A Unified Theory of Tobin's q,Corporate Investment,Financing, and Risk Management

We propose a model of dynamic investment, financing, and risk management for financially constrained firms. The model highlights the central importance of the endogenous marginal value of liquidity (cash and credit line) for corporate decisions. Our three main results are: (1) investment depends on the ratio of marginal q to the marginal value of liquidity, and the relation between investment and marginal q changes with the marginal source of funding; (2) optimal external financing and payout are characterized by an endogenous double‐barrier policy for the firm's cash‐capital ratio; and (3) liquidity management and derivatives hedging are complementary risk management tools.     

Impact of corporate performance on stock price predictions in the UAE markets: Neuro-fuzzy model

Predicting stock price remains one of the challenges for investors' investment strategies. This study helps with accurate prediction and the main factors affecting variations in stock prices. It applies an adaptive neuro-fuzzy model on 58 listed firms from both the Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange and the Dubai Financial Market for the period 2014–2018 to estimate the predictive power of corporate performance measures and their significance. After examining four performance predictors—return on asset (ROA), return on equity (ROE), earning per share (EPS), and profit margin (PM)—the study finds that ROE is the most significant predictor and ROA is the least. EPS is the most influential profitability measure and PM the least.     

Does q-theory with investment frictions explain anomalies in the cross section of returns?

Q-theory predicts that investment frictions steepen the relation between expected returns and firm investment. Using financing constraints to proxy for investment frictions, we show only weak evidence that the investment-to-assets and asset growth effects in the cross section of returns are stronger in financially more constrained firms than in financially less constrained firms. There is no evidence that q-theory with investment frictions explains the investment growth, net stock issues, abnormal corporate investment, or net operating assets anomalies. Limits-to-arbitrage proxies dominate q-theory with investment frictions in explaining the magnitude of the investment-to-assets and asset growth anomalies in direct comparisons.     

EVA, ACCOUNTING PROFITS, AND CEO TURNOVER: AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION, 1985–1994

A growing number of companies use EVA or related measures of economic profits as metrics for corporate planning and executive compensation. Unlike traditional accounting measures of performance, EVA attempts to measure the value that firms create or destroy by subtracting a capital charge from the cash returns they generate on invested capital. For this reason, EVA is seen by its proponents as providing the most reliable year-to-year indicator of a market based performance measure known as market value added, or MVA. Although EVA and MVA have received considerable attention in recent years, there has been little empirical study of these performance measures—and what studies have been produced have provided mixed results. This study joins the debate over EVA vs. conventional accounting measures by asking a different question: Which performance measures do the best job of explaining not only stock returns, but the probability that a CEO will be dismissed for poor performance? Using a sample of 452 firms during the period 1985–1994, the authors report that EVA has a somewhat stronger correlation with stock price performance than conventional accounting measures such as ROE and ROA. But, of greater import, EVA appears to be a considerably more reliable indicator of CEO turnover than conventional accounting measures.     

An analysis of working capital efficiency and shareholder return

Since 1997, CFO Magazine has published a ranking of 1000 companies in its “Working Capital Scorecard.” Our research explores the question as to whether working capital management practices based on the accounting metrics used by CFO Magazine serve as a basis for investor-based strategies for superior return generation. We examine the stock performance of top ranked companies from 1997 to 2012 against benchmark portfolios. Controlling for market, market capitalization, book to market, momentum factors, liquidity factors, and corporate governance; the higher ranked firms produce statistically higher excess returns than bottom ranked firms. In bull market periods, firms with superior working capital management outperformed their counterparts on a raw and risk-adjusted basis. These top ranked firms also provide statistically significant active returns regardless of market cycle. In sum, our results indicate that shareholders reward firms with superior working capital management strategies with higher raw and risk-adjusted performance over longer holding periods across the economic cycle especially in bear markets cycles.     

Family values: Ownership structure,performance and capital structure of Canadian firms

This study examines how family ownership affects the performance and capital structure of 613 Canadian firms from 1998 to 2005. In particular, we distinguish the effect of family ownership from the use of control-enhancing mechanisms. We find that freestanding family owned firms with a single share class have similar market performance than other firms based on Tobin’s q ratios, superior accounting performance based on ROA, and higher financial leverage based on debt-to-total assets. By contrast, family owned firms that use dual-class shares have valuations that are lower by 17% on average relative to widely held firms, despite having similar ROA and financial leverage.     

Controlling shareholders and corporate value: Evidence from Thailand

This study investigates the effects of controlling shareholders on corporate performance. The empirical results, based on a unique database of Thai firms, do not support the hypothesis that controlling shareholders expropriate corporate assets. In fact, the presence of controlling shareholders is associated with higher performance, when measured by accounting measures such as the ROA and the sales–asset ratio. Since most of the firms do not implement control mechanisms to separate voting and cash flow rights, the controlling shareholders might be self-constrained not to extract private benefits. Otherwise, they would internalize higher costs of expropriation from holding high stakes. The controlling shareholders' involvement in the management, however, has a negative effect on the performance. The negative effect is more pronounced when the controlling shareholder-and-manager's ownership is at the 25–50%. The evidence also reveals that family-controlled firms display significantly higher performance. Foreign controlled firms as well as firms with more than one controlling shareholder also have higher ROA, relative to firms with no controlling shareholder.     

Returns to scale and asset prices

The q‐theory of investment is proposed to explain firm growth effects, where previous papers identify a negative effect of firm growth, including asset growth, real investment and net share issuance, on future stock returns. This paper uses returns to scale from the production function to test the dynamic q‐theory, which predicts that the firm growth effect is theoretically weaker for firms with decreasing returns to scale (DRS) than for non‐DRS firms. Our empirical results generally support the prediction of dynamic q‐theory. However, we find that the dynamic q‐theory explains little of the value, momentum and ROE effects from the standpoint of returns to scale.     

The effects of corporate bailout on firm performance: International evidence

Not all corporate bailouts are the same. We study corporate bailouts from around the world during 1987–2005. Among these bailed-out firms, some firms are economically distressed while others are financially distressed. Some firms are bailed out with cash (either as equity or as loans) while others are bailed out with debt relief. Some firms are bailed out by the government while others are bailed out by other stakeholders. We examine these firms’ operating performance before and after their bailouts, but specifically across different bailout types, and we also measure their stock returns surrounding their bailout announcements.     

Do institutional shareholder services (ISS) corporate governance ratings reflect a company's operating performance?

Little is known about the relation between the actual governance rating received by a firm and the firm's performance. In this study, we examine the relation between the actual corporate governance rating received by a firm and the firm's performance during the years 2002–2004. We use the institutional shareholder services (ISS) corporate governance quotient (CGQ) rating of a firm's corporate governance structure and analyze this rating in relation to the firm's operating performance. We compare the institutional shareholder services’ CGQ rating to two measures of the firm's operating performance, return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE). Based upon our results, we do not find statistical evidence suggesting that the firms’ operating performance is related to the firms’ ISS corporate governance rating.     

Performance choice,executive bonuses and corporate leverage

This study examines the causal link between a firm's leverage decisions and the characteristics of its CEO bonus plans. Results from a simultaneous equations model strongly suggest that highly levered firms are less likely to use return on equity (ROE) or ROE-based accounting performance measures to determine executive bonuses. Estimates also indicate that firms with fewer debt covenants, higher interest rates on debt, and a greater proportion of executive pay in the form of stock options are less likely to adopt ROE-based measures for use in CEO bonus plans. These findings lend strong support to the efficient contracting hypothesis. The conflicting interests of corporate stakeholders, especially between stockholders and creditors, encourage firms to tie executive pay to performance metrics like return on assets (ROA) that will strike the optimal balance between the agency costs of debt and the agency costs of equity.Data availability: all data are available from public sources.     

UNIVERSAL BANKS ARE NOT THE ANSWER TO AMERICA'S CORPORATE GOVERNANCE "PROBLEM": A LOOK AT GERMANY, JAPAN, AND THE U.S.

This article objects to a recent tendency of legal and economic scholars to "romanticize" the corporate governance role of German universal banks and Japanese main banks. There are potential conflicts between banks' interests as lenders and as shareholders that are likely to make banks less-than-ideal monitors for outside shareholders. Citing evidence that Japanese corporate borrowers pay above-market interest rates for their bank financing, Macey and Miller interpret the high interest rates as "rents" earned by Japanese banks on their loan portfolios in exchange for (1) insulating incumbent management of borrower firms from hostile takeover and (2) accepting suboptimal returns on their equity holdings.
The main problems with the German and Japanese systems stem from their failure to produce well-developed capital markets. Concentrated and stable shareholdings reduce the order flow in the market, thereby depriving the market of liquidity. And the lack of capital market liquidity– combined with the intense loyalty of the banks towards incumbent management–removes the ability of outside shareholders to make a credible threat of takeover if managerial performance is substandard.
The problem with American corporate governance–if indeed there is one–is not that hostile takeovers are bad, but that there are not enough of them due to regulatory restrictions and misguided legal policies. While U.S. law should be amended to give banks and other debtholders more power over borrowers in the case of financial distress, encouraging U.S. banks to become large stockholders is not likely to improve corporate efficiency. Strengthening the "voice" of American equity holders by eliminating restrictions on the market for corporate control would be the most effective step in improving firm performance.     

Risk management,corporate governance,and bank performance in the financial crisis

The recent financial crisis has raised several questions with respect to the corporate governance of financial institutions. This paper investigates whether risk management-related corporate governance mechanisms, such as for example the presence of a chief risk officer (CRO) in a bank’s executive board and whether the CRO reports to the CEO or directly to the board of directors, are associated with a better bank performance during the financial crisis of 2007/2008. We measure bank performance by buy-and-hold returns and ROE and we control for standard corporate governance variables such as CEO ownership, board size, and board independence. Most importantly, our results indicate that banks, in which the CRO directly reports to the board of directors and not to the CEO (or other corporate entities), exhibit significantly higher (i.e., less negative) stock returns and ROE during the crisis. In contrast, standard corporate governance variables are mostly insignificantly or even negatively related to the banks’ performance during the crisis.     

Does the method of entry matter? Evidence from Indian ADRs and GDRs

This paper documents changes in volatility, returns, liquidity and valuation on the local market following different ADR issues, viz., Level I, II, III, Rule 144A and Regulation S offerings, by the Indian firms in the global market. The sample consists of 84 ADR and GDR issues made by the Indian firms during 1990–2001. The Rule 144A and Reg S issues experience a significant decline in volatility on the home (Indian) market and these effects are mainly observed during the first sub-period, i.e. 1990–1997. In addition, Level III ADRS, which are exchange listed and capital raising issues, experience a significant increase in liquidity on the home market and these occur in the second sub-period, i.e. 1998–2001. Though ADRs in general experience an increase in valuation (as measured by the q ratios) after the U.S. issue, there is no strong evidence to suggest that the magnitude of increase depends on the method of entry.     

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.     

Leverage,governance and wealth effects of asset purchasers

We examine a sample of 670 firms that announce asset purchases. We hypothesize that buyer announcement returns should be higher in the presence of better monitoring and better governance. Consistent with the monitoring hypothesis, we find that buyers with higher private debt make purchase decisions that increase shareholder value. Consistent with the governance hypothesis, we find that returns are higher for buyers that have lower antitakeover provisions in place. Consistent with the managerial discretion hypothesis, buyer announcement-period returns increase with buyer leverage. Consistent with the liquidity hypothesis, we find that announcement-period returns decrease with the seller's Z-score, suggesting that buyers benefit from the lower liquidity of assets sold by sellers with lower debt capacity and higher financial distress. We also find that buyer announcement-period returns are directly related to their operating performance in the post-purchase year.     

Corporate Governance and Firm Performance in Iran

This study uses data from companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE) for the years 2005–2006 to investigate the role of corporate governance indices on firm performance. We use board size, board independence, board leadership and institutional investors on the board as corporate governance indices and EPS, ROA and ROE as firm performance surrogates. Our regression results show that board size is negatively associated with firm performance. Moreover, the presence of outside directors strengthens the firms' performance. We find, however, no relationship between leadership structure and firm performance. Likewise, the presence of institutional investors on the board of directors is not positively associated with firm performance.     

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.     

Corporate governance,top executive compensation and firm performance in Japan

For 174 large Japanese corporations during 1992–1996, we find that top executive pay is higher in firms with weaker corporate governance mechanisms, controlling for standard economic determinants of pay. We use management ownership and family control (“the ownership mechanisms”), and keiretsu affiliation, the presence of outside directors, and board size (“the monitoring mechanisms”) to measure corporate governance mechanisms. We also find that the excess pay related to ownership and monitoring variables is negatively associated with subsequent accounting performance, consistent with the presence of an agency problem. We do not, however, find an association between this excess pay and subsequent stock returns.     

The United Shareholders Association Shareholder 1000 and firm performance

From 1989 through 1993, the United Shareholders Association (USA) published its Shareholder 1000 report, which ranked 1000 firms on several dimensions of corporate performance, including shareholder rights and management compensation. We examine two measures reported by the USA of the alignment between managers' and shareholders' interests: a shareholder rights score and a management compensation rating. The associations between these measures and measures of operating performance and investment levels are analyzed. We find evidence that the USA shareholder rights and management compensation scores are significantly and positively associated with measures of operating performance and investment spending. Further tests indicate that USA management compensation scores proxy for aspects of corporate behavior that have significant valuation implications not reflected in financial statements.