Earnings Forecasts and the Information Contained in Spinoff Announcements

This study examines spinoff announcements in conjunction with financial analysts’ forecasts of earnings. The analysis shows that spinoff announcement abnormal returns are significantly related to the firm's information environment as proxieci by financial analysts’ earnings prediction errors. The findings also indicate that analysts significantly increase their short-term earnings forecasts in response to spinoffs, but do not significantly revise their long-term earnings forecasts. However, the earnings revisions are not significantly different across prediction error groups, which confirms that spinoff-related abnormal returns cannot be attributed solely to expected performance gains.     

Analysts’ pre-tax income forecasts and the tax expense anomaly

This paper examines whether analysts’ pre-tax income forecasts mitigate the tax expense anomaly documented by Thomas and Zhang (J Account Res 49:791–821, 2011). They find that seasonal changes in quarterly income tax expense are positively related to future returns after controlling for the earnings surprise and conclude that investors underreact to value-relevant information in tax expense. When analysts issue both earnings and pre-tax income forecasts, they implicitly provide a forecast of income tax expense. We posit that this implicit forecast helps investors recognize the persistence of current tax expense surprise for future earnings. Accordingly, we expect that mispricing of tax expense will be less severe for firms with earnings and pre-tax income forecasts. As expected, we find that the presence of pre-tax income forecasts significantly weakens the positive relation between tax expense surprise and future returns, consistent with analysts’ implicit forecasts of tax expense mitigating the tax expense anomaly.     

THE EFFECT OF SELF-TENDER OFFERS ON EARNINGS EXPECTATIONS

We examine financial analysts' earnings revisions after self-tender offers. Consistent with the assertions of earlier studies that self-tender offers signal future performance, financial analysts significantly increase their forecasts of earnings for firms that announce self-tender offers. However, the revisions differ based on the method chosen to repurchase shares. For Dutch auction offers, analysts significantly revise their estimates of short-term earnings only. For fixed-price tender offers, analysts increase both short-term and long-term earnings estimates. Also, long-term earnings revisions are significantly related to announcement-period abnormal returns for fixed-price tender offers, which suggests that fixed-price self-tender offers convey more positive information about future earnings than do Dutch auction offers.     

Alternative adjustments to analysts' earnings forecasts: relative and complementary performance

This study examines the relative and complementary performance of alternative earnings forecast adjustments using a common set of consensus analysts’ earnings forecasts. We document that a simple adjustment to analysts’ earnings forecasts, based solely on cross-sectional relationships between actual and forecasted earnings in the prior year, performs as well as more complicated adjustment methods, i.e., composite forecasts and persistence adjusted forecasts. A forecast adjustment that is based on prior year earnings and returns, however, provides significant incremental reductions in forecast error and dominates all of the other adjustment methods.     

Target price forecasts: The roles of the 52-week high price and recent investor sentiment

This paper reveals that in addition to fundamental factors, the 52-week high price and recent investor sentiment play an important role in analysts’ target price formation. Analysts’ forecasts of short-term earnings and long-term earnings growth are shown to be important explanatory variables for target prices; equally, the 52-week high price and recent investor sentiment are also shown to explain target price levels and especially target price biases. Our analysis additionally reveals that analysts place greater weight on these two non-fundamental factors in settings with greater task complexity and to some extent in those with greater resource constraints. Conversely, on balance, the results suggest that this increased reliance does not translate into an increased impact per unit of each non-fundamental factor on forecast bias. Finally, our results show that target prices are useful in predicting future stock returns beyond earnings forecasts and commonly used risk proxies. However, in an internally consistent fashion, the informativeness of target prices for future returns is significantly reduced when greater weight is placed on either the 52-week high or recent investor sentiment in the target price formation process.     

What Drives Target Price Forecasts and Their Investment Value?

This paper examines the informativeness of analysts’ target price forecasts by relating the investment value of target prices to their primary drivers. Decomposing target price forecasts into near‐term earnings forecasts and price‐to‐earnings ratio forecasts, we show that target price revisions reflect information from both components. In addition, we also find that the relative importance of each component in target price revisions is related to firm characteristics. A portfolio based on target price implied expected returns delivers significant abnormal returns. More importantly, we find that the abnormal returns are associated with both earnings and price‐to‐earnings forecasts, which suggests that the informativeness of target price forecasts comes not only from analysts’ ability to forecast short‐term earnings but also from their ability to assess risk and long‐term growth prospect implied in price‐to‐earnings forecasts.     

Evaluating the information content of earnings forecasts

This study develops a framework to compare the ability of alternative earnings forecast approaches to capture the market expectation of future earnings. Given prior evidence of analysts’ systematic optimistic bias, we decompose earnings surprises into analysts’ earnings surprises and adjustments based on alternative forecasting models. An equal market response to these two components indicates that the associated earnings forecast is a sufficient estimate of the market expectation of future earnings. To apply our framework, we examine four recent regression-based earnings forecasting models, alongside a simple earnings-based random walk model and analysts’ forecasts. Using the earnings forecasts of the model that satisfies our sufficiency condition, we identify a set of stocks for which the market is unduly pessimistic about future earnings. The investment strategy of buying and holding these stocks generates statistically signi?cant abnormal returns. We offer an explanation as to why this and similar strategies might be successful.     

Do banks care about analysts' forecasts when designing loan contracts?

We investigate whether banks rely on the information content in equity analysts’ annual earnings forecasts when assessing the risk of potential borrowers. While a long literature finds that analysts provide useful information to market participants, it is not clear that banks, which have access to privileged information, would benefit from publicly available analysts’ forecasts. If, however, banks do rely on this information, then more precise private information in earnings forecasts may inform banks. We focus our analysis on the requirement of collateral because it is a direct measure of default risk, whereas other loan terms such as interest spread and debt covenants can also protect against other risks, such as asset misappropriation. The direct link between collateral and default risk allows us to examine whether information from analysts is relevant to banks when designing loan contracts. Consistent with our predictions, we find that higher precision of the private information in analysts’ earnings forecasts is associated with a lower likelihood of requiring collateral, and this effect is larger when a borrower does not have a prior relationship with the lender or their accounting or credit quality is low. We also find that this association disappears after the implementation of Regulation FD, consistent with this regulation reducing analysts’ access to private information.     

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ANALYSTS’ FORECAST REVISIONS AND EARNINGS COMPONENTS: THE EVIDENCE OF FRS 3

This study examines whether the earnings components as required by FRS 3 help UK analysts to predict firms’ earnings changes by investigating the statistical association between analysts’ forecast revisions and firms’ unexpected earnings components. I find that analysts’ forecast revisions made in different time horizons are consistently associated with unexpected earnings components as required by FRS 3. UK analysts are able to incorporate current-year unexpected earnings components into their current and future earnings forecasts even before firms officially release this information. However, empirical results also show that current-year unexpected earnings components are not fully incorporated into analysts’ forecasts of future earnings. Analysts appear to wait for more information releases regarding firms’ future earnings and delay their revisions of future earnings forecasts. This is consistent with the evidence that the cumulative revisions of current earnings forecasts are generally associated with prior-year unexpected earnings components, and the association appears to be stronger as time progresses. Overall, this study provides evidence suggesting that the earnings components as required by FRS 3 help UK analysts to identify firms’ permanent and transitory earnings changes over different forecast horizons. This study also provides strong evidence supporting the informativeness of earnings components for analysts’ forecasts and the information set perspective of FRS 3 that highlights the importance of earnings components in predicting a reporting entity’s future performance.     

Are analysts’ earnings forecasts more accurate when accompanied by cash flow forecasts?

We examine whether analysts’ earnings forecasts are more accurate when they also issue cash flow forecasts. We find that (i) analysts’ earnings forecasts issued together with cash flow forecasts are more accurate than those not accompanied by cash flow forecasts, and (ii) analysts’ earnings forecasts reflect a better understanding of the implications of current earnings for future earnings when they are accompanied by cash flow forecasts. These results are consistent with analysts adopting a more structured and disciplined approach to forecasting earnings when they also issue cash flow forecasts. Finally, we find that more accurate cash flow forecasts decrease the likelihood of analysts being fired, suggesting that cash flow forecast accuracy is relevant to analysts’ career outcomes.     

Revenue surprises and stock returns

This paper examines the relation between revenue surprises and contemporaneous and future stock returns. It also investigates whether analysts update their earnings forecasts in response to revenue surprises in a timely and unbiased fashion. Stock price reaction on the earnings announcement date is significantly related to contemporaneous as well as past revenue surprises. After controlling for earnings surprises, we find significant abnormal returns in the post-announcement period for stocks that have large revenue surprises. Although analysts revise their forecasts of future earnings in response to revenue surprises, they are slow to incorporate fully the information in revenue surprises.     

Analysts’ earnings forecast errors and cost of equity capital estimates

This study investigates the relation between analysts’ forecast errors and cost of equity capital estimates implied from analysts’ earnings forecasts and price. My analysis predicts and removes forecast errors from analysts’ earnings forecasts on an out-of-sample basis and then uses these adjusted analysts’ forecasts to reverse-engineer cost of equity capital estimates. While the correction for predictable analysts’ forecast errors meaningfully lowers each of three firm-level implied COEC estimates employed in this study and commonly used in the literature, I do not find that this correction improves their association with realized returns.     

Do management EPS forecasts allow returns to reflect future earnings? Implications for the continuation of management’s quarterly earnings guidance

Using 18,253 firm-year observations from 1998 through 2003, we build on literature suggesting that more informative disclosures allow returns to better reflect future earnings and test whether management earnings per share forecasts and their characteristics influence the future earnings response coefficient (FERC). We find that FERCs are greater for forecasting firms and when forecasts are more frequent or precise. We suggest that more frequent and more precise forecasts assist investors in better predicting future earnings. Importantly, we find that quarterly and short-term forecasts incrementally increase the association between returns and future earnings beyond annual and long-term forecasts; thus, even short-term, quarterly forecasts allow investors to form better expectations about future earnings. This suggests a benefit of quarterly earnings forecasts possibly overlooked in recommendations from the United States Chamber of Commerce, CFA Institute, Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics, and The Conference Board to eliminate quarterly earnings guidance.     

Earnings expectations,investor trade size,and anomalous returns around earnings announcements

We provide evidence that identifiable subsets of investors use significantly different information sets. Investors initiating large trades respond to analysts’ earnings forecast errors, while investors initiating small trades respond to a less-sophisticated signal that underestimates the implications of current earnings innovations for future earnings levels. This suggests small investors exhibit the behavior that Bernard and Thomas [Journal of Accounting and Economics 13, 305–340] theorize causes post-earnings announcement drift. We also use analysts’ forecasts to significantly improve the predictability of returns around earnings announcements previously documented by Bernard and Thomas. Finally, results attempting to link return predictability to the prevalence of small-investor trading are mixed.     

Short Interest,Returns, and Unfavorable Fundamental Information

Several months before information becomes public, the level of short interest contains value‐relevant information about publicly traded corporations. Short interest predicts future bad news, negative earnings surprises, and downward revisions in analyst earnings forecasts. This informational content is stronger for stocks that are harder to short. We also find that nearly half of the well‐known cross‐sectional relation between short interest and future stock returns is related to future changes in firms’ value‐relevant information. Our results suggest that short interest predicts future returns, in part, due to short sellers’ ability to uncover unfavorable information about firms.     

Rationalizing forecast inefficiency

We show analysts’ own earnings forecasts predict error in their own forecasts of earnings at other horizons, which we argue provides a measure of the extent to which analysts inefficiently use information. We construct our measure by exploiting two sources of variation in analysts’ incentives: (i) more recent forecasts have greater salience at the time of the earnings release so accuracy incentives are higher (lower) at shorter (longer) forecast horizons and (ii) analysts have greater incentives for optimism (pessimism) at longer (shorter) horizons. Consistent with these incentives affecting the incorporation of information into forecasts, we document (i) current year forecasts underweight (overweight) information in shorter (longer) horizon forecasts and (ii) the mis-weighting is more pronounced when recent news is negative—when analysts have greater (weaker) incentives to incorporate the news into shorter (longer) horizon forecasts. Finally, returns tests suggest that forecasts adjusted for the inefficiency we document better represent market expectations of earnings.

     

To beat or not to beat? The importance of analysts’ cash flow forecasts

We investigate the implications of firms’ benchmark-beating patterns with respect to analysts’ quarterly cash flow forecasts for firms’ current capital market valuation and their future performance. We hypothesize that nonnegative earnings surprises are more likely to be supported by real operating performance and signal higher earnings quality if they are achieved via higher than expected cash flows or lower than expected accruals. We show that firms beating analyst earnings forecasts have larger positive capital market reactions and larger earnings response coefficients if they beat analyst cash flow forecasts or report lower than expected accruals. We also demonstrate that these firms’ superior future performance may provide an economic justification for their more favorable market response. Our findings suggest that firms’ ability to beat analyst cash flow forecasts is informative regarding the quality of their earnings surprises.     

The disparity between long-term and short-term forecasted earnings growth

We find the disparity between long-term and short-term analyst forecasted earnings growth is a robust predictor of future returns and long-term analyst forecast errors. After adjusting for industry characteristics, stocks whose long-term earnings growth forecasts are far above or far below their implied short-term forecasts for earnings growth have negative and positive subsequent risk-adjusted returns along with downward and upward revisions in long-term forecasted earnings growth, respectively. Additional results indicate that investor inattention toward firm-level changes in long-term earnings growth is responsible for these risk-adjusted returns.     

Earnings expectations and interactive discussions with corporate insiders

This study aims to empirically clarify the informational role of interactive discussions with corporate insiders by analyzing how participants’ expectations are affected by their participant comments during analyst and investor days. The results indicate that the tone of management presentations and responses to participants’ comments exhibit no impact on analysts’ expectations of company performance. By contrast, analysts’ earnings forecasts react significantly to comments from their peers (especially star analysts). Furthermore, peer comments contain additional information on analysts’ forecast errors. Finally, analysts whose earnings forecasts diverge positively (negatively) from the consensus are influenced by their peers' negative (positive) opinions. The results suggest that interactive meetings contribute in acquiring information and opinions from other participants (especially informed participants) rather than from corporate insiders.     

On the relation between predictable market returns and predictable analyst forecast errors

We investigate the relation between predictable market returns and predictable analyst forecast errors. Perfect correlation between predictable components of forecast errors and abnormal returns would lend credence to the view that pricing anomalies are not merely an artifact of inadequately controlled risk. Our evidence implies an imperfect correlation. Moreover, we find that while the predictable component of abnormal returns is significantly associated with future forecast errors, trading strategies based directly on the predictable component of forecast errors are not profitable. Further implications of our findings are that predictable components of analysts’ forecast errors are robust with respect to loss functions and analysts’ earnings forecasts may significantly diverge from the market expectations.