Day-of-the-Week Effects in the Long-Run Performance of Initial Public Offerings

This study examines the influence of day-of-the-week patterns in security returns on long-run IPO underperformance. Comparisons are made between the IPOs in Ritter's [20] database, and a constructed set of matching firms based on SIC code and size, using NYSE, AMEX, and NASDAQ securities. It is found that virtually all of the IPO underperformance occurs on Mondays and Tuesdays and that the degree of underperformance significantly differs from other days. Thus, a common explanation may exist for the general day-of-the-week pattern in security returns and IPO long-run underperformance.     

The Long-Run Performance of initial Public Offerings

The underpricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) that has been widely documented appears to be a short-run phenomenon. Issuing firms during 1975–84 substantially underperformed a sample of matching firms from the closing price on the first day of public trading to their three-year anniversaries. There is substantial variation in the underperformance year-to-year and across industries, with companies that went public in high-volume years faring the worst. The patterns are consistent with an IPO market in which (1) investors are periodically overoptimistic about the earnings potential of young growth companies, and (2) firms take advantage of these “windows of opportunity.”     

Earnings Management and the Long-Run Market Performance of Initial Public Offerings

Issuers of initial public offerings (IPOs) can report earnings in excess of cash flows by taking positive accruals. This paper provides evidence that issuers with unusually high accruals in the IPO year experience poor stock return performance in the three years thereafter. IPO issuers in the most "aggressive" quartile of earnings managers have a three-year aftermarket stock return of approximately 20 percent less than IPO issuers in the most "conservative" quartile. They also issue about 20 percent fewer seasoned equity offerings. These differences are statistically and economically significant in a variety of specifications.     

Long-Run Operating Performance of Initial Public Offerings in Japanese Over-the-Counter Market (1991–2001): Evidence and Implications

This paper implements a comprehensive study on the long run post-issue operating performance of more than 700 initially public offerings (IPOs) in the Japanese over-the-counter market (JASDAQ) from 1991 to 2001. Empirical results document dramatic and continuing operating underperformance that are robust to industry or mean reversion adjustment. The diagnostic tests for behavioral explanations further uncover the salient decline of market expectations by various measures over the post issuing years, as well as the upsurge in company expansion around the offering years followed by the striking dwindle soon afterwards. These findings jointly shed light on the systematic over-optimism of market investors and managers at the time of IPO events. The multiple regression analysis also demonstrates robust evidence that is favorable for the hypotheses of “Windows of Opportunity” and market timing. In contrast, we do not find that there are significant associations between changes in alternative insider ownership and the evolution of operating performance. We suggest the explanations based on the agency problem theory are not effective in explaining the long run operating underperformance of JASDAQ IPOs.JEL Classification Code: G30, G31, D80, D84     

Myth or Reality? The Long-Run Underperformance of Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from Venture and Nonventure Capital-Backed Companies

We investigate the long-run underperformance of recent initial public offering (IPO) firms in a sample of 934 venture-backed IPOs from 1972–1992 and 3,407 nonventure-backed IPOs from 1975–1992. We find that venture-backed IPOs outperform non-venture-backed IPOs using equal weighted returns. Value weighting significantly reduces performance differences and substantially reduces underperformance for nonventure-backed IPOs. In tests using several comparable benchmarks and the Fama-French (1993) three factor asset pricing model, venture-backed companies do not significantly underperform, while the smallest nonventure-backed firms do. Underperformance, however, is not an IPO effect. Similar size and book-to-market firms that have not issued equity perform as poorly as IPOs.     

Institutional Allocation in Initial Public Offerings: Empirical Evidence

We analyze institutional allocation in initial public offerings (IPOs) using a new data set of U.S. offerings between 1997 and 1998. We document a positive relationship between institutional allocation and day one IPO returns. This is partly explained by the practice of giving institutions more shares in IPOs with strong premarket demand, consistent with book-building theories. However, institutional allocation also contains private information about first-day IPO returns not reflected in premarket demand and other public information. Our evidence supports book-building theories of IPO underpricing, but suggests that institutional allocation in underpriced issues is in excess of that explained by book-building alone.     

Property Investment and Property Development Firm Performance Around Initial Public Offerings and Rights Offerings: U.K. Evidence

In contrast to the well-documented underperformance of equity issuers, property investment firms undertaking initial public offerings and rights issues have performed indistinguishably from similar nonissuing firms. Property development companies that issued equity over the same period performed significantly worse than nonissuing firms. The major difference between property development and property investment firms is that property investment firms hold portfolios of real estate assets and thus have more certain prices. The lower pricing uncertainty of property investment firms results in normal long-run performance. Tests of the cognitive bias hypothesis provide only weak support of this explanation, while size and book-market effects are unable to account for the performance of property investment and development companies. The findings of underperformance for rights issues suggest that timing equity issues to take advantage of new shareholders may not be linked to the existence of cognitive bias. An important finding for the international growth in securitized real estate markets is that no evidence is found suggesting equity issues of securitized real estate firms should be avoided.     

Initial Public Offerings: CFO Perceptions

We examine four issues pertaining to initial public offerings (IPOs) using a survey of 438 chief financial officers (CFOs). First, why do firms go public? Second, is CFO sentiment stationary across bear and bull markets? Third, what concerns CFOs about going public? Fourth, do CFO perceptions correlate with returns? Results support funding for growth and liquidity as the primary reasons for IPOs. CFO sentiment is generally stationary in pre‐ and post‐bubble years. Managers are concerned with the direct costs of going public, such as underwriting fees, as well as indirect costs. We find a negative relation between a focus on immediate growth and long‐term abnormal returns.     

Some Evidence on the Uniqueness of Initial Public Debt Offerings

Debt initial public offerings (IPOs) represent a major shift in a firm's financing policy by both extending debt maturity and altering the public-private debt mix. In contrast to findings for seasoned debt offerings, we document a significantly negative stock price response to debt IPO announcements. This result is consistent with debt maturity and debt ownership structure theories. The equity wealth effect is negatively related to the offer's maturity, and positively related to the degree of bank monitoring. We find that firms with less information asymmetry and firms with higher growth opportunities experience a less adverse stock price response.     

The Diversification Effects of Initial Public Offerings

Abstract:  A firm's stock becomes publicly tradable through an initial public offering (IPO). This study suggests a portfolio diversification perspective to explore IPOs. We examine whether investors can gain diversification benefits by adding an IPO portfolio to a set of benchmark portfolios sorted by firm size and book-to-market ratio. Using US IPOs from 1980-2002, we find that adding a value-weighted IPO portfolio does lead to a statistically and economically significant enlargement of the investment opportunity set for investors relative to investing solely in a set of benchmark portfolios. Specifically, the Sharpe ratio of the tangency portfolio increases by 5.50% on average after including IPO stocks. Furthermore, IPOs associated with prestigious lead underwriters are the main source of this augmentation of the mean-variance investment opportunity set. Finally, our study implies that issuing IPO exchange traded funds or similar products can provide diversification gains to investors.     

The Informational Content of Initial Public Offerings

The ability of capital markets to distinguish firms of different value by the size of their initial equity offerings is attenuated when insiders can sell equity more than once. A model is developed in which there is price risk from holding equity between periods. When the uncertainty is small, there must be pooling in the first period. When uncertainty is large, the pooling equilibria dominate the separating equilibrium.     

The Initial Public Offerings of Listed Firms

A number of firms in the United Kingdom list without issuing equity and then issue equity shortly thereafter. We argue that this two‐stage offering strategy is less costly than an initial public offering (IPO) because trading reduces the valuation uncertainty of these firms before they issue equity. We find that initial returns are 10% to 30% lower for these firms than for comparable IPOs, and we provide evidence that the market in the firm's shares lowers financing costs. We also show that these firms time the market both when they list and when they issue equity.     

Underpricing and Firm Quality in Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from Singapore

Firms seeking initial public listings on the Stock Exchange of Singapore can choose between offering their shares at a fixed price or selling them in two tranches: the first tranche is offered at a fixed price while the issue price of the second tranche is determined via a tender system. Consistent with the existing signalling literature, tendering IPO firms underprice their fixed price tranche more than non-tendering IPO firms. The underpricing in the fixed tranche is recouped through higher proceeds from the tender tranche. Our evidence suggests that IPO firms use the tender option to signal superior firm quality.     

Underwriter Lock-up Releases, Initial Public Offerings and After-market Performance

The lock‐up agreement between an underwriter and an issuing firm's principals prohibits sale of securities for a period of time following the offering date. Investment banks must support the stock following an offering. The lock‐up assures investors that the restricted shares will not enter the market, at least for a period of time. Negative abnormal returns prior to the lock‐up release show that unrestricted investors liquidate positions prior to the scheduled lock‐up release. Negative abnormal returns are more robust for firms that are not influenced by SEC Rule 144 than for firms that are.     

The Pricing of Insurer Demutualization Initial Public Offerings

This article examines the pricing of the initial public offerings (IPOs) that follow insurance company demutualizations. Insurers that convert from mutual to stock form typically cite the need for capital as a key motivation. Given that capital adequacy is a primary regulatory objective for insurers, one would expect that for a given number of shares to be sold, these firms would price their offerings to maximize proceeds. However, the vast literature on IPO pricing suggests various theories as to why it may be in the issuing firm's best interest to underprice its offering. By examining the initial and long‐run stock returns for these conversion IPOs, the existence and degree of underpricing, as characterized by large initial returns, can be determined. It is observed that on average demutualization insurer IPOs post significantly higher first‐day returns than nondemutualization insurer IPOs. These gains would accrue to the initial investors and to those policyholders who receive compensation in the form of shares in the newly created stock insurer. Attractive returns are sustained for both groups of insurers during the first few years after IPO.     

The Post-Issue Market Performance of Initial Public Offerings in China's New Stock Markets

In this paper, we investigate the post-issue market performance of initial public offerings (IPOs) in China's new stock markets. Our analysis focuses on whether and how institutional features unique to China differentially affect IPO performance. These features include the existence of dual-class shares for the same underlying firms (A-shares issued to domestic investors and B-shares issued to foreign investors) and the unusually long time lag between the offering and listing dates. Our sample consists of 277 A-share and 65 B-share IPOs that were listed on China's new stock markets during the 1992–1995 period. Our study has a number of interesting results. First, A-share IPOs are much more severely underpriced during the initial return period than B-share IPOs. Second, B-share IPOs underperform A-share IPOs (and the market) during the post-issue periods for up to three years. Third, the results of multivariate regression analyses strongly suggest that economic factors determining the post-issue performance of IPOs differ across the A-share and B-share samples.     

The Role of Lockups in Initial Public Offerings

In a sample of 2,794 initial public offerings (IPOs), we testthree potential explanations for the existence of IPO lockups:lockups serve as (i) a signal of firm quality, (ii) a commitmentdevice to alleviate moral hazard problems, or (iii) a mechanismfor underwriters to extract additional compensation from theissuing firm. Our results support the commitment hypothesis.Insiders of firms that are associated with greater potentialfor moral hazard lockup their shares for a longer period oftime. Insiders of firms that have experienced larger excessreturns, are backed by venture capitalists, or go public withhigh-quality underwriters are more likely to be released fromthe lockup restrictions.     

Analyst Following of Initial Public Offerings

We examine data on analyst following for a sample of initial public offerings completed between 1975 and 1987 to see how they relate to three well-documented IPO anomalies. We find that higher underpricing leads to increased analyst following. Analysts are overoptimistic about the earnings potential and long term growth prospects of recent IPOs. More firms complete IPOs when analysts are particularly optimistic about the growth prospects of recent IPOs. In the long run, IPOs have better stock performance when analysts ascribe low growth potential rather than high growth potential. These results suggest that the anomalies may be partially driven by overoptimism.     

Monitoring Role of Venture Capital in the Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from Korea

Because the government has initiated the development of venture capital firms in Korea, independent venture capital firms have been significantly influenced by government regulations and interventions; in contrast, corporations have made venture investments internally to avoid the regulations. This study investigates whether the Korean institutional environment harms the monitoring role of independent venture capital firms, while it does not significantly impact corporate venture capital firms. In an IPO setting, we find that earnings management (long-term performance) significantly decreases (increases) with the ownership of corporate venture capital firms. However, we do not find a significant relation between the ownership of independent venture capital firms and earnings management or long-term performance. The results suggest that Korean independent venture capital firms do not play a role in monitoring their investee companies; in contrast, corporate venture capital firms play a monitoring role.