How Do Investment Banks Value Initial Public Offerings (IPOs)?

Abstract:  We investigate the valuation and the pricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) by investment banks for a unique dataset of 49 IPOs on Euronext Brussels in the 1993–2001 period. We find that for each IPO several valuation methods are used, of which Discounted Free Cash Flow (DFCF) is the most popular. The offer price is mainly based on DFCF valuation, to which a discount is applied. Our results suggest that DDM tends to underestimate value, while DFCF produces unbiased value estimates. When using multiples, investment banks rely mostly on future earnings and cash flows. Multiples based on post-IPO forecasted earnings and cash flows result in more accurate valuations.     

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.     

Issuer Operating Performance and IPO Price Formation

We study the relation between issuer operating performance and initial public offering (IPO) price formation from the initial price range to the offer price to the closing price on the first trading day. For a post‐bubble sample of 2001–2013 IPOs, we find that pre‐IPO net income and, in particular, operating cash flow are strongly, positively associated with the revision from the mid‐point of the initial price range to the offer price and that the “partial adjustment phenomenon” concentrates among issuers with the strongest operating performance. As for why publicly observable information helps predict changes in valuation from when the initial price range is set to when the offer price is set, our findings suggest that strong‐performing issuers, especially those offering small slices of ownership, have lower bargaining incentives and are susceptible to the underwriter(s) low‐balling the price range. Overall, our results suggest an important role for accounting information in understanding the pricing of book‐built IPOs and are consistent with the presence of agency problems between issuers and underwriters.        

Why do Underwriters Charge Low Underwriting Fees for Initial Public Offerings in Taiwan?

Abstract:  In Taiwan, underwriting fees for initial public offerings (IPOs) are extremely low compared to fees in other countries. From 1989 to 1999, the average underwriting fee for IPOs in Taiwan is 0.99%—far below the regulatory limit. Although the Taiwanese underwriting industry is highly concentrated, underwriting fees do not cluster at any particular level. We examine the underwriting fee and income structure in Taiwan and find support for an incentive hypothesis. Underwriters have an incentive to charge lower underwriting fees when market demand for IPO shares increases and capital gains account for a larger portion of their total income.     

The Impact of Strategic Investment Choices on Post-Issue Operating Performance and Survival of US IPO Firms

Abstract:  We examine the impact of strategic investment choices at the time of the IPO on: (i) the post-issue operating performance and (ii) the likelihood of failure and time-to-failure of newly public US firms. Our post-issue operating performance analysis uses various performance metrics, benchmarks, and expectation models. Overall, our evidence indicates that the extent of diversification and industry-adjusted capital expenditures intensity are generally positively related to changes in operating performance. We do not, however, document a consistent relation between industry-adjusted R&D expenditures and changes in operating performance. The results from our survival analysis suggest that pre-issue managerial commitment to R&D spending and developing diversified product lines enhance the ability of IPO issuing firms to remain viable for longer periods of time. Our study highlights the impact of various managerial investment decisions on the subsequent performance of newly public firms.     

Underwriter Compensation Structure: Can It Really Bond Underwriters?

Underwriter compensation can be structured as all cash or a combination of cash and warrants. Using a sample of small initial public offerings (IPOs), we find that underwriter compensation contracts that include warrants in exchange for cash can serve as certification for IPO firms by substituting for reputation capital. When underwriters accept warrants when they could have received more cash compensation, the IPOs avoid the well documented long‐run underperformance. However, when underwriters receive warrants after maximizing cash compensation, the IPO experiences higher underpricing and poorer long‐run performance. The findings are consistent with a motivation by the underwriters to circumvent regulatory constraints.     

Single versus multiple banking: lessons from initial public offerings

A vast research in banking addresses the question of the costs and benefits of multiple bank relationships versus a single bank relationship. Although no clear-cutting conclusion is reached, several contributions suggest that multiple bank relationships might lead to a sub-optimal level of monitoring, compared to a single bank relationship, as a result of free riding and coordination problems. We take a novel approach to tackle this research question, by looking at the role, if any, played by the number of lending relationships in initial public offerings (IPOs). We look at the short-term performances of IPOs as measured by underpricing and find that firms that go public with multiple bank relationships exhibit more underpricing than those that go public with a single bank relationship. This finding is independent of the number of bank relationships and/or whether any of the lending banks also acts as underwriter in the offering. We interpret our results as suggesting that the market attributes a weaker certification role to multiple bank relationships because of their less effective monitoring of IPO firms.     

Are IPO investors rational? Evidence from closed-end funds

Why buy a closed-end fund at IPO, when it is likely to trade at a discount in a few months’ time? One theory suggests that buying a new fund is justified by an initial period of investment outperformance. A second theory is that new funds are launched to provide access to assets that are temporarily illiquid and to exploit the subsequent liquidity gain while a third theory asserts that buyers of new issues are not fully rational but are influenced by time-varying sentiment. This paper tests the three theories using data from UK-traded closed-end equity-fund IPOs over 1984–2006. The empirical results provide strong support for the influence of sentiment but provide little or no support for the two other theories.     

Long-run stock performance of German initial public offerings and seasoned equity issues

We estimate the long-run stock performance after initial public offerings (IPOs) in the German capital market with a larger sample than prior studies and alternative benchmarks (the equally and the value-weighted market portfolio, size portfolios and matching stocks). In addition we present the first results on the long-run performance after seasoned equity issues (SEOs) in Germany. We conclude that size portfolios and matching stocks are better benchmarks than market portfolios. Using buy‐and-hold abnormal returns, we estimate that German stocks involved in an IPO or in a SEO, on average, underperform a portfolio consisting of stocks with a similar market capitalization by 6% in three years. This is considerably less than the underperformance after IPOs and SEOs in the US market reported by Loughran and Ritter (1995) and the underperformance after IPOs in Germany reported by Ljungqvist (1997). We also show that the apparent underperformance of the 1988–1990 IPO cohort discussed by Ljungqvist (1997) disappears when the abnormal performance estimate is based on size instead of market portfolios.