Investor perceptions of the earnings quality consequences of hiring an affiliated auditor

The Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX) requires that firms wait 1 year before hiring an individual employed as a member of the external audit team. SOX’s intent is to reduce the perceived loss of auditor independence due to affiliated hiring. SOX also requires fully independent audit committees and disclosure of directors with financial expertise. Using a sample of financial executive hires during the pre-SOX period, we find that earnings response coefficients (ERCs) decline following hires of individuals recently employed by the firm’s external auditor, but ERCs do not decline following hires not recently employed by the external auditor. We also find smaller ERC declines following affiliated hires for firms with audit committee compositions consistent with subsequently imposed SOX requirements. Further investigation using measures of earnings quality suggests that differences in ERC changes are attributable to perceived, rather than real, changes in earnings quality following affiliated hires.     

Uncertainty Associated with Future Environmental Costs and the Market's Differential Response to Earnings Information

This study examines whether the uncertainty arising from a firm's exposure to future environmental costs (environmental uncertainty) affects the market's price sensitivity to reported earnings. Specifically, when environmental uncertainty is significantly high, are investors more responsive to reported earnings released by 'high-polluting' firms than reported earnings announced by 'low-polluting' firms within the same industry? The initial impact of Title IV (the acid rain provisions) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (1990 CAAA) on the US electric utility industry provides the research setting required to isolate the effects of environmental uncertainty while addressing this question. Consistent with theoretical predictions, we find that the earnings response coefficients (ERCs) of high-polluting electric utilities are significantly greater than those of their low-polluting counterparts during a predicted period of elevated environmental uncertainty. In adjoining sample years associated with lower environmental uncertainty, we observe no statistical difference in the magnitude of the ERCs between these two groups. In addition, the study's findings suggest that the magnitude of the ERC is increasing in the firm's exposure to future environmental costs, after controlling for other factors that potentially affect ERCs.     

Does the Stock Market See a Zero or Small Positive Earnings Surprise as a Red Flag?

This study shows that firms collectively incur a cost for managing earnings and analyst expectations to meet earnings forecasts. We compare the coefficient in the regression of abnormal stock returns on earnings surprise (the earnings response coefficient [ERC]) across ranges of earnings surprises. The ERC for earnings surprises in the range [0, 1¢] is significantly lower than ERCs for earnings surprises in adjacent ranges for firm-quarters in the early and mid 2000s, but not for those in the 1990s. The results are robust to controlling for the sign of estimated discretionary accruals and the trajectory of analyst earnings forecasts. We further find that investors are right to be skeptical about earnings surprises in the range [0, 1¢]. The relation of future earnings surprise with current earnings surprise is more negative for current earnings surprises in that range than for those in any other range. Evidence also suggests analysts react negatively to earnings surprises in that range.     

Discussion of: The option market’s anticipation of information content in earnings announcements

Billings and Jennings (2011) develop a new measure of stock price sensitivity to earnings called anticipated information content (AIC). The main difference between an AIC and an earnings response coefficient (ERC) is that AICs measure expected rather than actual sensitivity. I evaluate the AIC’s potential usefulness in future research, and conclude that AICs have several disadvantages relative to ERCs but might be useful in rare circumstances. Estimates of AICs contain considerable measurement error and fail a primary test of construct validity when left uncorrected. I outline a method for correcting two of the three sources of measurement error, which can be used by researchers interested in pursuing work on AICs. The method may have uses beyond computing AICs because it yields a prediction of the unsigned change in stock price during a scheduled event window.     

Share price anticipation of earnings and management's discussion of operations and financing

This paper combines research on the measurement of disclosure quality and the measurement of share price anticipation of earnings to produce a new test of the usefulness of the information disclosed in management discussions of operations and financing for predicting future earnings. Market-Based Accounting Research has shown that earnings changes are anticipated and impounded in prices well before the financial year for which earnings are reported. This price anticipation leads to downward biased earnings response coefficients (ERCs) in the commonly estimated regression model of returns on contemporaneous earnings changes. We exploit predictable differences in the biasedness of the ERC estimate across firm-years to test the hypothesis that share prices are better informed when the annual report contains a detailed discussion of the firm's operations and financing. Our results suggest that such voluntary disclosure may have been useful in predicting future earnings changes. The effect would appear to be strongest (1) in models that examine one-period-ahead and two-period-ahead share price anticipation and (2) when we employ a disclosure index that captures forward-looking information.     

Can historical returns-earnings relations predict price responses to earnings news?

The main purpose of this study is to examine the usefulness of pooled and firm-specific returns-earnings models in predicting price responses to future earnings news. The question addresses whether earnings response coefficients (ERCs) (i.e., slope coefficients obtained from regressions of market-adjusted returns on earnings surprises) are helpful in predicting price responses to future earnings surprises. In other words, are historical returns-earnings relations (as captured by ERCs) useful in predicting future returns-earnings relations? Surprisingly, we find that ERCs from firm-specific regressions provide less accurate predictions of price responses to future earnings surprises than ERCs from pooled regressions. In addition, out-of-sample predictions from actual-firm-specific regressions are no more accurate than those from pseudo-firm-specific regressions. This is despite the fact that our pseudo firms are created through random draws of returns-earnings data. Therefore, they have no economic characteristics that extend beyond the period over which the coefficients are estimated.     

Sustained Earnings and Revenue Growth,Earnings Quality,and Earnings Response Coefficients

We show that firms reporting sustained increases in both earnings and revenues have (1) higher quality earnings and (2) larger earnings response coefficients (ERCs) in comparison to firms reporting sustained increases in earnings alone. With respect to earnings quality, firms with revenue-supported increases in earnings have more persistent earnings, exhibit less susceptibility to earnings management, and have higher future operating performance. With respect to response coefficients, firms with revenue-supported increases in earnings have both higher ERCs and lower book value response coefficients, consistent with the implications of the Ohlson (1995, Contemporary Accounting Research 12, 661–687) model.JEL Classification: G12, M41     

Earnings Persistence, Losses and the Estimation of Earnings Response Coefficients

One of the major themes of capital markets accounting research concerns mapping the relation between accounting earnings and security returns. There is still not agreement on the functional form of this relation. The models analysed here are those where: the level of earnings alone, the change in earnings alone, or both, scaled by price, are used as explanatory variables for returns. This article demonstrates that if earnings are either completely permanent or entirely transitory, the earnings response coefficients (ERCs) estimated by levels and changes models should coincide. However, if earnings comprise a mixed process of permanent and transitory components, the ERC estimated by the levels will differ from that estimated by the changes model. Using losses to identify transitory components in earnings, empirical evidence consistent with these predictions is provided.
A combined model using both the level of, and change in, earnings is justified as a weighted average of an earnings and a book value valuation model (e.g., Ohlson, 1989). An alternative rationalization concerns the mitigation of an errors-in-variables problem associated with the estimation of unexpected earnings (Ali and Zarowin, 1992). The results for the combined model are more consistent with the latter. In this context, some previous empirical studies perceive the levels variable as a useful addition to the changes variable when there are transitory components in earnings. However, the evidence reported here suggests that the level of earnings, scaled by price, appears to be the fundamental earnings explanatory variable for returns (Ohlson, 1991, p. 1). The changes variable can, when the errors-in-variables problem is not mitigated by other methods, be a useful addition to the levels variable.     

Accounting Losses and Earnings Response Coefficients: The Impact of Leverage and Growth Opportunities

This paper investigates how accounting losses affect the relationship between accounting earnings and stock returns, i.e. earnings response coefficients (ERCs), in different leverage and growth categories. In a sample of NYSE firms between 1975 and 1990, the exclusion of losses improves the ERCs considerably. While the impact of losses on ERCs is highest in the subgroup including high growth opportunity firms, the exclusion of losses does not improve ERCs as significantly among firms with low growth opportunities. The results further support the hypothesis that the impact of losses on ERCs is different in different financial leverage subgroups. The measured increase in ERCs is most significant among the least levered firms. The observation that the impact of losses on ERCs is related to growth opportunities and financial leverage is clearly observable also in different size categories. The effects of growth opportunities and financial leverage are also incrementally important with respect to each other. In general, the results indicate that the impact of growth opportunities and financial leverage on ERCs is clearly observable especially when losses and profits are analyzed separately.     

The effect of CEO ownership on the information content of reported earnings

This paper examines the relation between capital market perceptions of earnings quality and CEO equity ownership. Using the earnings response coefficients (ERCs) from annual returns–earnings regressions as a proxy for investor perceptions of earnings quality, we find that ERCs first increase and then decline across higher levels of CEO ownership with an inflection point around 25% ownership. Using analyst behavior as another proxy for the perceptions of financial analysts, we find that earnings forecasts are more accurate as ownership increases, but once ownership levels reach about 25%, accuracy declines with further increases in ownership. Forecast dispersion, forecast revision volatility, and analyst following decline and then increase across increasing levels of CEO ownership. Our results suggest that, for low levels of CEO ownership, earnings are perceived as being more informative about future firm performance as ownership increases. However, once ownership levels are high, earnings are perceived as being less informative with further increases in ownership.     

Earnings Response Coefficients and Dividend Policy Parameters

In a seminal paper. Ball and Brown (1968) documented a positive statistical association between earnings surprises and stock returns around an earnings announcement. They concluded that accounting earnings conveyed ‘useful’ information to the market. However, the question of how accounting earnings convey useful information is still being understood. Recent work on this topic has found that current accounting earnings aid investors and analysts in predicting future accounting earnings. Few studies, however, have examined the usefulness of current earnings for predicting other value-relevant attributes. A model by Ohlson (1989a) suggests that investors are also interested in the relationship between current earnings and future dividends. Ohlson's model is supported by empirical tests in this paper which show that the relationship between current earnings and future dividends is significant in explaining cross-sectional variation in earnings response coefficients (ERCs). A second result of interest is that information in dividends substitutes for that in accounting earnings. We find that dividend policy parameters reflect information contained in current earnings. These results add new insights on the information revealed through the analysis of ERCs. Consistent with logic presented here, a symmetrically opposite result is found with respect to dividend response coefficients. The informativeness of earnings (dividends) is found to be negatively (positively) related to the information content of dividends.     

Are incentives for earnings management reflected in the ERC: Large sample evidence

In this study, I examine the effect of exposure to earnings management (EM) incentives on the earnings response coefficient (ERC). Drawing from several anecdotes and normative arguments about the implications of managers' incentives for investor perception, I predict and test that exposure to EM incentives is negatively associated with the ERC. I find that ERC is reliably lower for firms with elevated exposure to EM incentives, holding constant the effects of actual EM and other factors that affect the returns–earnings relation. Furthermore, the effect of the incentive exposure on cash flows as well as on total accruals is reliably negative. These results are robust across alternative price– and returns–earnings specifications, and are insensitive to the inclusion of other measures of earnings quality. Additional analysis shows that the effect of such incentives on the ERC is more pronounced at higher levels of institutional stock ownership. However, a certain class of institutional owners – transient institutions – are less sensitive to the implications of such incentives for earnings quality.     

When does comparability better enhance relevance? Policy implications from empirical evidence

This study investigates the user-specific contexts under which comparability better enhances relevance of accounting information. We first confirm the intuition in the FASB’s (2010) current conceptual framework by documenting that the short-window earnings response coefficient (ERC) is positively associated with the pre-determined level of comparability. Using the cross-sectional variation in the positive relation between ERC and comparability, we show that the link between ERC and comparability is more pronounced for firms with higher investor sophistication and lower information asymmetry among investors. We further support our predictions using analysts’ earnings forecast revisions and various alternative measures of earnings informativeness. In sum, our paper shows that comparability improves information users’ ability to identify similarities and differences across different firms to a greater extent when investor base is more sophisticated and private information is less prevalent. These results suggest that standard setters, regulators, and practitioners should devote more attention to the role of comparability in firms whose investors are less sophisticated and information environment is more opaque.     

Experimental evidence on the effect of earnings targets on managers' estimates in the financial statements

This paper reports on an experiment designed to provide evidence on whether external earnings targets, such as those imposed by analysts, influence managers' judgments about (and the related accuracy of) the value of assets/liabilities reported in the financial statements. Data from the experiment indicate that higher earnings targets result in managers reporting higher estimates of profitability/asset values, but also produce larger errors in estimating those amounts. The biased estimates and related errors are a result of managers being overly optimistic about their ability to generate outcomes that fully support their estimates. In addition, data indicate that managers, over-time, learn to make better estimates, but the relation between targets, estimates, and estimation errors persists. All of this occurred in a setting in which there were financial incentives to produce the most accurate estimates possible—nothing was to be gained by deliberately biasing estimates. This suggests that the earnings targets affected managers' judgment about amounts to be reported in the financial statements, and led to sub-conscious biases that produced results causing managers' estimates to be erroneously correlated with external earnings targets.     

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.     

媒体关注、制度环境与盈余信息市场反应——对市场压力假设的再检验

针对于忠泊等人(2011)提出的媒体关注市场压力假设,文章从盈余信息市场反应的角度,进一步解释了市场压力的来源以及对管理者行为的影响。文章发现,媒体关注增加了短期内盈余信息的市场反应;降低了长期内的盈余公告后漂移程度;而且媒体关注的这种效应在外部市场化环境较差的地区更加显著。媒体关注对短期内盈余信息市场反应的放大效应,对长期内盈余信息传递效率的提升作用,正是管理者所面临的市场压力之一,媒体关注通过影响资本市场而发挥外部公司治理的功能。     

Corporate Disclosure Policy and the Informativeness of Stock Prices

We examine the association between voluntary corporate disclosure and the informativeness of stock prices. We measure corporate disclosure using the AIMR-FAF annual corporate disclosure ratings. We define price informativeness by the association between current stock returns and future earnings changes: more informative stock price changes contain more information about future earnings changes. To measure this association, we regress current returns against (current and) future earnings changes. The aggregated coefficient on the future earnings changes, which we refer to as the future ERC, is our measure of informativeness (association).We hypothesize and find that greater disclosure is associated with stock prices that are more informative about future earnings (i.e., higher future ERC). These results provide empirical support for the widely held, but heretofore empirically undocumented, belief that greater disclosure provides information benefits to investors.     

Cross-sectional Variation in Price Anticipation of Earnings

Estimates of the earnings response coefficient (ERC) can be improved by including leading returns in return-earnings models. This improvement in estimated ERC can be used to measure price anticipation of earnings. It is posited that this price anticipation is related to the information environment of a firm. Theories and prior empirical research pertaining to the information environment (e.g. Bhushan, 1989; Frankel et al., 1994) are used to identify three variables, breadth of trading, capital issues and volatility of returns, which potentially determine the extent of price anticipation of earnings. The empirical tests suggest that the tendency of prices to lead earnings is negatively related to thin trading and is positively related to the propensity for external financing and return volatility in the year immediately prior to that to which the anticipated earnings pertain.     

Stakeholder relations and stock returns: On errors in investors' expectations and learning

A significant number of institutional investors publicly state the belief that corporate stakeholder relations are associated with firm value in a manner that the financial market fails to understand. We investigate whether stakeholder information predicted risk-adjusted returns due to errors in investors' expectations and ultimately ceased to do so as attention for such information increased. We build a stakeholder-relations index (SI) for a wide range of U.S. firms over the period 1992–2009 and provide evidence that the SI explained errors in investors' expectations about firms' future earnings. The SI was positively associated with long-term risk-adjusted returns, earnings announcement returns, and errors in analysts' earnings forecasts over the period 1992–2004. However, as attention for stakeholder issues became more widespread, subsequently, these relationships diminished considerably. The results are consistent with the idea that increased investor attention for stakeholder issues eventually eliminates mispricing.