Using Forecasts of Earnings to Simultaneously Estimate Growth and the Rate of Return on Equity Investment

We develop a method for simultaneously estimating the cost of equity capital and the growth in residual earnings that are implied by current stock prices, current book value of equity, and short-term forecasts of accounting earnings. We demonstrate the use of our method by calculating the expected equity risk premium. Our estimate is higher than estimates in extant studies that are based on the same earnings forecast data. The main difference between our study and these papers is that while they provide arguments supporting an assumed rate of growth beyond the forecast horizon, we estimate this rate.     

Using earnings forecasts to simultaneously estimate firm-specific cost of equity and long-term growth

A growing body of literature in accounting and finance relies on implied cost of equity (COE) measures. Such measures are sensitive to assumptions about terminal earnings growth rates. In this paper we develop a new COE measure that is more accurate than existing measures because it incorporates endogenously estimated long-term growth in earnings. Our method extends Easton et al. (J Account Res, 40, 657–676, 2002) method of simultaneously estimating sample average COE and growth. Our method delivers COE (growth) estimates that are significantly positively associated with future realized stock returns (future realized earnings growth). Moreover, the predictive ability of our COE measure subsumes that of other commonly used COE measures and is incremental to commonly used risk characteristics. Our implied growth measure fills the void in the earnings forecasting literature by robustly predicting earnings growth beyond the five-year horizon.     

Analysts’ earnings forecast errors and cost of equity capital estimates

This study investigates the relation between analysts’ forecast errors and cost of equity capital estimates implied from analysts’ earnings forecasts and price. My analysis predicts and removes forecast errors from analysts’ earnings forecasts on an out-of-sample basis and then uses these adjusted analysts’ forecasts to reverse-engineer cost of equity capital estimates. While the correction for predictable analysts’ forecast errors meaningfully lowers each of three firm-level implied COEC estimates employed in this study and commonly used in the literature, I do not find that this correction improves their association with realized returns.     

Volatility forecasts and at-the-money implied volatility: a multi-component ARCH approach and its relation to market models

This article explores the relationships between several forecasts for the volatility built from multi-scale linear ARCH processes, and linear market models for the forward variance. This shows that the structures of the forecast equations are identical, but with different dependencies on the forecast horizon. The process equations for the forward variance are induced by the process equations for an ARCH model, but postulated in a market model. In the ARCH case, they are different from the usual diffusive type. The conceptual differences between both approaches and their implication for volatility forecasts are analysed. The volatility forecast is compared with the realized volatility (the volatility that will occur between date t and t + ΔT), and the implied volatility (corresponding to an at-the-money option with expiry at t + ΔT). For the ARCH forecasts, the parameters are set a priori. An empirical analysis across multiple time horizons ΔT shows that a forecast provided by an I-GARCH(1) process (one time scale) does not capture correctly the dynamics of the realized volatility. An I-GARCH(2) process (two time scales, similar to GARCH(1,1)) is better, while a long-memory LM-ARCH process (multiple time scales) replicates correctly the dynamics of the implied and realized volatilities and delivers consistently good forecasts for the realized volatility.     

Management earnings forecast disclosure policy and the cost of equity capital

We examine the relation between management earnings forecast disclosure policy and the cost of equity capital in a cross-section of 1,355 firms over a 4-year post-Regulation Fair Disclosure period (2001 through 2004). We find evidence of a negative association between the quality of management earnings forecasting policy and cost of equity capital, and we document that the strength of the association is greater for firms with higher disclosure costs and for firms with more relevant quarterly management earnings forecasts. Our results are robust to the use of multiple methods to address both endogeneity and the measurement error in firm-specific estimates of implied cost of equity capital.     

Estimating the Cost of Capital Using Stock Prices and Near‐term Earnings Forecasts

Earnings‐based valuation models, although long used by finance practitioners, have become increasingly popular among finance academics as well. Among the most important reasons for academics' increased acceptance of earnings‐based valuation is the well‐documented claim that earnings over a short (three‐ to four‐year) forecast horizon tend to capture a large fraction—as much as 80%—of today's value, much more than is captured by near‐term forecasts of free cash flow, the measure long advocated by finance theorists as the basis for DCF valuation. But most important for the purposes of this article, the recognition that such a large percentage of the current values of many public companies is captured within a short forecast horizon has led to a large academic literature that uses earnings‐based valuation models together with current stock prices to “back out” estimates of the companies' implied expected rates of return and costs of equity capital. The effectiveness and precision of such reverse engineering depend on the reliability of the forecasts both within a finite forecast horizon and beyond. And although the models tested in academic work, which are based on large samples of forecasts and hard‐to‐verify assumptions about earnings beyond the forecast horizon, often do not appear to provide useful estimates, the author argues that such reverse engineering of the valuation models should become straightforward and workable once reliable forecasts of earnings are obtained—say, from the corporate (or investment) analysts who are familiar with the operations of the companies they work for (or cover).     

The effect of management earnings forecast characteristics on cost of equity capital

This study uses a framework presented in Hirst, Koonce, and Venkataraman (2008) to assess how differences in management earnings forecast characteristics influence a firm's cost of equity capital. I find that less specific forecasts, pessimistic forecasts, and forecasts that predict a loss for the period are associated with higher cost of equity capital levels and more timely forecasts and forecasts with more information content are associated with lower cost of equity capital levels. Analysis interacting control variables and forecast antecedents with forecast characteristics indicates that the effects forecast characteristics have on cost of equity capital are either enhanced or moderated depending on firm beta, firm size, firm book-to-market ratios, analyst following, prior forecast bias, and earnings quality. The results highlight the importance of interacting key variables when interpreting the market effect of management earnings forecasts.     

Market implied future earnings and analysts’ forecasts

This study provides evidence on market implied future earnings based on the residual income valuation (RIV) framework and compares these earnings with analyst earnings forecasts for accuracy (absolute forecast error) and bias (signed forecast error). Prior research shows that current stock price reflects future earnings and that analyst forecasts are biased. Thus, how price-based imputed forecasts compare with analyst forecasts is interesting. Using different cost of capital estimates, we use the price-earnings relation and impute firms’ future annual earnings from three residual income (RI) models for up to 5 years. Relative to I/B/E/S analyst forecasts, imputed forecasts from the RI models are less or no more biased when cost of capital is low (equal to a risk-free rate or slightly higher). Analysts slightly outperform these RI models in terms of accuracy for immediate future (1 or 2) years in the forecast horizon but the opposite is true for more distant future years when cost of capital is low. A regression analysis shows that, in explaining future earnings changes, analyst forecasts relative to imputed forecasts do not impound a significant amount of earnings information embedded in current price. In additional tests, we impute future long-term earnings growth rates and find that they are more accurate and less biased than I/B/E/S analyst long-term earnings growth forecasts. Together, the results suggest that the RIV framework can be used to impute a firm’s future earnings that are high in accuracy and low in bias, especially for distant future years.     

Analyst recommendations and the implied cost of equity

We investigate the relation between analyst recommendations and the cost of equity implied by current stock price and earnings forecasts. Contrary to expectations, previous-year recommendation upgrades are associated with increases in the current cost of equity; and past increases in the cost of equity are associated with current recommendation downgrades. Furthermore, changes in the implied cost of equity and changes in analyst recommendations jointly explain as much as 31% of the variation in 1-year holding period returns, where most of the variation (28%) is explained by the implied cost of equity alone. We document that when forming recommendations, analysts underestimate the role of the cost of equity.     

The Term Structure of Implicit Discount Rates in Security Valuation

Abstract:   A reformulation of the residual income model is used to generate estimates of discount rates implicit in UK security prices. The terminal value of the infinite valuation model is incorporated into the coefficient on current earnings. By varying the length of the forecast horizon, different combinations of implicit discount rates are revealed that allow the estimation of time‐variant costs of equity. Results indicate no specific pattern of discount rates, thus revealing neither myopia on short‐term earnings nor excessive optimism on long(er)‐term earnings. Surprisingly, there is weak evidence that if any myopia exists, it is concentrated in larger and lower price‐earnings firms.     

Terminal valuations, growth rates and the implied cost of capital

We develop a model based on the notion that prices lead earnings, allowing for a simultaneous estimation of the implied growth rate and the cost of equity capital for US industrial sectors. The major difference between our approach and that in prior literature is that ours avoids the necessity to make assumptions about terminal values and consequently about future growth rates. In fact, growth rates are an endogenous variable, which is estimated simultaneously with the implied cost of equity capital. Since we require only 1-year-ahead forecasts of earnings and no assumptions about dividend payouts, our methodology allows us to estimate ex ante aggregate growth and risk premia over a larger sample of firms than has previously been possible. Our estimate of the risk premium being between 3.1 and 3.9 % is at the lower end of recent estimates, reflecting the inclusion of these short-lived companies. Our estimate of the long run growth is from 4.2 to 4.7 %.     

Evaluating cross-sectional forecasting models for implied cost of capital

The computation of implied cost of capital (ICC) is constrained by the lack of analyst forecasts for half of all firms. Hou et al. (J Account Econ 53:504–526, 2012, HVZ) present a cross-sectional model to generate forecasts in order to compute ICC. However, the forecasts from the HVZ model perform worse than those from a naïve random walk model and the ICCs show anomalous correlations with risk factors. We present two parsimonious alternatives to the HVZ model: the EP model based on persistence in earnings and the RI model based on the residual income model from Feltham and Ohlson (Contemp Account Res 11:689–732, 1996). Both models outperform the HVZ model in terms of forecast bias, accuracy, earnings response coefficients, and correlations of the ICCs with future returns and risk factors. We recommend that future research use the RI model or the EP model to generate earnings forecasts.     

Conditional conservatism and cost of capital

We empirically test the association between conditional conservatism and cost of equity capital. Conditional conservatism imposes stronger verification requirements for the recognition of economic gains than economic losses, resulting in earnings that reflect losses faster than gains. This asymmetric reporting of gains and losses is predicted to lower firm cost of equity capital by increasing bad news reporting precision, thereby reducing information uncertainty (Guay and Verrecchia 2007) and the volatility of future stock prices (Suijs 2008). Using standard asset-pricing tests, we find a significant negative relation between conditional conservatism and excess average stock returns over the period 1975–2003. This evidence is corroborated by further tests on the association between conditional conservatism and measures of implied cost of capital derived from analysts’ forecasts.     

Information dynamics, dividend displacement, conservatism, and earnings measurement: a development of the Ohlson (1995) valuation framework

This paper extends the Ohlson (Contemp Account Res 11, 661–687, 1995) equity valuation framework by demonstrating that dividend displacement continues to hold when dividends have a positive forecast coefficient in the linear abnormal earnings dynamic. The analysis demonstrates that such a predictive role for dividends implies a positive association between cum div book value of equity and the present value of expected abnormal earnings, consistent with both dividend displacement and accounting conservatism. While a signaling role for dividends is ruled out, a link between dividends, expected performance, and equity value is, however, demonstrated. The paper also considers a linear information model where an undefined variable replaces realized abnormal comprehensive earnings as an indicator of future performance. The role of this variable as a predictor of future abnormal comprehensive earnings is highlighted and the special case where it corresponds to recurring abnormal earnings is considered. This latter case provides useful implications for implementation of asset revaluations.     

Dividend change announcements,ROE, and the cost of equity capital

We hypothesize and present strong evidence that dividend increases (decreases) result in a general decrease (increase) in the opportunity cost of equity capital (K_e), measured by the discount rate implicit in analysts' forecasts. Estimates of K_e obtained from analyst forecast data likely capture priced information risk that is not reflected in cost of equity capital estimates customarily obtained from empirical excess returns data. In the presence of a full menu of control variables, our measured changes in the cost of equity capital are shown to provide high explanatory power for the market reaction to dividend change announcements. We also hypothesize and demonstrate that the impact of dividend changes on the cost of equity is conditional on how preannouncement K_e relates to preannouncement return on equity (ROE). Specifically, dividend increases result in a reduction in the cost of equity capital only when currently experienced ROE < K_e. This is consistent with shareholders preferring earnings to be reinvested by managers to earn a higher rate than their opportunity rate. When ROE > K_e, on the other hand, the cost of equity capital actually increases. For dividend decreases, the cost of equity capital increases only when ROE > K_e, consistent with firms currently experiencing positive economic income using dividend cuts to signal anticipated permanent earnings declines. Together with extensive robustness tests, our results indicate that dividend changes significantly affect shareholder value, contrary to the longstanding dividend irrelevance argument.     

CEO Risk‐Taking Incentives and the Cost of Equity Capital

In this paper, we show that the sensitivities of an executive's wealth to changes in stock prices (deltas) decrease the implied cost of equity capital while the sensitivities of an executive's wealth to changes in stock volatility (vegas) increase the implied cost of equity capital. Our findings demonstrate that shareholders understand the risks of firms’ future projects as embedded in executive compensation and price these risks into the cost of equity capital accordingly. The findings have strong implications for optimal executive compensation contract design, project evaluation and cost of capital estimation.     

Why Do Analysts use a Zero Forecast for Other Comprehensive Income?

Accounting theory and accounting researchers stress the importance of clean surplus accounting and comprehensive income to corporate valuation. However, casual observation suggests that sell-side equity analysts routinely ignore other comprehensive income (OCI) in their forecasts and instead focus on forecasting earnings (before OCI). Using a sample of analyst reports, I first confirm that analysts normally omit forecasts of OCI or comprehensive income from their reports, consistent with analysts forecasting OCI as zero. I then predict and find that a zero forecast for OCI generally produces lower forecasting errors than alternative time-series models, such as a random walk or AR(1) model, suggesting a rational reason why analysts take this approach. Finally, I predict and find that although analysts’ point forecasts of future OCI are usually zero, their implied cost of equity estimates are consistent with analysts forecasting a positive variance for OCI.     

The Effect of Accounting Restatements on Earnings Revisions and the Estimated Cost of Capital

This paper examines the effect of accounting restatements on a firm's cost of equity capital. We show that, on average, accounting restatements lead to both decreases in expected future earnings and increases in the firm's cost of equity capital. Depending on the model used, relative percentage increases in the cost of equity capital average between 7 and 19% in the month immediately following a restatement. The relative increase in the cost of capital dissipates as time passes and after controlling for analyst forecast biases, but continues to average between 6 and 15% in the most conservative setting. We also show that restatements initiated by auditors are associated with the largest increase in the cost of capital, and that firms with greater leverage experience greater increases in their cost of capital. Overall, our evidence is consistent with accounting restatements lowering the perceived earnings quality of the firm and increasing investors' required rates of return.     

Expected earnings growth and the cost of capital: an analysis of accounting regime change in the European financial market

This study focuses on the relation between the cost of equity capital and earnings expectations when the properties of accounting that determine earnings vary across different regulatory regimes. More particularly, it addresses the European setting where different types of GAAP regime have continued to function in the presence of the gradual harmonization of the underlying legal framework, and where the adoption of internationally recognized accounting standards by certain firms has anticipated the requirement for International Financial Reporting Standards. On the basis of estimates of the cost of equity that are implied by analysts' earnings forecasts, the article provides evidence that financial market integration may have already contributed to mitigating the economic consequences of accounting diversity, and that switching to IFRS could have a short lived impact on capital markets. Moreover, based on firm level transparency and disclosure rankings provided by Standard and Poor's, it is shown how the quality of financial reporting conditions the implied cost of equity under different GAAP.     

Serial Correlation in Management Earnings Forecast Errors

We examine whether management earnings forecast errors exhibit serial correlation and how analysts understand the serial correlation property of management forecast errors (MFEs). MFEs should not exhibit serial correlation if managers efficiently process information in prior forecast errors and truthfully convey their earnings expectations through management forecasts. However, for long‐horizon management forecasts of annual earnings, we find significantly positive serial correlation in MFEs, and sample self‐selection does not seem to drive this phenomenon. Further analyses suggest that managers’ unintentional information processing bias contributes to this positive serial correlation. Analysts anticipate the intertemporal persistence of MFEs but underestimate the persistence level when reacting to management forecasts. Our findings have implications for market participants who rely on management forecasts to form earnings expectations, and also shed light on the efficiency of managerial decision making.