Stock Splits and Bond Yields: Isolating the Signaling Hypothesis

One explanation offered for stock splits is that the split signals positive information by reducing the stock price range in expectation of improved future prospects. Price declines also lead to changes in stock price dynamics, but related securities are not subject to these other changes and therefore can be used to provide a separate assessment of the markets’ interpretation of the split. We examine corporate bond issues around stock splits and find a significant decline in the bond yield spread following stock splits, supporting the signaling hypothesis. We also confirm improvements in forecasted and realized earnings subsequent to stock splits.     

Assimilating earnings and split information: Is the capital market becoming more efficient?

Recent studies have implied that the capital market has become more efficient with respect to the announcements of stock splits and corporate earnings. This study calculated residual returns associated with these announcements and then tested, by time period (early and late years), for a between period difference. The results suggest that for certain earnings and split announcements the market is no more efficient than it has been in the past.     

Underreaction to Self-Selected News Events: The Case of Stock Splits

An emerging literature looking at self-selected, corporate newsevents concludes that markets appear to underreact to news.Recent theoretical articles have explored why or how underreactionmight occur. However, the notion of underreaction is contentious.We revisit this issue by focusing on one of the most simpleof corporate transactions, the stock split. Prior studies thatreport abnormal return drifts subsequent to splits do not appearto be spurious, nor a consequence of misspecified benchmarks.Using recent cases, we report a drift of 9% in the year followinga split announcement. We consider fundamental operating performanceas a source of the underreaction and find that splitting firmshave an unusually low propensity to experience a contractionin future earnings. Further, analysts' earnings forecasts arecomparatively low at the time of the split announcement andrevise sluggishly over time. Together these results are consistentwith the notion of market underreaction to the information incorporate news events.     

Reverse stock splits and earnings performance

This paper presents evidence that reverse stock splits are preceded by significantly poorer earnings performance for splitting firms compared to a sample of matched control firms. Interestingly, the overall earnings-returns relationship becomes significantly stronger following the reverse stock split. I interpret this as evidence that reverse splits communicate to market participants that sub-par earnings performance before the split is not transitory and that it is expected to persist in the future. Together, the evidence in this paper provides an explanation as to why reverse splits, which are employed for reasons that are seemingly beneficial to shareholders, are assessed negatively, on balance, by market participants.     

A FURTHER UNDERSTANDING OF STOCK DISTRIBUTIONS: THE CASE OF REVERSE STOCK SPLITS

In this study we analyze reverse stock splits and demonstrate that the total risk of returns to reverse splitting securities declines after the split, yet systematic risk remains essentially unchanged. In general, securities have negative abnormal stock returns at reverse split announcements, though smaller companies have stronger negative reactions. Companies forced to reverse split have positive wealth effects.     

The Differences Between Stock Splits and Stock Dividends: Evidence on the Retained Earnings Hypothesis

Abstract:  This paper investigates stock dividends and stock splits on the Copenhagen Stock Exchange (CSE), which is of interest because several of the more recent explanations for a stock market reaction can be ruled out. The main findings are that the announcement effect of stock dividends as well as stock splits is closely related to changes in a firm's payout policy, but that the relationship differs for the two types of events. A stock dividend implies an increase in nominal share capital and hence a decrease in retained earnings. Firms announcing stock dividends finance growth entirely by debt (explaining the need for an increase in nominal share capital) and retained earnings. Basically all firms announcing a stock dividend with a split factor of less than two can also afford to increase their total cash dividends permanently, at least proportionally to the increase in share capital, leading to a significant announcement effect of 4.23%. Firms announcing a stock dividend with a split factor of two or more also increase total cash dividends permanently, but less than proportionally to the increase in share capital. This leads to an insignificant announcement effect of 0.08%. These findings support a retained earnings/signaling hypothesis. For stock splits, no separate announcement effect was found when a firm's payout policy was controlled for. This lends support to the idea that a stock split per se is a cosmetic event on the CSE and is also consistent with the fact that making a stock split on the CSE is virtually cost free.     

The information content of stock splits

We develop a new methodology that controls for both the timing of annual earnings news (Asquith et al., 1989) and the performance prior to split announcements (Barber and Lyon, 1996) to evaluate the information content of stock splits. In contrast to existing evidence, we find that stock splits in aggregate are followed by positive abnormal future earnings growth, suggesting that stock splits contain information about future, rather than past, operating performance. When we use changes in breadth of institutional ownership as a new metric of information content to corroborate our findings, we find that splits with the greatest increase in breadth experience positive post-split abnormal returns and positive abnormal earnings growth. Together, our results suggest that some splits contain positive information about future performance, and that sophisticated market participants such as institutional investors are able to select these splits.     

The impact of regulation FD on the information environment: evidence from the stock market response to stock split announcements

This paper examines the information environment effects of regulation fair disclosure (Reg FD). We investigate the stock market response to stock splits in the pre- and post-regulation periods. We find that abnormal returns around split announcement are positive in both periods, but the magnitude of the returns is smaller in the post-FD period relative to the pre-FD period. The difference between the pre- and post-FD period abnormal returns persists even after we control for factors that may affect split announcement returns. We also find that the magnitude of the association between announcement returns and the unexpected portion of the split factor has increased post-regulation. Our analysis of performance trends for split firms reveals that patterns of profitability and changes in profitability in the years around stock splits are similar in the pre- and post-FD periods. However, we find that announcement returns are associated with lagged profitability changes in the pre-FD period, but with future profitability changes in the post-FD period. Collectively, our results imply that Reg FD has reduced information asymmetry and improved price efficiency.     

Stock splits in a neutral transaction cost environment: Evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange

This paper investigates the value consequences of stock splits in a market where institutional characteristics minimize the effects of price realignment and signaling. We find that despite these market conditions, stock splits by Greek firms produce positive price reaction around the announcement day. Further, split factors are directly related to pre-split price levels and deviations from average market prices. Splitting firms also realize earnings improvement which is not reversed after the stock split. Consistent with these findings, market reaction is inversely related to the post-split target price and the size of firm. We interpret this as evidence in support, respectively, of the self-selection and “attention-gathering” hypotheses. As reported in other international studies, there is no evidence of liquidity improvement.     

TRADING PATTERNS OF SMALL AND LARGE TRADERS AROUND STOCK SPLIT EX-DATES

We investigate the trading patterns of small and large traders around stock split ex-dates. Using the intraday transaction database for the Toronto Stock Exchange during 1983–89, we find that stock splits are associated with significant changes in trading patterns. Although stock splits appear to have little effect on the trading behavior of large traders (trade value of at least $100,000), they are associated with significant decreases in odd-lot trading and increases in small board-lot trading (trade value of less than $10,000). Although the liquidity premia decrease for all trade sizes, trade direction changes significantly from sell to buy after split ex-dates for all but the large trades, where the change is in the opposite direction. The significant increase in variances after split ex-dates is explained by various microstructure-related variables, and small (large) trades appear to be (de)stabilizing.     

Regular Dividend Announcements and Future Unexpected Earnings: An Empirical Analysis

Previous studies have interpreted stock price reaction to dividend announcements as being consistent with the hypothesis that any changes are forecasts of future corporate profits. Recent studies seem to provide evidence to this effect. This study provides additional empirical evidence pertaining to the issue of whether quarterly cash dividend announcements convey useful information about a firm's future profitability, beyond that contained in contemporaneous quarterly earnings announcements. The association between unexpected changes in quarterly dividends and unexpected accounting earnings in subsequent quarters is examined, after controlling for information contained in past and current earnings series. The results, based on a large sample of regular quarterly cash dividend changes, indicate that firms that increased (decreased) their dividends realized, on average, greater (smaller) unexpected accounting earnings in subsequent periods than firms that did not change their dividends.     

Stock Splits in Switzerland: To Signal or Not to Signal?

In Switzerland, the existence of a mandatory minimum par value inhibited many companies from splitting their stocks as they already traded at their minimum par value. These Swiss companies could split their stocks only after the legal minimum par value was lowered in July 1992 and again in May 2001. These two events provide rare opportunities to distinguish between stock splits that signal a permanent increase in stock price and splits that are merely a reaction to a regulatory change and thus have other motives. The significant return differences between the two samples are in line with the hypothesis that splits are a means to send positive signals to the stock market. Furthermore, while trading volumes remained largely unaffected after stock splits, relative tick sizes generally increased after a stock split, and bid-ask spreads often increased after a stock split.     

EARNINGS FORECAST REVISIONS ASSOCIATED WITH STOCK SPLIT ANNOUNCEMENTS

Recent studies document abnormal stock returns at stock split announcements. Three hypotheses related to expected future earnings—the trading range, attention, and signaling hypotheses—have been offered as explanations. Evidence has also been provided that splitting firms have greater postannouncement earnings growth than control nonsplitting firms. Using earnings expectation data from the Institutional Brokers Estimate System, significantly greater forecast revisions are found in this study for split firms than for control nonsplit firms. The difference is significantly related to abnormal stock returns of splitting firms.     

Liquidity,the Value of the Firm,and Corporate Finance

The theory of corporate finance has been based on the idea that a company's market value is determined mainly by just two variables: the company's expected after‐tax operating cash flows or earnings, and the risk associated with producing them. The authors argue that there is another important factor affecting a company's value: the liquidity of its own securities, debt as well as equity. The paper supports this argument by reviewing the large and growing body of evidence showing that differences—and changes—in liquidity can have major effects on the pricing of corporate stocks and bonds or, equivalently, on investors' required returns for holding them. The authors also suggest that the liquidity of a company's securities can be managed by corporate policies and actions. For those companies whose value is likely to be increased by having more liquid securities—which is by no means true of all companies (mature firms that don't need outside capital may well benefit from having more concentrated ownership and hence less liquidity)—management should consider actions such as reducing leverage and substituting dividends for stock repurchases as well as measures designed to increase the effectiveness of their disclosure and investor relations program and the size of their investor base.     

Do stock splits signal future profitability?

This study examines whether stock split announcements contain information content about future profitability, measured in terms of future earnings change, future earnings, or future abnormal earnings. We find that the split announcement year has the highest earnings change and the earnings change declines substantially over the subsequent five years. Our empirical results show little evidence that stock splits are positively related to future profitability. In fact, stock splits are in general negatively related to future profitability in subsequent years after the announcement, except for dividend-paying firms with a split factor less than 0.5. This negative relation holds regardless of future profitability measure. Therefore, our empirical finding suggests that stock splits are not useful signals of a firm’s future earnings prospects. JEL Classification G30     

The information content of stock splits

This study examines whether stock splits contain information content about future operating performance or whether splits are undertaken by firms to realign their share prices and to improve trading liquidity. In the four years following split announcements, splitting firms do not experience improved operating performance relative to non-splitting firms. Furthermore, stock split signals are not related to future profitability. The positive announcement effect can be explained by lower share prices and improved market liquidity following stock splits but not by split signals and post-split operating performance. Our results show very little evidence that stock splits signal improvement in long-run operating performance and are more consistent with the trading range/liquidity hypothesis.     

Stock Splits as a Manipulation Tool: Evidence from Mergers and Acquisitions

We document that acquiring firms are more likely than nonacquiring firms to split their stocks before making acquisition announcements, especially when acquisitions are financed by stock and when the deals are large. Our findings support the hypothesis that some acquiring firms use stock splits to manipulate their equity values prior to acquisition announcements. Using earnings quality as a proxy for firms' intention to manipulate, we find that acquirers with low earnings quality (i.e., acquirers that are more likely to use stock splits to manipulate their stock values) have lower long‐run stock returns compared with their benchmarks, especially when the deals are financed with stock. In contrast, acquirers with high earnings quality do not show that pattern. Our evidence complements and extends the findings in the literature that some acquirers manipulate their stock prices before stock‐swap acquisitions. This study suggests that target shareholders should use information such as earnings quality and stock splits to discriminate among acquirers and ensure that exchanges are conducted on fair terms.     

The Extreme Future Stock Returns Following I/B/E/S Earnings Surprises

We investigate the stock returns subsequent to quarterly earnings surprises, where the benchmark for an earnings surprise is the consensus analyst forecast. By defining the surprise relative to an analyst forecast rather than a time‐series model of expected earnings, we document returns subsequent to earnings announcements that are much larger, persist for much longer, and are more heavily concentrated in the long portion of the hedge portfolio than shown in previous studies. We show that our results hold after controlling for risk and previously documented anomalies, and are positive for every quarter between 1988 and 2000. Finally, we explore the financial results and information environment of firms with extreme earnings surprises and find that they tend to be “neglected” stocks with relatively high book‐to‐market ratios, low analyst coverage, and high analyst forecast dispersion. In the three subsequent years, firms with extreme positive earnings surprises tend to have persistent earnings surprises in the same direction, strong growth in cash flows and earnings, and large increases in analyst coverage, relative to firms with extreme negative earnings surprises. We also show that the returns to the earnings surprise strategy are highest in the quartile of firms where transaction costs are highest and institutional investor interest is lowest, consistent with the idea that market inefficiencies are more prevalent when frictions make it difficult for large, sophisticated investors to exploit the inefficiencies.     

Survival

Empirical analysis of rates of return in finance implicitly condition on the security surviving into the sample. We investigate the implications of such conditioning on the time series of rates of return. In general this conditioning induces a spurious relationship between observed return and total risk for those securities that survive to be included in the sample. This result has immediate implications for the equity premium puzzle. We show how these results apply to other outstanding problems of empirical finance. Long-term autocorrelation studies focus on the statistical relation between successive holding period returns, where the holding period is of possibly extensive duration. If the equity market survives, then we find that average return in the beginning is higher than average return near the end of the time period. For this reason, statistical measures of long-term dependence are typically biased towards the rejection of a random walk. The result also has implications for event studies. There is a strong association between the magnitude of an earnings announcement and the postannouncement performance of the equity. This might be explained in part as an artefact of the stock price performance of firms in financial distress that survive an earnings announcement. The final example considers stock split studies. In this analysis we implicitly exclude securities whose price on announcement is less than the prior average stock price. We apply our results to this case, and find that the condition that the security forms part of our positive stock split sample suffices to explain the upward trend in event-related cumulated excess return in the preannouncement period.     

Liquidity,the Value of the Firm,and Corporate Finance*

The theory of corporate finance has been based on the idea that a company's market value is determined mainly by just two variables: the company's expected aftertax operating cash flows or earnings, and the risk associated with producing them. The authors argue that there is another important factor affecting a company's value: the liquidity of its own securities, debt as well as equity. The paper supports this argument by reviewing the large and growing body of evidence showing that differences—and, perhaps even more important, sudden changes—in liquidity can have major effects on the pricing of corporate stocks and bonds or, equivalently, on investors' required returns for holding them. The authors also suggest that the liquidity of a company's securities can be managed by corporate policies and actions. For those companies whose value is likely to be increased by having more liquid securities—which is by no means true of all companies (for example, mature firms with little need for outside equity are likely to benefit from having more concentrated ownership and hence less liquidity)—management should consider actions such as reducing leverage and substituting dividends for stock repurchases as well as measures designed to increase the effectiveness of their disclosure and investor relations program and the size of their retail investor base.