Do brokerage houses add value? The market impact of UK sell-side analyst recommendation changes

This paper reports on the first full study investigating the economic role of sell-side analysts’ stock recommendations in the UK market. We also explore whether UK analysts are, in practice, influenced by the same biases as that reported for their US counterparts.We find that share prices are significantly influenced by analysts’ recommendation changes, not only at the time of the recommendation change but also in subsequent months. The price reaction to new sell recommendations is greater than the price reaction to new buy recommendations and exhibits post-recommendation drift which is consistent with initial underreaction to bad news. Returns generated are influenced, cross-sectionally, by factors associated with a firm's information environment and analyst incentives such as size, same-sign earnings forecast revisions and recommendation changes that skip a rank.We find that UK analysts’ investment recommendations in practice appear less susceptible to potential conflicts of interest than their US counterparts. The ratio of new sell to buy recommendations is higher in the UK and a greater proportion of such recommendations are accompanied by same-sign earnings forecast revisions than their equivalents in the US. We find brokerage house investment banking relationships do not appear to impact (adversely) on abnormal returns.     

Never judge a book by its cover: what security analysts have to say beyond recommendations

Our study analyzes market reaction to the entire content of a large sample of analysts’ reports from the period 2002 to 2004 for the German market. In particular, we explore whether the three summary measures in the reports, i.e., recommendation revisions, earnings forecast revisions, and target price forecast revisions are acknowledged by the market. Additionally, we investigate if stated justifications in the written text of analysts’ reports contain information value beyond the three summary measures. We find that earnings forecast revisions and target price forecast revisions contain valuable information, both unconditionally and conditional on the rest of the information in the report. Our findings also reveal that justifications made by analysts are of high salience to market participants. These justifications provide valuable information, both unconditionally and conditional on all other types of information in a report. Our findings also suggest that business ties between banks and the analyzed companies do not affect market reaction to dissemination of an analysts’ report.

Analysts’ forecast revisions and firms’ research and development expenses

This study examines whether reported values for firms’ research and development (R&D) affect analysts’ annual earnings forecast revisions following quarterly earnings announcements. Because R&D introduces uncertainty into earnings forecasts, analysts may benefit from additional information searches in an effort to increase forecast accuracy. Also, accounting standards mandate an immediate expensing of R&D, in essence projecting a zero value for the R&D. To the extent that R&D will produce future payoffs, the expense treatment reduces the informativeness of reported earnings for forecasting future earnings. Thus, the marginal benefit of analysts’ efforts to produce more information may increase with the magnitude of the R&D component of earnings announcements and trigger additional forecast revisions. Alternatively, if the cost of information searches exceeds the benefit, analysts’ forecast revisions may decrease. Our results show a positive relation between R&D expenses and analysts’ forecast revision activity. We also find a positive and significant association between the level of R&D expenses and the magnitude of analysts’ forecast revisions following quarterly announcements. These results point to a greater amount of analyst scrutiny when reported earnings are accompanied by high levels of R&D expenses.

The information content of financial analysts' forecasts of earnings: Some evidence on semi-strong inefficiency

The paper assesses the information content of revisions in financial analysts' forecasts of earnings by analyzing the relation between the direction of these revisions and stock price behavior. Abnormal returns during the months surrounding the revisions in analysts' forecasts are computed and evaluated. The results strongly indicate that information on revisions in forecasts of earnings per share is valuable to investors. It is also suggested that market reaction to the disclosure of analysts' forecasts is relatively slow and gives rise to potential abnormal returns to investors who act upon this type of publicly available information.     

Product market pricing power, industry concentration and analysts’ earnings forecasts

This is the first study to establish a link between product market power and analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy and bias. Relating two different dimensions of market power to earnings forecastability, we document that (a) a firm’s relative pricing power and (b) its industry concentration are strong positive determinants of analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy. We find that forecasting earnings of higher market power firms is less complex due to their ability to withstand cost shocks as well as greater informational-efficiency enjoyed by such firms. Further, forecast optimism increases with weakening product market pricing power and with lower industry concentration. The knowledge derived from this study will hopefully improve the accuracy of equity valuation, and thereby engender better buy-side (stock selections) and sell-side recommendations by analysts. Our analysis also suggests that brokerage firms compensating analysts based on forecast accuracy need to adjust for the differential in the information complexity of different industries.     

The effect of repeat restructuring charges on analysts’ forecast revisions and accuracy

The primary objective of this study is to examine the effect of prior restructuring charges on analyst forecast revisions and accuracy. We find evidence that analysts respond differently to first-time restructuring firms than to repeat restructuring firms. Analysts revise their forecasts of both one-year-ahead earnings and five-year long-term growth in earnings more negatively for first-time restructuring firms than for firms with prior charges. When we examine forecast errors in the year subsequent to the restructuring, we find that current charges complicate analysts’ earnings forecast task. We further find that the decline in analyst forecast accuracy is mitigated by prior charges within past two years.     

Analysts and anomalies

Analysts' price targets and recommendations contradict stock return anomaly variables. Using an index based on 125 anomalies, we find that analysts' annual stock return forecasts are 11% higher for anomaly-shorts than for anomaly-longs. Anomaly-shorts’ return forecasts are excessively optimistic, exceeding realized returns by 34%. Recommendations also tend to be more favorable for anomaly-shorts, although this result varies across anomaly types. Consistent with analysts' slowly incorporating anomaly information, anomalies forecast revisions in both price targets and recommendations. Our findings imply that investors who follow analysts' actionable information contribute to mispricing.     

The role of corporate governance in meeting or beating analysts’ forecast

Meeting or beating analysts’ forecasts is a topic of considerable interest in the academic and business communities. Some studies indicate a favorable market response when firms meet or beat analysts’ earnings forecasts, but others suggest managers opportunistically manage earnings to achieve earnings targets. We investigate the relation between corporate governance mechanisms and meeting or exceeding analysts’ expectations and find that attributes of corporate governance are related to the likelihood of consistently meeting or exceeding consensus forecasts. We extend current literature by showing that some attributes of strong corporate governance mechanisms lower agency costs associated with consistently meeting or beating analysts’ expectations. We also find that compensation committees reward managers for consistently meeting or beating analysts’ forecasts.     

Analyst underreaction and the post-forecast revision drift

The post-forecast revision drift (PFRD), the phenomenon of delayed stock price reactions to analyst forecast revisions, is a well-documented market anomaly. Prior research attributes PFRD to underreaction by investors to analyst forecast revisions. This study investigates the role of the analyst forecast revision process itself in the PFRD anomaly. Using a large sample of US firms, we confirm prior findings of a positive serial correlation (momentum) in individual analysts’ revisions to their earnings forecasts and, based on both indirect and direct tests, document a positive association between this momentum and PFRD. Further analyses reveal that both the forecast revision momentum and PFRD vary in similar ways with respect to the nature of the news driving the revisions and the information environment. Collectively, our findings show that underreaction by individual analysts in the forecast revision process is an important contributor to the PFRD phenomenon.     

Do star analysts know more firm-specific information? Evidence from China

Using a unique database in China, we extend the literature to further distinguish the information production role of star vs. non-star analysts. We confirm the general conclusion of a positive association between analyst coverage and stock return synchronicity measured by a firm’s R² in China. The findings from star analysts, however, show that star analyst coverage actually decreases stock return synchronicity. We contend that the firm-specific human capital in star analysts helps the analysts overcome the challenges of information production in an emerging market. The superior firm-specific human capital argument of star analysts is further supported by the negative association of star analysts’ firm-specific experiences and stock return synchronicity. Our conclusions are robust to different specifications of star analyst presence and different definitions of analysts’ firm-specific experiences. We also find that star analysts exhibit a more accurate earnings forecast than non-star analysts.     

Regulation fair disclosure and the market’s reaction to analyst investment recommendation changes

Previous research has shown that affiliated analysts (those who are working for investment banks that underwrite securities for companies) have an incentive to provide optimistically biased recommendations from selective information they are given by the firm. In an effort to halt such activities, as of October 2000, Regulation Fair Disclosure (RegFD) prohibits selective disclosure of material non-public information by public companies to privileged individuals (such as favored research analysts) and requires broad, non-exclusionary disclosure of such information. We examine firms’ stock price reactions to investment recommendation changes from affiliated analysts versus unaffiliated analysts from October 1998 to November 2002, around the passage of RegFD. Similar to previous research, we find that investors reacted more significantly to recommendation downgrades by affiliated analysts than to those by unaffiliated analysts prior to the passage of RegFD. However, we find that the difference in the reactions to recommendation changes is not present after the passage of RegFD. We also find that stock price reactions to analysts’ (both affiliated and unaffiliated) recommendation changes decreased significantly after the passage of RegFD. Thus, RegFD appears to have curbed the selective disclosure of information (particularly negative information) by firms to affiliated analysts. Further, the smaller reactions to recommendation changes by all analysts after RegFD may reflect a change in analysts’ behavior (irrespective of information that is available) or a response by corporate managers to withhold information rather than risking a violation of fair disclosure rules.     

Slow price reactions to analysts’ recommendation revisions

This study explores the reasons for the slow price reactions to analysts’ recommendation revisions. We predict that analysts’ recommendation revisions contain earnings-related information that is not incorporated in analysts’ earnings forecasts and that the slow price reaction is attributable to a gradual incorporation of this earnings-related information into stock prices. We find that, consistent with our prediction, stocks with recommendation upgrades subsequently experience more upward earnings forecast revisions than stocks with recommendation downgrades, and that the differences in subsequent stock returns between upgraded and downgraded stocks is attributable to differences between subsequent earnings forecast (especially, FY2 earnings forecast) revisions.     

Credit ratings and disclosure channels

We study the relation between analysts’ ratings of firms’ credit worthiness and ratings of the quality of firms’ (1) annual report disclosures, (2) quarterly and other disclosures, and (3) manager-analyst communications. We find that credit ratings are better for firms with higher rated annual report disclosures. We also find that marked increases in analyst ratings of annual report quality are accompanied by improvements in credit ratings. We find no relation between credit ratings and analysts’ ratings of either quarterly report disclosures or management-analyst communications. Overall, the results suggest that a commitment to better annual report disclosure is related to a lower cost of credit capital.     

Book-to-Market Components, Future Security Returns, and Errors in Expected Future Earnings

This study investigates whether the ability of book-to-market to predict returns derives from systematic errors in the market's expectation of future earnings. We extend Beaver and Ryan (1996, 2000) by decomposing book-to-market into a more persistent (bias) component and a delayed recognition (lag) component. We find that both components are related to analyst expectations of future earnings, but the lag component is the dominant factor across all forecast horizons. Similarly, we find that the lag component explains most of the inverse relation between book-to-market and future returns. Given that lag is constructed by regressing book-to-market ratios on lagged price changes, our results are consistent with the lag component capturing systematic stock price reversals. We find that the components have unique relations with subsequent earnings forecast revisions, and controlling for these relations substantially mitigates the components' ability to predict returns. Our component-level analysis provides insight into how expected future earnings, summarized in book-to-market ratios help to explain this market anomaly.     

Why do analysts issue forecast revisions inconsistent with prior stock returns? Determinants and consequences

We examine the informativeness of analyst forecast revisions that are directionally inconsistent with prior stock price movements (sign‐inconsistent revisions). Sign‐inconsistent revisions represent approximately one‐half of the forecast revisions from 1995 through 2010. Our tests indicate that sign‐inconsistent revisions are less informative than are sign‐consistent revisions. Sign‐inconsistent revisions are less likely to be closer to actual earnings realizations and they generate smaller stock price reactions. We also find evidence that sign‐inconsistent revisions are associated with analysts' economic incentives to generate trading volume and their behavioural limitations related to information uncertainty. These results suggest that sign‐inconsistent revisions do not necessarily benefit investors.     

The stock price effects of changes in dispersion of investor beliefs during earnings announcements

Existing research provides competing theories about how dispersion of investor beliefs might affect stock prices. We measure changes in dispersion of investor beliefs around earnings announcements using changes in the dispersion of individual analysts’ forecasts. We find that the 3-day market response to earnings announcements is negatively associated with changes in dispersion, consistent with the cost of capital hypothesis. The results hold after controlling for the current earnings surprise, forecast revisions of future earnings, and reported earnings relative to various earnings thresholds. Our study provides new insight about the information contained in earnings announcements that is incremental to the magnitude and timing of cash flows.     

The implications of ineffective internal control and SOX 404 reporting for financial analysts

The mandatory reporting of firms’ internal control effectiveness continues to be debated by equity market participants, U.S. regulatory agencies and oversight committees. We investigate the implications of material weaknesses in internal control and SOX 404 required reporting of such for financial analysts because analysts are important intermediaries in the U.S. capital market and it is not known whether analysts’ forecasts or coverage decisions are affected by firms’ internal control problems or reporting, respectively. Results of our empirical tests indicate that analysts provide less accurate forecasts and there is greater forecast dispersion for firms with ineffective internal control. We also find that firms that disclose internal control problems have less analyst coverage and that analyst following declines after the material weakness in internal control is disclosed. The results are robust to controlling for potential self-selection bias and management earnings guidance. Our study documents the consequences of ineffective internal control for an important class of financial statement users and suggests the required reporting on the effectiveness of internal control is beneficial to understanding the properties of analysts’ forecasts.     

Audit committee accounting expertise,expectations management,and nonnegative earnings surprises

We investigate whether accounting expertise on audit committees curtails expectations management to avoid negative earnings surprises. Controlling for the endogenous choice of an accounting expert, we find that firms with an accounting expert serving on the audit committee exhibit: (1) less expectations management to avoid negative earnings surprises; (2) less nonnegative earnings surprises through expectations management; and (3) more nonnegative earnings surprises that are less susceptible to manipulations of both realized earnings and earnings expectations. We find, however, that the inclusion of an accounting expert on the audit committee curtails expectations management only in the interim quarters. While Brown and Pinello (2007) find a greater magnitude of downward revisions in analysts’ forecasts in the fourth quarter, they also document a lower incidence of nonnegative earnings surprises. Together, this suggests that with an accounting expert, audit committees likely view the fourth quarter downward revisions as driven more by guidance than by manipulation, thus focusing on curbing only expectations management in interim quarters.     

Dynamic forecasting behavior by analysts: Theory and evidence

We develop a multi-period learning model to examine the relation between analysts’ forecasting behavior and their performance. In a competitive market for banking services, the surplus and the analyst's payoff, which is determined through bargaining, are convex in her reputation. The convexity of her payoff structure and the presence of employment risk lead to a U-shaped relation between the analyst's forecast boldness and prior performance and a positive relation between forecast boldness and experience. We find support for these predictions in our empirical analysis. Significant underperformers (outperformers) face higher (lower) employment risk and are more likely to issue bolder forecasts.     

An Empirical Analysis of Analysts' Target Prices: Short-term Informativeness and Long-term Dynamics

Using a large database of analysts' target prices issued over the period 1997–1999, we examine short‐term market reactions to target price revisions and long‐term comovement of target and stock prices. We find a significant market reaction to the information contained in analysts' target prices, both unconditionally and conditional on contemporaneously issued stock recommendation and earnings forecast revisions. Using a cointegration approach, we analyze the long‐term behavior of market and target prices. We find that, on average, the one‐year‐ahead target price is 28 percent higher than the current market price.