The Market Reaction to Stock Splits

In this paper, a model of market reaction to stock splits is presented and tested. We argue that the announcement of a split sets off the following chain of events. The market recognizes that, subsequent to the (reverse) split ex-day, the daily number of transactions along with the raw volume of shares traded will increase (decrease). This increase in volume results in an increase in the noisiness of the security's return process. The increase in noise raises the tax-option value of the stock, and it is this value that generates the announcement effect of stock splits. Empirical evidence using security returns, daily trading volume, and shareholder data strongly supports this theory. The evidence, in conjunction with this theory, also agrees with extant literature that splits result in decreased liquidity, but there is no evidence that this reduction in liquidity is priced.     

Stock Splits: Evidence from Mutual Funds

Mutual fund splits occur in high-priced funds after unusually high returns. Split factors are related to the deviation of a fund's price from the mean of all fund prices. Post-split prices are below the mean of other funds' prices. Post-split numbers of shareholders and assets do not increase compared with funds having similar rates of asset growth. However, I find evidence that mutual fund splits bring per account shareholdings back up to normal levels. I argue that signaling, liquidity, and tick size theories do not apply to mutual fund splits.     

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.     

Stock Dividends,Stock Splits,and Signaling

This paper provides evidence that firms signal their private information about future earnings by their choice of split factor. Split factors are increasing in earnings forecast errors, after controlling for differences in pre-split price and firm size. Furthermore, price changes at stock dividend and split announcements are significantly correlated with split factors, holding other factors constant, and with earnings forecast errors. These correlations suggest that management's choice of split factor signals private information about future earnings and that investors revise their beliefs about firm value accordingly. The analysis also suggests, however, that announcement returns are significantly correlated with split factors after controlling for earnings forecast errors. This suggests that earnings forecast errors measure management's private information about future earnings with error, that split factors signal other valuation-relevant attributes, or that a signaling explanation is incomplete.     

Underreaction to Self-Selected News Events: The Case of Stock Splits

An emerging literature looking at self-selected, corporate newsevents concludes that markets appear to underreact to news.Recent theoretical articles have explored why or how underreactionmight occur. However, the notion of underreaction is contentious.We revisit this issue by focusing on one of the most simpleof corporate transactions, the stock split. Prior studies thatreport abnormal return drifts subsequent to splits do not appearto be spurious, nor a consequence of misspecified benchmarks.Using recent cases, we report a drift of 9% in the year followinga split announcement. We consider fundamental operating performanceas a source of the underreaction and find that splitting firmshave an unusually low propensity to experience a contractionin future earnings. Further, analysts' earnings forecasts arecomparatively low at the time of the split announcement andrevise sluggishly over time. Together these results are consistentwith the notion of market underreaction to the information incorporate news events.     

Volatility increases Subsequent to NYSE and AMEX Stock Splits

The post-split increase in daily returns volatility is less for AMEX stocks than for NYSE stocks. The exchange trading location is a significant factor in explaining the volatility shift even after stock price and firm size are considered. Furthermore, when measured on a weekly basis, there is no increase in AMEX stocks' returns volatility. These results suggest that measurement errors created by bid-ask spreads and the 1/8 effect, and also one or more of the elements that make the NYSE different from the AMEX, explain why the estimated volatility of daily stock returns increases after the ex split date.     

Stock Splits: Prior and Subsequent Price Relationships

Although it has long been recognized that a stock split merely changes the packaging of an investor's claim to earnings, there is widespread belief in the financial community that the split confers some substantive benefits on stockholders. This paper describes an empirical investigation of the effect of split action on stock price. The split action was found to have an insignificant effect, even at a 10% level, on changes in market price over the 12 month period surrounding the split.     

Stock Splits in Switzerland: To Signal or Not to Signal?

In Switzerland, the existence of a mandatory minimum par value inhibited many companies from splitting their stocks as they already traded at their minimum par value. These Swiss companies could split their stocks only after the legal minimum par value was lowered in July 1992 and again in May 2001. These two events provide rare opportunities to distinguish between stock splits that signal a permanent increase in stock price and splits that are merely a reaction to a regulatory change and thus have other motives. The significant return differences between the two samples are in line with the hypothesis that splits are a means to send positive signals to the stock market. Furthermore, while trading volumes remained largely unaffected after stock splits, relative tick sizes generally increased after a stock split, and bid-ask spreads often increased after a stock split.     

REIT Stock Splits and Market Efficiency

An analysis of real estate investment trust (REIT) stock splits is presented. Evaluation of the initial reaction to split REITs supports efficient market pricing where REITs generate statistically significant positive announcement date returns, no statistically significant record date returns, and muted ex-date returns. In the long-term, split REITs do not consistently out perform benchmark portfolios over one-year, two-year, and three-year periods. REITs split subsequent to a substantial run up in stock price and to improve the position of their post split stock price relative to the stock price of the typical REIT.     

REIT Stock Splits and Liquidity Changes

This study examines the motive of stock splits made by REITs. We find that REIT liquidity increases after the split announcement. However, the increase in liquidity is limited to days around the split announcement. After the ex-date, the liquidity tends to revert back to the pre-split level. We find that the positive market reaction around the announcement date is positively related to the change in short-term liquidity but not to the change in long-term liquidity. The announcement effect is also not correlated with future changes in operating performance. Overall, our results suggest that REITs split their share to attract investors’ attention rather than to signal or to improve trading liquidity in the long run.     

Stock Splits and Stock Dividends: Why,Who, and When

This study investigates empirically why firms split their stock or distribute stock dividends and why the market reacts favorably to these distributions. The findings suggest that stock splits are mainly aimed at restoring stock prices to a “normal range.” Some support can also be found for the oft-mentioned signalling motive of stock splits. Stock dividends are altogether different from stock splits, and they appear to be a decreasing phenomenon. The clue to stock dividend distributions may lie in their perceived substitution for relatively low cash dividends.     

The Information Content of Multiple Stock Splits

We examine the relationship between the frequency of stock splits and firms' motives for splitting their stock. Compared to their peers, infrequent splitters show higher post‐split operating performance, but not so for frequent splitters. We find that split ratio and liquidity change explain the stock split announcement effect for the frequent splitters. In contrast, the change in operating performance in the split year explains the announcement effect for the infrequent splitters. Our results suggest that frequent splits are more consistent with the trading range‐improved/liquidity hypothesis and infrequent splits are more consistent with the signaling hypothesis.     

Rationality of Stock Splits: The Target-Price Habit Hypothesis

The question of why firms exercise stock splits has inspired research for some time. Signalling and optimal trading range hypotheses are possible explanations for stock splits. This paper considers the sociological aspects of maintaining a stable target-price habit. It argues that one of the principal reasons for stock splits is to conform to the market norm, which is established by mutual reinforcement among financial analysts, managers, and investors. Models based on economic reasons alone do not fully explain the rationality of stock splits.     

The Performance of Long-run Stock Returns Following Issues of Public and Private Debt

This study uses a balance sheet-based method to identify both public and private debt issues. This feature is important because there have been no studies of the information content of private debt issues, while private debt is substantially more prevalent than public debt. We find no abnormal returns following straight debt issues. However, convertible debt issuers under-perform the market on the order of 50 to 70 percent in the following five years. In pursuit of explanations, we find that convertible debt issues signal a deterioration of future profitability, which accounts for at least part of the stock price underperformance.     

Stock Splits and Bond Yields: Isolating the Signaling Hypothesis

One explanation offered for stock splits is that the split signals positive information by reducing the stock price range in expectation of improved future prospects. Price declines also lead to changes in stock price dynamics, but related securities are not subject to these other changes and therefore can be used to provide a separate assessment of the markets’ interpretation of the split. We examine corporate bond issues around stock splits and find a significant decline in the bond yield spread following stock splits, supporting the signaling hypothesis. We also confirm improvements in forecasted and realized earnings subsequent to stock splits.     

Stock Splits, Tick Size, and Sponsorship

A traditional explanation for stock splits is that they increase the number of small shareholders who own the stock. A possible reason for the increase is that the minimum bid-ask spread is wider after a split and brokers have more incentive to promote a stock. I document a large number of small buy orders following Nasdaq and NYSE/AMEX splits during 1993 to 1994. I also find strong evidence that trading costs increase, and weak evidence that costs of market making decline following splits. This is consistent with splits acting as an incentive to brokers to promote stocks.     

Stock Splits and Liquidity: The Case of the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock

In an attempt to disentangle the signaling effect from the liquidity effect of stock splits, I examine the liquidity changes following the two‐for‐one split of the Nasdaq‐100 Index Tracking Stock. Since there can be no signaling with an index stock split, any difference between pre‐ and postsplit trading may be driven by liquidity but not signaling effects. I find that though the postsplit relative bid‐ask spread is higher and daily turnover is unchanged, the frequency, share volume, and dollar‐volume of small trades all increased after the split, indicating that the split improved liquidity for small trade‐sizes.