent behavioural models in which investors underweight new evidence and conservatively update their beliefs in the right direction, but by too little in magnitude with respect to more objective information.     

A new dividend forecasting procedure that rejects bubbles in asset prices: the case of 1929's stock crash

We develop a new procedure to forecast future cash flows froma financial asset and then use the present value of our cashflow forecasts to calculate the asset's fundamental price. Asan example, we construct a nonlinear ARMA-ARCH-Artificial NeuralNetwork model to obtain out-of-sample dividend forecasts for1920 and beyond, using only in-sample dividend data. The presentvalue of our forecasted dividends yield fundamental prices thatreproduce the magnitude, timing, and time-series behavior ofthe boom and crash in 1929 stock prices. We therefore rejectthe popular claim that the 1920s stock market contained a bubble.     

Model-based earnings forecasts vs. financial analysts' earnings forecasts

Existing accounting-based forecasting models of earnings either do not fully consider information that is contained in stock prices or use an ad hoc specification that is not based on rigorous valuation theory. In this paper, we develop an earnings forecasting model built on the theoretical linkages between future earnings and stock prices as well as a number of accounting fundamental variables. We find that our model-based forecasts of earnings are in general less biased and more accurate than both existing model-based forecasts and analysts' consensus forecasts, at both shorter and longer horizons. We also show that the accuracy of both model-based forecasts and financial analysts' forecasts depend on firm-specific characteristics such as firm size and industry membership.     

Confirming Management Earnings Forecasts, Earnings Uncertainty, and Stock Returns

In this study we examine the association among confirming management forecasts, stock prices, and analyst expectations. Confirming management forecasts are voluntary disclosures by management that corroborate existing market expectations about future earnings. This study provides evidence that these voluntary disclosures affect stock prices and the dispersion of analyst expectations. Specifically, we find that the market's reaction to confirming forecasts is significantly positive, indicating that benefits accrue to firms that disclose such forecasts. In addition, although we find no significant change in the mean consensus forecasts (a proxy for earnings expectations) around the confirming forecast date, evidence indicates a significant reduction in the mean and median consensus analyst dispersion (a proxy for earnings uncertainty). Finally, we document a positive association between the reduction of dispersion of analysts' forecasts and the magnitude of the stock market response. Overall, the evidence suggests that confirming forecasts reduce uncertainty about future earnings and that investors price this reduction of uncertainty.     

Do sell-side analysts exhibit differential target price forecasting ability?

We examine the overall and individual analyst performance of 12-month-ahead target price forecasts over the 10 years from 2000 through 2009. Implied target price-based returns exceed actual returns by an average of 15 %, and absolute target price forecast errors average 45 %. At the end of the 12-month forecast horizon, only 38 % of target prices are met, but 64 % are met at some time during the forecast horizon. We find statistically significant but economically weak evidence of persistent differential abilities by sell-side analysts to forecast target prices. Target price announcement period return analyses indicate no differential market reactions to analysts’ target price revisions conditional on their recent target price forecast performance. This finding is consistent with the market understanding that analysts have, at best, limited abilities to persistently provide accurate target price forecasts.     

Strategic distortions in analyst forecasts in the presence of short-term institutional investors

We document that analysts cater to short-term investors by issuing optimistic target prices. Catering dominates among analysts at brokers without an investment banking arm as they face lower reputational cost. The market does not see through the analyst catering activity and their forecasts lead to temporary stock overpricing that short-term institutional investors exploit to offload their holdings to retail traders. We also report evidence consistent with catering brokers being rewarded with more future trades channelled through them. Our study identifies a new source of conflicts of interest in analyst research originating from the ownership composition of a stock.     

On the information role of stock recommendation revisions

We examine the information transmission role of stock recommendation revisions by sell-side security analysts. Revisions are associated with economically insignificant mean price reactions and often piggyback on recent news, events, long-term momentum, and short-run contrarian return predictors, typically downgrading after bad news and upgrading after good news. However, the revisions are usually information-free for investors. The findings go against the long-standing view that recommendations are an important means by which analysts assimilate information into stock prices. They disagree with the view of policymakers that analysts’ stock picks materially impact stock prices.     

Managing News Coverage around Initial Public Offerings

We examine opportunistic behavior of initial public offering (IPO) firms in Taiwan where they are required to disclose their own earnings forecasts and are unrestricted in releasing news around the offerings. We find that prior to the offerings, IPO firms tend to report higher earnings, disclose inflated earnings forecasts, and manage more good news. News management, however, emerges as the most predominant factor in aftermarket stock prices. In particular, IPO firms have a strong preference for releasing good news related to strategy/policy that may simply provide a vision of a firm's future. Furthermore, the news releases are often forward-looking when they are positive about the firms but tend to be realized when they are negative. IPO firms also tend to engage in more window dressing activities before a larger sale of IPO shares from existing shareholders or a larger decline in insiders' holdings. Our analysis shows that managerial optimism cannot fully account for their behavior .     

Analysts' Reactions to Earnings Preannouncement Strategies

Preannouncements of earnings tend to overstate negative or understate positive news, which decreases the chance of a negative surprise when actual earnings is announced. We conduct an experiment to investigate how experienced sell-side analysts' earnings forecasts are affected by preannouncements that either understate, accurately state, or overstate the magnitude of positive or negative total earnings news, holding total earnings news constant. We find that firms with negative (positive) total news receive the highest post-earnings announcement forecasts of future earnings when the earlier preannouncement overstates (understates) the magnitude of the news. These forecasts are consistent with the analysts' perceptions about the firms' future prospects, but not their perceptions of management. While analysts expect preannouncements to be lower than actual earnings, they do not adjust their forecasts for these beliefs. These insights into analysts' responses have implications both for managers and analysts.     

Analyst reputation and the issuance of disaggregated earnings forecasts to I/B/E/S

Although sell-side analysts privately forecast revenues and expenses when producing earnings forecasts, not all analysts choose to provide I/B/E/S with earnings forecasts disaggregated into revenues and expenses. We investigate the role of reputation in explaining this decision. We find that analysts without established reputations are more likely than reputable analysts to issue disaggregated earnings forecasts to I/B/E/S, consistent with I/B/E/S exposure benefits accruing to analysts seeking to establish a reputation. Among less reputable analysts, those with high ability are more likely to disaggregate, consistent with this group reaping greater benefits from the exposure I/B/E/S provides. Additional tests support our primary hypotheses. Among less reputable analysts, those who disaggregate are more (less) likely to be promoted (demoted or terminated). The stock market responds similarly, with more weight assigned to earnings forecast revisions provided by analysts who disaggregate their earnings forecasts.