Detecting news in aggregate accounting earnings: implications for stock market valuation

How much news is there in aggregate accounting earnings? I provide evidence that earnings changes at the stock market level are correlated with new information about not only expected future cash flows but also discount rates. A comprehensive investigation of the link to discount rates reveals that aggregate earnings changes are tied to news about all components of the expected future stock market return, i.e., the real riskless rate, expected inflation, and the expected equity risk premium. Over the sample period studied, cash flow news and discount rate news in aggregate earnings changes covary positively and have offsetting impacts on stock market prices. As a result, stock market prices appear to be insensitive to aggregate earnings changes. The findings highlight the importance of separating cash flow news from discount rate news when evaluating the information content of accounting earnings at the stock market level. Overall, my study sheds new light on the informativeness and relevance of accounting earnings for valuation at the stock market level.     

What Drives Anomaly Returns?

We decompose the returns of five well-known anomalies into cash flow and discount rate news. Common patterns emerge across the five factor portfolios and their mean-variance efficient (MVE) combination. Whereas discount rate news predominates in market returns, systematic cash flow news drives the returns of anomaly portfolios and their MVE combination with the market portfolio. Anomaly cash flow and discount rate shocks are largely uncorrelated with market cash flow and discount rate shocks and with business cycle fluctuations. These rich empirical patterns restrict the joint dynamics of firm cash flows and the pricing kernel, thereby informing models of stocks' expected returns.     

Understanding Stock Price Volatility: The Role of Earnings

In an efficient capital market, asset prices vary when investors change their expectations about cash flows, discount rates, or both. Using dividends to measure cash flows, previous research shows that the aggregate dividend‐price ratio varies due to changes in expected discount rates (returns) rather than expected cash flows. In contrast, using accounting earnings instead of dividends as a measure of cash flows, this paper shows that as much as 70% of the variation in the dividend‐price ratio can be explained by changes in expected earnings. Moreover, the paper documents a significant negative correlation between expected returns and expected earnings, suggesting that variations in a common factor to both may generate significant price volatility. The results are consistent with the dividend‐policy irrelevance hypothesis.     

VALUATION AND RISK-ADJUSTED DISCOUNT RATES

There is a continuing controversy as to whether the use of a constant risk adjusted discount rate in capital budgeting decisions implies that the risk of the cash flows increases over time. This paper shows that valuation using these discount rates implies an increasing premium for risk over time but that the increasing premium is due to the net impact of the uncertainty in the cash flow; uncertainty in future market expectations of the cash flow; and changes in the market price of risk. The risk of the cash flow itself need not be increasing over time.     

Do Accruals Drive Firm‐Level Stock Returns? A Variance Decomposition Analysis

This paper extends the variance decomposition framework of Campbell [1991], Campbell and Ammer [1993], and Vuolteenaho [2002] to address the relative value relevance of accrual news, cash flow news, and expected-return news in driving firm-level equity returns. The extension is based on the Feltham-Ohlson [1995, 1996] clean surplus relations. Using three models, this study shows that all three factors, accruals, cash flows, and expected future discount rates are value relevant. Moreover, accrual news is found to significantly dominate expected-return news in driving firm-level stock returns. Operating income news is also found to significantly dominate both expected-return news and free cash flow news in driving firm-level stock returns. Furthermore, after splitting net income into cash flow and accrual earnings components in the Vuolteenaho model, accrual earnings news and cash flow earnings news are found to equally drive firm-level stock returns and to dominate expected-return news. Further disaggregation of the data yields some evidence that accrual earnings news is a more important factor than cash flow earnings news in driving current stock returns. Overall, the three models indicate that changes in expected future accruals are a primary driver, if not the primary driver, of current stock returns.     

Valuation in Emerging Markets: A Simulation Approach

Most of the foundations of valuation theory have been designed for use in developed markets. Because of the greater, and in some cases different, risks associated with emerging markets (although recent experience might suggest otherwise), investors and corporate managers are often uncomfortable using traditional methods. The typical way of capturing emerging-market risks is to increase the discount rate in the standard valuation model. But, as the authors argue, such adjustments have the effect of undermining some of the basic assumptions of the CAPM-based discounted cash flow model. The standard theory of capital budgeting suggests that estimates of unconditional expected cash flows should be discounted at CAPM discount rates (or betas) that reflect only “systematic,” or “nondiversifiable,” market-wide risks. In practice, however, analysts tend to take what are really estimates of “conditional” expected cash flows—that is, conditional on the firm or its country avoiding a crisis—and discount them at higher rates that reflect not only systematic risks, but diversifiable risks that typically involve a higher probability of crisis-driven costs of default. But there is almost no basis in theory for the size of the increases in discount rates. In this article, the authors propose that analysts in emerging markets avoid this discount rate problem by using simulation techniques to capture emerging-market risks in their estimates of unconditional expected cash flows—in other words, estimates that directly incorporate the possibility of an emerging-market crisis and its consequences. Having produced such estimates, analysts can then discount them using the standard Global CAPM.     

Accruals,cash flows,and aggregate stock returns

This paper examines whether the firm-level accrual and cash flow effects extend to the aggregate stock market. In sharp contrast to previous firm-level findings, aggregate accruals is a strong positive time series predictor of aggregate stock returns, and cash flows is a negative predictor. In addition, innovations in accruals are negatively contemporaneously correlated with aggregate returns, and innovations in cash flows are positively correlated with returns. These findings suggest that innovations in accruals and cash flows contain information about changes in discount rates, or that firms manage earnings in response to marketwide undervaluation.     

What Moves Investment Growth?

We use accounting identities to decompose unexpected changes in investment growth into surprises to current cash‐flow growth and stock returns, and revisions of expectations about future cash‐flow growth and future discount rates. Using a vector autoregressive model we find that current cash‐flow surprises account for the largest element of the variance decomposition. Investment growth and current cash‐flow surprises are negatively correlated with news about future cash‐flow growth, which can be expected from persistent productivity shocks and decreasing returns to scale. We find little evidence of a discount rate channel for investment since return terms are small and have unintuitive signs.     

Does firm value move too much to be justified by subsequent changes in cash flow?

The appropriate measure of cash flow for valuing corporate assets is net payout, which is the sum of dividends, interest, and net repurchases of equity and debt. Variation in net payout yield, the ratio of net payout to asset value, is mostly driven by movements in expected cash flow growth, instead of movements in discount rates. Net payout yield is less persistent than dividend yield and implies much smaller variation in long-horizon discount rates. Therefore, movements in the value of corporate assets can be justified by changes in expected future cash flow.     

Is Country Diversification better than Industry Diversification?

In this paper, we develop a framework in which one can examine the source of industry and country diversification by examining their underlying return components. We find that the global cash flow factor explains on average 39% of the variation of country cash flows and global discount rates explain 55% of the variation of country discount rates. These are much less than the explanatory power of the two factors over industry cash flow and discount rate variations, which are 72% and 78% respectively. This suggests that global factors are much less important for return components at country level than at the industry level. As a result, both better diversification of expected returns and cash flows across countries determine the larger benefits of country diversification versus industry diversification. Moreover, emerging markets tend to have much smaller co‐movements of both dividends and expected returns with those of the world, suggesting a lower degree of integration with the world goods and financial markets. Our results cast doubt on the prevailing wisdom that country diversification should be replaced by industry diversification.     

Discount-Rate Risk in Private Equity: Evidence from Secondary Market Transactions

Measures of private equity (PE) performance based on cash flows do not account for a discount-rate risk premium that is a component of the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) alpha. We create secondary market PE indices and find that PE discount rates vary considerably. Net asset values are too smooth because they fail to reflect variation in discount rates. Although the CAPM alpha for our index is zero, the generalized public market equivalent based on cash flows is large and positive. We obtain similar results for a set of synthetic funds that invest in small cap stocks. Ignoring variation in PE discount rates can lead to a misallocation of capital.     

The term structures of equity and interest rates

This paper proposes a dynamic risk-based model capable of jointly explaining the term structure of interest rates, returns on the aggregate market, and the risk and return characteristics of value and growth stocks. Both the term structure of interest rates and returns on value and growth stocks convey information about how the representative investor values cash flows of different maturities. We model how the representative investor perceives risks of these cash flows by specifying a parsimonious stochastic discount factor for the economy. Shocks to dividend growth, the real interest rate, and expected inflation are priced, but shocks to the price of risk are not. Given reasonable assumptions for dividends and inflation, we show that the model can simultaneously account for the behavior of aggregate stock returns, an upward-sloping yield curve, the failure of the expectations hypothesis, and the poor performance of the capital asset pricing model.     

The Role of Real Options in Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice1

Most discussions of capital budgeting take for granted that discounted cash flow (DCF) and real options valuation (ROV) are very different methods that are meant to be applied in different circumstances. Such discussions also typically assume that DCF is “easy” and ROV is “hard”—or at least dauntingly unfamiliar—and that, mainly for this reason, managers often use DCF and rarely ROV. This paper argues that all three assumptions are wrong or at least seriously misleading. DCF and ROV both assign a present value to risky future cash flows. DCF entails discounting expected future cash flows at the expected return on an asset of comparable risk. ROV uses “risk‐neutral” valuation, which means computing expected cash flows based on “risk‐neutral” probabilities and discounting these flows at the risk‐free rate. Using a series of single‐period examples, the author demonstrates that both methods, when done correctly, should provide the same answer. Moreover, in most ROV applications—those where there is no forward price or “replicating portfolio” of traded assets—a “preliminary” DCF valuation is required to perform the risk‐neutral valuation. So why use ROV at all? In cases where project risk and the discount rates are expected to change over time, the risk‐neutral ROV approach will be easier to implement than DCF (since adjusting cash flow probabilities is more straightforward than adjusting discount rates). The author uses multi‐period examples to illustrate further both the simplicity of ROV and the strong assumptions required for a typical DCF valuation. But the simplicity that results from discounting with risk‐free rates is not the only benefit of using ROV instead of—or together with—traditional DCF. The use of formal ROV techniques may also encourage managers to think more broadly about the flexibility that is (or can be) built into future business decisions, and thus to choose from a different set of possible investments. To the extent that managers who use ROV have effectively adopted a different business model, there is a real and important difference between the two valuation techniques. Consistent with this possibility, much of the evidence from both surveys and academic studies of managerial behavior and market pricing suggests that managers and investors implicitly take account of real options when making investment decisions.     

Why Is Long‐Horizon Equity Less Risky? A Duration‐Based Explanation of the Value Premium

We propose a dynamic risk‐based model that captures the value premium. Firms are modeled as long‐lived assets distinguished by the timing of cash flows. The stochastic discount factor is specified so that shocks to aggregate dividends are priced, but shocks to the discount rate are not. The model implies that growth firms covary more with the discount rate than do value firms, which covary more with cash flows. When calibrated to explain aggregate stock market behavior, the model accounts for the observed value premium, the high Sharpe ratios on value firms, and the poor performance of the CAPM.     

Quantifying time value errors

Time valuation of cash flows is an essential part of personal financial planning and management. Many financial arrangements are priced according to a cash-flow valuation model. Expected cash flows associated with a stock or bond are discounted at an appropriate risk-adjusted rate in order to determine the fair value of the financial asset. Home mortgage loans are priced according to the discounted value of the future principal and interest cash flows. Yet, despite the importance of the discounted cash flow methodology in pricing assets, computational errors are often made when discount factors are not calculated precisely. This article attempts to quantify the magnitude of the error when the mathematical function for present value is ignored and interpolation is used instead to determine the discount factor.     

What moves international stock and bond markets?

We study the relation between international mutual fund flows and the different return components of aggregate equity and bond markets. First, we decompose international equity and bond market returns into changes in expectations of future real cash payments, interest rates, exchange rates, and discount rates. News about future cash flows, rather than discount rates, is the main driver of international stock returns. This evidence is in contrast with the typical results reported only for the US. Inflation news instead is the main driver of international bond returns. Next, we turn to the interaction between these return components and international portfolio flows. We find evidence consistent with price pressure, short-term trend chasing, and short-run overreaction in the equity market. We also find that international bond flows to emerging markets are more sensitive to interest rate shocks than equity flows.     

Estimating cost of capital in firm valuations with arithmetic or geometric mean – or better use the Cooper estimator?

We test the extent and determinants of bias effects of the arithmetic as well as the geometric mean estimator and the estimator of Cooper [1996. Arithmetic versus geometric mean estimators: Setting discount rates for capital budgeting. European Financial Management 2 (July): 157–67] regarding discount rate estimation for firm valuation by way of a bootstrap approach for 13 different countries. The Cooper estimator is superior to both the geometric and the (conventional) arithmetic mean estimator. However, a ‘truncated’ version of the arithmetic mean estimator leads generally to better estimation outcomes than the Cooper estimator. This means that, in order to reduce problems of upward-biased firm value estimates, expected cash flows beyond a certain time horizon are completely neglected in terminal value estimation. Such an approach seems particularly reasonable for the valuation of young growth companies as well as for companies from quickly developing countries such as Brazil, China, or Thailand, because the bias in terminal value estimation is increasing in the growth rate of future expected cash flows.     

Managerial discretion to delay the recognition of goodwill impairment: The role of enforcement

Under International Financial Reporting Standards, managers can use two approaches to increase the estimated fair value of goodwill in order to justify not recognizing impairment: (1) make overly optimistic valuation assumptions, and (2) increase future cash flow forecasts by inflating current cash flows. Because enforcement constrains the use of optimistic valuation assumptions, we hypothesize that enforcement influences the relative use of these two choices. We test this hypothesis by comparing a sample of 1,958 firms from 36 countries that are likely to delay recognizing goodwill impairment (suspect firms) to a sample of control firms. First, we find that firms in high‐enforcement countries use a higher discount rate to test goodwill for impairment than firms in low‐enforcement countries. We also find a more positive association between discount rate and upward cash flow management for suspect firms than for control firms. This result is consistent with suspect firms substituting optimistic valuation assumptions with inflated current cash flows. Second, we find that, relative to control firms, suspect firms exhibit higher upward cash flow management in high‐enforcement countries than in low‐enforcement countries. Third, we show that suspect firms in high‐enforcement countries are more likely to eventually impair goodwill.     

The value relevance of cash flows, current accruals, and non-current accruals in the UK

Cash flow statements have a longstanding history as mandated financial statement disclosures, having replaced funds flow statements. The usefulness of such disclosures with respect to one of the main purposes of financial statements—providing information relevant to the assessment of future cash flows and their uncertainty, and the market value of firms—is still subject to debate. This study investigates whether various partitions of earnings involving combinations of a cash flow measure of performance and measures of current accruals and non-current accruals improve the ability to explain market values in the UK relative to using earnings alone. Using a valuation model-based methodology, and employing a UK sample of non-financial firms for the years 1993 to 2007, our results suggest strong support for the assertion that cash flows can have incremental value relevance relative to either earnings or funds flows. By implication, cash flows can have separate value relevance from total and, in particular, current accruals. There is slightly less consistent evidence that current and non-current accruals can have separate value relevance but, nonetheless, the results are still strongly in favour in this respect. Generally, the main source of increase in explanatory power for market values is the separate inclusion of our cash flow measure in the estimated regressions. As a consequence, we conclude that the statement of cash flows in the UK provides information useful to UK investors in valuing firms. Further, requiring a cash flow statement, as opposed to a funds flow statement, improves the information content of financial statements in the UK.