The moderating role of board gender diversity on the relationship between firm opacity and stock returns

In this study, we examine the impact of board gender diversity on the association between firm opacity and stock price crash. We utilize the negative shock of the 2007–2008 financial crisis to capital markets to examine whether firms with gender-diverse boards witnessed lower stock price crashes due to their lower opacity ex ante. Using a sample of S&P 1500 firms spanning the period 2005–2008, we employ a difference-in-differences research design and find that firms with high opacity ex ante witness more negative returns ex post. We also find that gender-diverse firms ex ante witness less negative returns ex post. Finally, our analysis reveals the moderating role that board gender diversity plays in the association between firm opacity and stock returns around the financial crisis. We subject our results to a range of robustness checks, including instrumental variable regressions, matched-sample analyses, and a set of falsification and placebo tests. Overall, we provide evidence that board gender diversity is associated with increased transparency in financial reporting, which pays off in times of crisis.     

Corporate Governance,Product Market Competition,and Equity Prices

This paper examines whether firms in noncompetitive industries benefit more from good governance than do firms in competitive industries. We find that weak governance firms have lower equity returns, worse operating performance, and lower firm value, but only in noncompetitive industries. When exploring the causes of the inefficiency, we find that weak governance firms have lower labor productivity and higher input costs, and make more value‐destroying acquisitions, but, again, only in noncompetitive industries. We also find that weak governance firms in noncompetitive industries are more likely to be targeted by activist hedge funds, suggesting that investors take actions to mitigate the inefficiency.     

The impact of costly regulation on R&D investment levels and productivity

Prior research finds that risk-taking has declined after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, consistent with the notion that SOX's corporate governance and internal control mandates diverted resources away from corporate risk-taking. We introduce to the accounting literature a new measure of R&D productivity, Research Quotient, to examine whether SOX affects R&D risk-taking and R&D productivity differently and whether the quality of the firm's governance and internal controls, pre-SOX, moderate these relations. While we find the relation between SOX and R&D risk-taking is sensitive to research design choices, we find a consistent positive relation between SOX and Research Quotient. Our evidence indicates that while firms may allocate fewer resources to R&D post-SOX, they concurrently manage their R&D investments more productively. Further, our results are robust to a difference-in-difference design and are stronger for firms with weaker governance pre-SOX.     

Is momentum trading profitable from Shari'ah compliant stocks?

This research offers fresh evidence supporting the pervasiveness of the momentum effect. Two decades after the momentum profitability firstly documented by Jegadeesh and Titman (1993), yet little research has been specifically devised for the momentum profitability on Shari'ah compliant stocks. We assess the momentum profitability over the Shari'ah compliant stocks in a Malaysian setting. We find evidence of strong return persistence as far as toward four-year holding period. Interestingly, no significant momentum returns are found among the conventional stocks. Upon further exploration we find neither an industry-driven momentum effect nor the small size firms can account for the momentum returns. Using return persistency formation criteria, we further find that underreaction seems to well fit in explaining this unique long lasting momentum profitability.     

Did accelerated filing requirements and SOX Section?404 affect the timeliness of 10-K filings?

This paper examines the effect of Sarbanes-Oxley provisions on 10-K filing delays. We find that tightened filing deadlines for accelerated and large accelerated filers are not associated with changes in the incidence of late filing. While Section 404 compliance does not affect filing timeliness for firms with effective internal controls, we find that about half the firms disclosing internal control weaknesses are late filers. As a consequence, many Section 404 material weakness firms experience negative abnormal returns around late filing notifications before filing the 10-K. Lastly, we find that market reactions to late filing notifications are more negative when management provides no meaningful explanation for the delay, consistent with managers’ incentives to withhold bad news.     

Mispricing firm-level productivity

This paper provides a mispricing-based explanation for the negative relation between firm-level productivity and stock returns. Investors appear to underprice unproductive firms and overprice productive firms. We find evidence consistent with the speculative overpricing of productive firms driven by investor sentiment and short sale constraints. Investors erroneously extrapolate past productivity growth and its associated operating performance and stock returns, despite their subsequent reversals. Such mispricing is perpetuated because of limits to arbitrage and is partially corrected around earnings announcements when investors are surprised by unexpected earnings news. Decomposition analysis indicates that extrapolative mispricing and limits to arbitrage explain most of the return predictability of firm-level productivity.     

Is there a symmetric nonlinear causal relationship between large and small firms?

This paper uses both linear and nonlinear causality tests to reexamine the causal relationship between the returns on large and small firms. Consistent with previous results, we find that large firms linearly lead small firms. We also find a significant linear causality in the direction from small firms to large firms, particularly in the more recent time period where the impact from small firms to large firms is greater than from large to small. More important, in contrast to the received literature, we find significant nonlinear causality that is bi-directional and of the same duration in either direction. Using the BEKK asymmetric GARCH model we are able to capture most of the detected nonlinear relationship. This indicates that volatility spillovers are largely responsible for the observed nonlinear Granger causality.     

Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The Impact of the 2002 Governance Rules

The 2001 to 2002 corporate scandals led to the Sarbanes–Oxley Act and to various amendments to the U.S. stock exchanges' regulations. We find that the announcement of these rules has a significant effect on firm value. Firms that are less compliant with the provisions of the rules earn positive abnormal returns compared to firms that are more compliant. We also find variation in the response across firm size. Large firms that are less compliant earn positive abnormal returns but small firms that are less compliant earn negative abnormal returns, suggesting that some provisions are detrimental to small firms.     

Managerial ownership dynamics and firm value

From 1988 to 2003, the average change in managerial ownership is significantly negative every year for American firms. We find that managers are more likely to significantly decrease their ownership when their firms are performing well and more likely to increase their ownership when their firms become financially constrained. When controlling for past stock returns, we find that large increases in managerial ownership increase Tobin's q. This result is driven by increases in shares held by officers, while increases in shares held by directors appear unrelated to changes in firm value. There is no evidence that large decreases in ownership have an adverse impact on firm value. We rely on the dynamics of the managerial ownership/firm value relation to mitigate concerns in the literature about the endogeneity of managerial ownership.     

Corporate diversification and downsizing decisions: International evidence from sharp and sudden performance shocks

While firms regularly reduce workforce following sharp performance decline, diversified firms may abstain from employment downsizing by transferring capital and labor between segments (the allocative flexibility effect). However, downsizing may be more likely if a performance shock leads to efforts to reduce inefficiency in resource allocation (the inefficient internal market effect). Using a large cross-country dataset, our results provide strong support for the inefficient internal market effect. We find that diversified firms are more likely to downsize and the national employment protection and union power laws moderate this link. We also find that diversified firms with more excess employment are more likely to downsize and that downsizing following major adverse performance shocks is associated with lower level of diversification and excess employment.     

An internal control perspective on the market value consequences of IT operational risk events

IT internal controls are an important component of an organization's arsenal of internal controls. Upon conceptualizing failures of operational IT systems, or what we call IT operational risk events, as signals of IT internal control weaknesses, we theorize about these events' impact on internal control objectives in general and about how this impact is influenced by the regulatory environment in particular. We then perform an event study to examine the economic impact of a diversified sample of IT operational risk events from the U.S. financial services industry during 1985–2009. We specifically test the impact of contextual factors on the degree of this effect, including the events' target (confidentiality, integrity, or availability of IT assets), the source of disclosure (regulatory or voluntary), the enactment of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, and firm-specific attributes. We find that investors penalize firms most strongly for experiencing events that compromise the availability of IT systems, consistent with our prediction that these events more negatively impact the reliability of financial reporting and the efficiency and effectiveness of operations. This result contrasts extant empirical studies that are predominantly concerned with information and security breaches. We find also that investors' penalty is the strongest for firms experiencing IT operational risk events that occurred after the passing of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act or were disclosed by a regulatory body. Finally, the market reaction is shown to be stronger for firms with high growth potential, firms that are larger, riskier, and are in the banking sector. Implications for research and practice are discussed along with directions for future research.     

Consequences of fraud and overcoming negative market reaction

We examine the market reaction to a sample of firms following the announcement of the firms' involvement in fraud, referred to as the trigger event. We find that these firms experience negative and significant returns following the announcement of fraud, in contrast to a control sample. More importantly, we examine tactics, such as changes in executives, auditing firm, and company name, that these firms may use to regain the market's confidence. We find that the market reacts negatively right after the change in executives, but the negative trend is reversed in the long-term for firms that make an executive change quickly after the trigger event. Similarly, firms that quickly change their auditing firm fare better. We also find that there is significantly more information asymmetry during the trigger event and at the litigation date, as well as during changes in CEO, CFO, and auditor. We find a prompt change in CFO is positively and significantly related to, and therefore predicts, better long-term stock performance.     

Sources of gains to shareholders from bankruptcy resolution

Using a logistic regression model, we identify the characteristics of firms whose shareholders are likely to benefit from bankruptcy resolution. That is, winners (losers) are firms whose shareholders experience positive (negative) excess returns after bankruptcy filing. We find that winners are relatively smaller firms with higher proportions of convertible debt, tend to file for bankruptcy for strategic reasons, have low share-ownership concentration, and suffer comparatively larger pre-filing stock price declines. Among winners, shareholder returns are greater for firms that have higher levels of private debt and research and development (R&D) expenditures, and operate in more concentrated industries. In addition, our analysis indicates that an ex ante trading strategy of purchasing bankrupt stocks with a greater than 50% probability of being a winner on the day after bankruptcy filing and holding the stocks for a year, on an average, can generate average compounded and excess compounded holding-period returns of +71% and +42%, respectively.     

The impact of hedging on the market value of equity

We examine the annual stock performance of firms that disclose the use of derivatives to hedge over the period 1995 to 1999. We find that only 21.6% of publicly traded U.S. corporations in our sample hedged with derivative instruments over this period and their use is concentrated in the larger companies. Similar to other studies we find that when derivatives are used, interest rate and currency securities are used much more frequently than commodity products. Our sample of 1308 companies that hedge outperforms other securities by 4.3% per year on average over our sample period. This result is robust to several alternative methods of estimating abnormal returns. When we segment performance by the type of hedge used, however, we find that the over-performance is due entirely to larger firms that hedge currency. We find no abnormal returns for firms hedging either interest rates or commodities. The abnormal returns in firms hedging currency is robust to alternative models that seek to control for exchange rate fluctuations and global equity returns; however, we find no significant abnormal returns to currency hedgers when using an augmented model that controls for the role of intangible assets.     

Sources of Financing,Profitability and Productivity: First Evidence from Matched Firms

This paper contributes to the literature on capital structure and firm performance. Using firm‐level data covering over 11,000 firms from 47 countries over a recent period of 1997‐2007, we address the effect of different sources of financing on corporate performance, employing a matching process, which allows an adequate `like‐for‐like’ comparison between high and low level of financing by firms. Robust to different matching estimators, the main findings are consistent with the theories of capital structure, in that firms with high debt‐to‐equity ratio tend to have lower returns to shareholders (profitability) and lower internal efficiency (productivity). The results become more robust when we separate the firms into advanced and emerging country‐groups or countries with high/low levels of financial development. Given the lower level of leverage below 50% on average in emerging markets (or in countries with lower level of financial reforms), firms in these economies face lower risk of financial distress and thereby less adverse effect on firm profitability and productivity, relative to their counterparts in advanced economies. We also find that retained earnings and equity financing improve performance, while debt financing by firms particularly in the form of bank loans leads to lower performance, although not so in the case of debt raised through issuing bonds.     

Incentive alignment through performance-focused shareholder proposals on management compensation

We investigate an emerging pay-performance activism under a natural setting of performance-focused shareholder proposals rule (PSPs) (Rule 14a-8) established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for top management compensation. We find that: (1) PSP sponsors successfully identify firms that suffer from a misalignment of managers and shareholders’ interests; (2) CEOs’ pay-for-performance sensitivity increases in the post-proposal period; and (3) shareholders benefit through positive stock returns as related to proposal filing dates; while (4) bondholders suffer significant negative returns and even more so for high-leverage firms. Our additional analyses suggest that perceived risk increase is the main driver of observed negative abnormal bond returns. However, we fail to find similar results for shareholder proposals not focused on performance (NPSPs). Collectively, our results indicate that shareholders benefit from this pay-performance activism through PSPs (but not NPSPs), but potentially at the expense of bondholders.     

Family friendly firms: does it pay to care?

In this paper we examine the returns to a portfolio of 29 firms that are perceived as family-oriented. The sample is based on firms awarded the best 100 companies for working mothers in Working Mother Magazine’s annual survey. There is much anecdotal evidence supporting the benefits of these programs, but little evidence relating family-oriented policies to shareholder wealth. We find, based on raw returns, that family-friendly firms do not earn statistically significant excess returns relative to a matched sample or to the S & P 500. Based on risk-adjusted returns, the family-friendly portfolio outperforms the market, but underperforms a matched sample portfolio.     

Do technology spillovers affect the corporate information environment?

Technology spillovers across firms affect corporate innovation, productivity, and value, according to prior research, so information about technology spillovers should matter to investors. We argue that technology spillovers increase the complexity and uncertainty of value relevant information about the firm, which makes information processing more costly, discourages it, and thereby increases information asymmetry between insiders and outsiders. We find that not only does information asymmetry increase, but so does avoidance by sophisticated market participants, uncertainty, and insider trading. We also find that investors do not misestimate short-term earnings, but they underestimate long-term earnings, consistent with the higher future stock returns that we also find.     

Productivity and liquidity management under costly financing

We explore theoretically and empirically the relationship between firm productivity and liquidity management in the presence of financial frictions. We build a dynamic investment model and show that, counter to basic economic intuition, more productive firms could demand less capital assets and hold more liquid assets compared to less productive firms when financing costs are sufficiently high. We empirically test this prediction using a comprehensive dataset of Chinese manufacturers and find that more productive firms indeed hold less capital and more cash. We do not, however, observe this for US manufacturers. Our study suggests a larger capital misallocation problem in markets with significant financing frictions than previously documented.     

Corporate misconduct,media coverage,and stock returns

This study examines the impact of increased investor attention to corporate misconduct (CM) on stock returns. We show that media coverage provides an important channel through which investor awareness of corporate wrongdoings can be enhanced. Using a unique research setting in Korea based on text analysis during the 2008–2020 period, we find that investors exhibit short-term adverse reactions to CM events. More importantly, the increased social awareness of CM issues through media coverage leads investors to penalize firms more severely. We also find that the adverse reaction to CM events is more prominent for firms with a greater negative media tone and surprise. The combined evidence supports the investor attention theory. Furthermore, the negative effects of CM on stock returns are smaller for firms with positive Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reputations, consistent with the insurance theory.