全流通市场中大股东交易的影响因素研究——基于股权结构的视角

全流通市场中的大股东交易问题日益成为关注的焦点。以2007年至2010年A股市场大股东交易作为研究对象,验证了股权结构对不同类型大股东交易行为的影响。研究结果显示控股股东净购买率与股权集中度显著负相关,与股权制衡度显著正相关;而非控股股东净购买率与股权集中度显著正相关,与股权制衡度显著负相关。这说明现有股权结构对控股股东和非控股股东交易行为的影响存在显著差异,而这种显著差异又将导致未来上市公司股权结构发生明显变化。     

反哺还是机会主义利己? ——对IPO阶段企业控股股东支持性关联交易的研究

选取2001-2019年A股IPO企业为研究样本,运用回归分析检验IPO阶段企业控股股东支持性关联交易的性质.研究结果显示,IPO前企业控股股东的支持性关联交易行为并不是着眼于企业长期发展的反哺,而是控股股东的短期机会主义利己行为.同时,盈利水平差、融资约束严重及外部市场法治化程度低的企业控股股东倾向于采用支持性关联交易"反哺"企业,而信息不对称程度并不影响"反哺"决策.进一步分析表明,控股股东更倾向于采取担保类和销售类支持性关联交易,且更倾向于在IPO前一年对上市企业提供爆发式的支持.     

产业资本流动对股票价格走势影响的研究

产业资本规模不断扩大并且在资本市场上积极活跃．成为目前影响股价涨跌的重要力量。本文着重分析控股股东、非控股股东中的法人股以及上市公司高管这三类产业资本的主要代表投资者的信息不对称优势以及持股成本优势,揭示产业资本流动在股市上的重要性。通过对大宗交易,上证指数、产业资本增减持等数据分析研究发现大盘指数底部与顶部与产业资本股东集中增持与减持的顶部有较高程度的一致性。通过对产业资本在A股市场上的增减持行为的应用研究帮助投资者寻找潜在市场机会以及回避市场风险。     

控股股东股权质押对股价波动影响机理研究

作为新型融资方式,股权质押逐渐成为融资的重要途径。依靠便捷、高效和成本较低优势,质押融资的规模不断增加。但其引发的一系列风险也不容忽视。控股股东作为公司所有者其行为对公司影响很大,在一定程度上反应着公司股价。所以本文想通过对控股股东股权质押的研究,发现质押所带来的风险对股价影响情况。从影响机理分析发现,因为市场存在信息不对称情况,处于信息优势的控股股东会利用该优势,侵占中小股东利益或者损害公司利益。从而引发中小股东因为恐慌而出现集体“出逃”现象,造成股价剧烈波动。在此基础上,本文通过股权质押、投资者情绪与股价之间的关系,验证质押对股价影响,并且发现投资者情绪对股价影响具有中介效应。     

投资者保护、关联交易与公司绩效——来自长三角A股上市公司的经验证据

以2007~2009年长三角地区A股上市公司为研究样本,以投资者保护为切入点,分析投资者保护、关联交易对公司治理效率的影响。研究表明:长三角地区上市公司普遍存在控股股东,董事长来源于控股股东的公司关联交易明显多于其他公司,总经理来自控股股东的公司关联交易不明显,关联交易与投资者保护程度负相关,投资者保护程度与公司治理正相关。     

信息披露质量 控股股东资金占用与公司价值——来自深市A股上市公司的经验证据

资本市场中存在的信息不对称加剧了控股股东对中小股东的利益侵占。信息披露作为一种旨在减轻信息不对称程度的机制,有助于提高上市公司的透明度,保护中小股东利益。本文以2007-2009年深市A股上市公司为样本,实证检验了信息披露质量对控股股东资金占用的影响。研究发现,控制相关因素后,信息披露质量与资金占用呈显著负相关,提高信息披露质量可以有效地降低控股股东资金占用;进一步研究发现,控股股东资金占用越少的公司价值越高,并且相比而言,信息披露质量越高,公司价值也越高。     

我国上市公司控股股东利益侵占行为研究：一个委托代理模型

我国上市公司控股股东侵占上市公司以及中小股东利益的行为屡见不鲜。其主要途径包括：虚假招股说明书、关联交易、股利政策、定向增发以及利润操纵。上市公司中小股东与控股股东间存在着委托代理关系。控股股东的利益侵占行为不仅降低了上市公司的期望收益,还降低了控股股东自身的努力程度以及所享有的收益份额。通过推进上市公司股权分散化、完善上市公司信息披露制度、推进＂以股抵债＂等金融创新,可以纠正上市公司控股股东侵占中小股东利益行为。     

市场环境与控股股东“掏空”行为研究——来自中国上市公司的经验证据

控股股东的“掏空”行为侵害了中小股东的利益,如何防范与治理控股股东的“掏空”行为已成为市场关注的重点。本文的研究表明,市场环境显著地影响了控股股东“掏空”的行为。换言之,地区间政府干预市场越少、金融市场越发达,该地区的上市公司越不会发生控股股东“掏空”行为,因而如何减少政府干预,促进金融市场的发展是政府在减少控股股东“掏空”行为应扮演的重要角色,同时,地方政府的财政赤字会直接或间接地驱动了控股股东“掏空”行为,制定监管政策在一定程度上能遏止“掏空”的行为。这说明,制度层面的约束和公共治理对公司层面的行为具有重要的影响。     

内幕交易、利益补偿与控制权转移——来自我国证券市场的证据

本文从控股股东角度探讨内幕交易在控制权转移中所发挥的作用。利用一个模型分析表明内幕交易起到了补偿控制权转移中控股股东所付出代价的作用,扩大了控制权转移交易的达成区域,使控制权转移事件更容易发生,控制权转移事件出现频率更高。在此基础上,利用上市公司（1997—2001）样本验证了：（1）我国上市公司控制权转移过程中存在内幕交易行为。（2）控制权转移中控股股东与内幕交易行为有关：控制权转移中控股股东付出越多,内幕交易行为越严重;原控股股东控股比例越高,内幕交易行为越严重;现金方式交易时内幕交易行为比非现金方式交易时更加严重。本文研究结果表明我国上市公司控制权转移中由于控股股东可以利用内幕交易补偿所付出的代价,从而使得控制权转移易于发生,这在一定程度上推动了自1997年起的上市公司控制权转移热潮的出现。     

上市公司与控股股东关联方交易的规范

关联方交易是一种特殊的交易形式.由于我国国有控股股东行为模式的特殊性,上市公司与控股股东关联方交易的公平性和公正性亟待规范.本文在对不公平的关联方交易产生的根源及控股股东行为模式进行论述的基础上,通过分析上市公司与控股股东不公平的关联方交易,结合我国股票市场的实际情况提出规范上市公司与控股股东关联方交易的若干措施.     

“Swimming Ducks Forecast the Coming of Spring”—The predictability of aggregate insider trading on future market returns in the Chinese market

This study systematically examines the ability of aggregate insider trading to predict future market returns in the Chinese A-share market. After controlling for the contrarian investment strategy, aggregate executive(large shareholder)trading conducted over the past six months can predict 66%(72.7%) of market returns twelve months in advance. Aggregate insider trading predicts future market returns very accurately and is stronger for insiders who have a greater information advantage(e.g., executives and controlling shareholders).Corporate governance also affects the predictability of insider trading. The predictability of executive trading is weakest in central state-owned companies,probably because the "quasi-official" status of the executives in those companies effectively curbs their incentives to benefit from insider trading.The predictive power of large shareholder trading in private-owned companies is higher than that in state-owned companies, probably due to their stronger profit motivation and higher involvement in business operations. This study complements the literature by examining an emerging market and investigating how the institutional context and corporate governance affect insider trading.     

Non-controlling large shareholders in emerging markets: Evidence from China

Non-controlling large shareholders play an important role in corporate governance in emerging markets where controlling shareholder expropriation is a major concern. We argue that non-controlling large shareholders are faced with two non-conflicting incentives: to take advantage of their information advantage and obtain positive abnormal returns when they trade company shares, and to serve as effective monitors and minimize controlling shareholders' appropriation of company wealth. Using a sample of large shareholders' selling events upon the expiration of the lockup period following the split-share structure reform in China, we find that non-controlling large shareholders successfully time the market, as shown by their positive abnormal returns when selling their shares. Their returns are higher if they have a greater information advantage. Furthermore, the positive returns of the controlling large shareholder are negatively related to non-controlling large shareholders' ownership, suggesting that non-controlling large shareholders play a monitoring role and prevent controlling shareholders from looting the company. We also show that large shareholders affiliated with the controlling shareholders are not subject to as high a level of monitoring as those controlling shareholders are. Furthermore, both firm opaqueness and the severity of agency cost affect the quality of non-controlling large shareholders' monitoring.     

Family control,multiple institutional block-holders,and informed trading

This paper investigates how large family shareholders and institutional block-holders jointly influence informed trading and firm valuation in the Hong Kong stock market. It combines market microstructure research with studies on the governance roles of multiple block-holders and finds that institutional block-holders rely on their relative controlling power vis-à-vis family owners to mitigate problems associated with informed trading. They also use their ownership rights to improve the structure of informed trading. However, these governance roles are predominantly exercised by pressure-resistant institutional block-holders. Informed trading reduces firm valuation, while an improvement in its structure increases valuation. Therefore, the governance roles of controlling families and pressure-resistant institutional block-holders may have different implications in terms of investors’ perceptions of private information risk.     

The effects of trading rights and ownership structures on the informativeness of accounting earnings: Evidence from China’ split share structure reform

This paper examines how the removal of trading restrictions and ownership structures affect earnings informativeness by investigating the changes in the earnings-return relation around China’s split share structure reform. I find the reform has a negative impact on the relationship between controlling shareholders’ ownership and earnings informativeness, which is consistent with the idea that the removal of trading restrictions gives controlling shareholders incentives to influence the stock price through managing earnings. I also find that earnings informativeness decreases with the reduction in controlling shareholders’ ownership. This dilution effect is more significant for firms with non-state controlling shareholders or with controlling shareholders that are not monitored by other large shareholders. The results are consistent with the notion that controlling shareholders provide less informative earnings in response to the dilution of their ownership to avoid the constraints arising from the increased monitoring by outside investors.     

Does insider trading regulation deter private information trading? International evidence

Using a sample of 2189 firms from 21 countries we find that, on average, stricter insider trading regulations reduce private information trading. However, for firms with high agency costs, insider trading restrictions are less effective in deterring private information trading. We suggest that controlling shareholders who are banned from trading may resort to covert expropriation of firm resources thereby reducing transparency and increasing the returns to private information trading. Consistent with this, we find that firms with higher agency costs located in countries with stricter insider trading laws have more opaque earnings and are valued lower.     

Ownership,analyst coverage,and stock synchronicity in China

This study examines how ownership structure affects the information environment of publicly traded firms in China. We hypothesize that concentrated ownership and the associated separation of ultimate control and ownership rights create agency conflicts between controlling shareholders and minority investors leading controlling owners to withhold firm-specific information from the market. We test this hypothesis by analyzing the effect of ultimate ownership structure and analyst coverage on stock return synchronicity. We find that a greater separation of control and ownership rights increases the response coefficient of stock return synchronicity to analyst coverage. This result is robust to endogeneity, a series of robustness checks, and an alternative hypothesis based on noise trading. The incentive of controlling owners to limit firm transparency thus leads analysts to disseminate more market-wide information.     

Dynamic ownership and private benefits

We quantify private benefits of control by estimating a structural model of optimal shareholding using data on the ownership dynamics of Italian public companies. In the model, shareholders must maintain a minimum stake in the company to extract control benefits, which leads to infrequent trading of large blocks, and which is consistent with the empirical evidence. We estimate that control benefits account for 2% (4%) of the market value of the equity (block), and controlling shareholders earn a sizeable premium from the block holding on top of the market value of the shares. Also, we provide evidence that large block ownership and ownership persistence are associated with higher stock returns.     

Corporate governance and market segmentation: evidence from the price difference between Chinese A and H shares

This paper empirically examines whether the price difference between Chinese A shares, which are traded in the domestic market, and their matching H shares, which are traded in the Hong Kong market, can be explained by firms’ corporate governance characteristics. We find that the A- to H-share price premiums are higher for firms in which the controlling shareholders and corporate insiders have greater potential to expropriate wealth from outside investors. This result is robust when we use a variety of corporate governance variables specific to listed Chinese companies to explain the A-share price premiums and when we control for differences between domestic and foreign investors in required returns, degree of speculative trading, liquidity, information, and demand elasticity. Our findings highlight the important role of corporate governance in explaining the price difference in segmented stock markets.     

Vote Trading and Information Aggregation

The standard analysis of corporate governance assumes that shareholders vote in ratios that firms choose, such as one share‐one vote. However, if the cost of unbundling and trading votes is sufficiently low, then shareholders choose the ratios. We document an active market for votes within the U.S. equity loan market, where the average vote sells for zero. We hypothesize that asymmetric information motivates the vote trade and find support in the cross section. More trading occurs for higher‐spread and worse‐performing firms, especially when voting is close. Vote trading corresponds to support for shareholder proposals and opposition to management proposals.     

Order submission behaviors and opening price behaviors: evidence from an emerging market

Recent studies document that mutual funds demonstrate an overnight information advantage over foreign investors in Taiwan, a fast emerging market. However, this inequality contradicts the documented foreign investors’ growing market dominance and information advantage. Motivated by the inconsistency, we apply intraday data to examine the linkage between investors’ order submission behaviors and the opening price behaviors of the top net-trade stocks of professional institutional investors. We find that mutual funds exhibit a more persistent and aggressive trading pattern than foreign investors. The order submission behavior of aggressive individuals, following closely mutual funds’ trades, mainly drives the observed informational differences.