Stock Splits: An Institutional Investor Preference

This study examines the relationship between the level of institutional ownership and the likelihood that firms will enact a stock split. There is evidence of a positive relationship between institutional ownership and subsequent split behavior. A firm size effect emerges from the finding that larger firms have higher percentages of institutional owners. This implies that institutional investors either encourage stock split behavior or invest in firms that exhibit indicators of eminent stock splits. Institutions purchasing shares before the split are likely to obtain short-term and long-term earmings increases.     

The Relationship Between Market Efficiency and Insider Ownership in Large and Small Firms

The study examines insider ownership in large and small firms in relation to market efficiency. Recent studies have found a positive and significant relation between inside ownership and stock market performance. Such a finding is predicated upon the idea that inside ownership minimizes agency costs caused by the conflict between hired managers and shareholders. It is argued here that semi-strong form market efficiency requires that all public information, including insider ownership, be quickly impounded into the price of a stock. If that is the case, the expected present value of a change in agency cost should be incorporated into the stock price shortly after any significant change in ownership. Hence, if the estimate is unbiased, the longer-term performance of firms should not be effected by such changes. The issue is examined for both large, well-known firms and for smaller, less-known firms. The hypothesis that markets are generally efficient with respect to insider ownership information is rejected.     

INSIDER TRADING EFFECTS ON STOCK RETURNS AROUND OPEN-MARKET STOCK REPURCHASE ANNOUNCEMENTS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

In this paper we empirically examine the effects of insider trading activities, the percentage of common shares outstanding authorized for repurchase, and management ownership on stock returns around open-market stock repurchase announcements. The study is conducted on a sample of 204 firms that announced open-market stock repurchases between 1982 and 1990. Results show that insider trading activities during the month that immediately precedes the announcement have a significant effect. While stockholders of firms with insider net selling activities earn positive excess returns, those of firms with insider net buying activities earn larger and more significant excess returns. Insider trading activities during more distant periods do not show any effects on stock returns. Results also indicate that management ownership has a significant positive effect on stock returns, and this effect is more positive when the percentage of common shares outstanding authorized for repurchase is large.     

The Effect Of Stock Splits On Liquidity And Excess Returns: Evidence From Shareholder Ownership Composition

We examine the influence of firm ownership composition on both the abnormal returns at the announcement of a stock split and liquidity changes following a stock split. We find three results. First, the largest post‐split increase in institutional ownership occurs for firms that had low institutional ownership before the split. Second, changes in liquidity are negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. Last, the abnormal return following a split is negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. These findings are important as they shed new light on the source of stock split announcement returns.     

CEO incentive plans and corporate liquidation policy

To investigate CEOs' incentives to liquidate their firms, we examine the effects of insider ownership and compensation in stock options on 30 voluntary liquidation decisions by industrial firms in the period 1975–1986. We find that liquidation decisions are influenced by CEO incentive plans and increase shareholder value. Firms with more outside board members, smaller market-to-book ratios, and attempts by outsiders to gain control are more likely to be liquidated. Although few top executives of liquidating firms subsequently take comparable jobs, at least 41% of CEOs who downsize are made better off by liquidation.     

Insider Trading,Ownership Structure,and the Market Assessment of Corporate Sell-Offs

This paper finds that the generally favorable assessment of corporate sell-off decisions is most apparent for closely held firms where insider net-buy activity is prevalent during the prior six-month period. This suggests that insider trader activity and ownership structure information are used by the market in the characterization of sell-off decisions as favorable or unfavorable for investors.     

CEO incentive plans and corporate liquidation policy

To investigate CEOs' incentives to liquidate their firms, we examine the effects of insider ownership and compensation in stock options on 30 voluntary liquidation decisions by industrial firms in the period 1975–1986. We find that liquidation decisions are influenced by CEO incentive plans and increase shareholder value. Firms with more outside board members, smaller market-to-book ratios, and attempts by outsiders to gain control are more likely to be liquidated. Although few top executives of liquidating firms subsequently take comparable jobs, at least 41% of CEOs who downsize are made better off by liquidation.     

The effect of ownership structure on firm performance: Additional evidence

This article examines the effect of ownership structure on corporate performance, using stock returns as a measure of performance. Based on the 1988–1992 sample period, we find that the level of insider ownership is positively related to stock returns. This result suggests that as managers' equity ownership increases, their interests coincide more with those of outside shareholders. But we also find that the square of the level of insider ownership is inversely related to stock returns, indicating that excessive insider ownership rather hurts corporate performance probably due to the problem associated with managers' entrenchment. Finally, we find that stock returns are positively related to institutional ownership, indicating that institutional owners are active in monitoring management.     

Stock splits to profit insider trading: Lessons from an emerging market

Stock splits have long presented financial puzzles: Why are they undertaken? Why are they associated with abnormal returns? Abnormal returns, particularly those coming shortly before a split’s announcement date, should raise strong suspicions of insider trading, particularly in nations with weak regulatory structures. We examined the 718 split events in the emerging stock market of Vietnam from 2007 through 2011. We found evidence consistent with illegal insider trading, particularly in firms that were vulnerable to insider manipulation and, therefore, more likely to split their stocks. When vulnerable firms’ stocks did split, they provided significant excess short-term returns. Tellingly, the abnormal returns on those stocks prior to the split announcements were also extremely high, indeed higher than their abnormal post-announcement returns. Moreover, trading volume increased prior to the split announcement date. This suspicious pattern is what we would expect if insiders were trading on their knowledge. We propose that illegal insider trading in contexts where it is possible to escape serious penalty provides a previously undiscussed and cogent explanation for both stock splits and abnormal short-term returns.     

Split Share Structure Reform,corporate governance,and the foreign share discount puzzle in China

We examine the impact of the Split Share Structure Reform on the well-known foreign share discount puzzle in China. Existing literature confirms that foreign investors are more concerned about insider expropriation because of their information disadvantage relative to domestic investors. The split share structure of the ownership of Chinese listed firms created a conflict of interests between state and private shareholders. Since, before the reform, state shareholders held restricted shares that denied them any wealth effect from share price movements, they had a limited incentive to work with private shareholders to ensure that managers maximized the stock market value of the firm. By abolishing the trading restrictions for state shareholders, this reform has increased the incentive alignment between state and private shareholders, encouraging them to monitor managers. If foreign investors’ concerns over the corporate governance implications of the split share structure at least partly contributed to their discounting of Chinese listed firms, then this discount should be reduced following the reform. Indeed, our evidence confirms this prediction, especially among Chinese listed firms with more state ownership or restricted shares. Our findings imply that this significant institutional reform of the Chinese stock market has benefitted minority investors.     

Biomarker of Quality? Venture‐backed Biotech IPOs and Insider Participation

Corporate financial managers of biotech firms need long‐term financing to reach key milestones, and that requires a long‐ term capital structure. They must balance a mix of investors with different objectives and different investment horizons that includes traditional venture capitalists and also hedge funds and mutual funds. This study helps practitioners understand the complex role of exit decisions, as venture capitalists seek better exit strategies and performance. IPOs are financing but not “exit” moves. In addition to certifying firm value, insider purchasing of shares in the IPO offering has two major consequences. First, venture capitalists reallocate large sums of capital from early‐stage to late‐stage deals that are expected to have lower risk (but also lower expected return) and shorter time to exit. Second, the speed at which VCs exit after the IPO depends on the firm ownership structure after the IPO and the stock liquidity. Going public with a significant participation by venture capitalists will probably increase the post‐IPO ownership and decrease the free float of the stock, implying a delay of the exit and the realization of the capital gains from the investments. Although this study has focused exclusively on the biotechnology industry, insider participation is not unique to it. Biotech's venture brethren in the software and technology industries also have insider participation in IPOs. During 2003–2015, approximately 41 venture‐backed firms outside of the biotechnology sector had insider participation.     

Determinants of Managerial Stock Ownership: The Case of CEOs

Research on the determinants of managerial equity ownership in firms is scant. To a limited extent, prior researchers have examined the variations in insider ownership proportions by combining the officers and directors into one group. This paper differs from earlier studies by focusing on the CEO. The evidence suggests that agency costs, free cash flow, and potential non-diversification losses and CEO attributes are important in explaining variations in CEOs' equity proportions in firms. Specifically, the paper finds that the proportion of CEO's ownership is related positively to the firm's debt level, diversification potential of the firm's common stock, free cash flows, and earnings volatility, and related negatively to the firm size.     

The Credibility of Voluntary Disclosure and Insider Stock Transactions

We examine stock price reaction to voluntary disclosure of innovation strategy by high‐tech firms and its relation with insider stock transactions before the disclosure. We find that, despite the qualitative and subjective nature of strategy‐related disclosure, there is positive stock price reaction to the disclosure. The evidence suggests that investors view the disclosure as credible good news. We also find that the disclosure is associated with more positive stock price reaction when it is preceded by insider purchase transactions. This evidence is consistent with insider purchase enhancing the credibility of the disclosure. The credibility‐enhancing effect is found to be stronger for firms with higher degrees of information asymmetry (younger firms, firms with lower analyst following, loss firms, and firms with higher research and development (R&D) intensity). Our evidence also indicates that predisclosure insider purchase is associated with greater future abnormal returns, suggesting that managers are privy to good news shortly before the disclosure.     

THE EFFECTS OF STOCK SPLITS ON THE OWNERSHIP MIX OF A FIRM

This paper examines the relationship between stock splits and the ownership mix of firms. Previous studies suggest that firms issue stock splits to lower their stock price into an optimal range so small investors can more easily afford to buy round lots. The results of this paper show a positive relationship between stock splits and institutional ownership but no effect on the firm's number of shareholders. Thus, the percentage of shares owned by individual investors decreases after a stock split. The inverse relationship between institutional ownership and a firm's total assets suggests that small firms use stock splits to attract attention from Wall Street.     

Why Do Firms Become Widely Held? An Analysis of the Dynamics of Corporate Ownership

We examine the evolution of insider ownership of IPO firms from 1970 to 2001 to understand how U.S. firms become widely held. A majority of these firms has insider ownership below 20% after 10 years. Stock market performance and liquidity play an extremely important role in ownership dynamics. Firms with stocks that are highly valued, are liquid, and have performed well experience large decreases in insider ownership and become widely held. Ownership also falls for low cash flow and high capital expenditures firms. Surprisingly, variables proxying for agency costs have limited success in explaining the evolution of insider ownership.     

The Effect of Managerial Ownership on Stock Split-Induced Abnormal Returns

This paper tests the proposition that split announcements are informative signals that play a greater information role for widely held firms. We present evidence for an inverse relationship between managerial ownership and the magnitude of stock split-induced abnormal returns. After controlling for industry and firm size, we find that splitting firms have lower managerial ownership, on average, than nonsplitting firms. We also find no evidence that managers trade on inside information prior to announcing splits.     

Predicting earnings in a poor information environment

Financial intermediaries, such as analysts, play an important role in providing information to investors. However, a large segment of the market (about 39% of CRSP firms between 1992 and 2009) is not served by financial analysts, leaving investors in a poor information environment. In this paper, we examine whether other publicly available information signals, such as insider trades, institutional holdings, and firms’ stock repurchases, can be used to predict information about earnings for these firms. We find that CFOs’ trading decisions are associated with new information contained in the annual earnings reports for firms with no or scant analyst coverage. In contrast, for firms with multiple analyst coverage, insider trading decisions are not predictive of new information in earnings reports. Our results suggest that some public information signals, such as insider trades, can be used to alleviate the poor information environment faced by investors. However, the market may not have fully priced the information contained in these signals.     

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.     

Shareholder Rights,Insider Ownership and Earnings Management

This paper examines whether shareholder rights, which enable shareholders to replace managers, can constrain earnings management, and whether this effect is conditional on the level of insider ownership. Using the comprehensive shareholder rights measure constructed by Gompers et al. ( 2003 ), we find that firms with stronger shareholder rights are associated with fewer income‐increasing discretionary accruals, suggesting that stronger shareholder rights deter managers from reporting aggressive earnings. Moreover, if insider ownership introduces managerial entrenchment, managers with higher ownership would be insulated from shareholder discipline. Consistent with this entrenchment theory, we find that the association between shareholder rights and earnings management becomes insignificant in the presence of higher levels of insider ownership. Shareholder rights are negatively associated with earnings management only when insider ownership is low. Our results indicate that the disciplinary effect of shareholder rights can be attenuated by high levels of insider ownership.     

Insider trading and future stock returns in firms with concentrated ownership levels

We investigate the relationship between insider trading and stock returns in firms with concentrated ownership. To this end, we employ data from East Asian countries which span the period January 2003 to May 2012. Consistent with the previous literature, we find a significantly negative relation between the selling activity of insiders and stock returns. However, contrary to studies which focus on highly developed markets, we find that the buying activity of insiders is also inversely related to future stock returns. Our analysis shows that top directors with higher ownership levels drive this result, suggesting that the trading activity of insiders is not always associated with profit-making motives and can be explained by their level of ownership. Furthermore, we demonstrate that a trading strategy which focuses solely on purchases made by top directors with high ownership levels yields negative returns. The paper has important implications for outside investors who mimic the trading activity of insiders with the aim to realise profits.