Accruals,Investment, and Future Performance

It is well documented that accounting measures of investment, such as working capital and capital expenditures, negatively predict future stock returns. The earnings fixation hypothesis suggests that investors overestimate and overvalue the persistence of the accrual component of earnings. Another stream of the literature argues that since accruals capture growth, the accruals anomaly can be explained by the investment anomaly, which finds that firms that grow their assets tend to have lower future returns. As empirical proxies for accruals and investment are either positively correlated or interchangeably used, it is difficult to distinguish between the competing hypotheses in empirical tests. This study contributes to the debate by identifying two special economic settings in which the two explanations offer diverging predictions. First, investment in research and development (R&D) represents an investment expenditure that reduces earnings but is not subject to accrual accounting. Thus, the earnings fixation hypothesis predicts a positive relation between increases in R&D investments and future returns, whereas the investment anomaly predicts a negative relation. Second, firms operating with negative working capital have working capital accruals that are negatively correlated with other forms of investment and growth. Therefore, while the earnings fixation hypothesis still predicts a negative relation between accruals and future returns in this setting, the investment explanation predicts a positive relation. For both sets of tests, the empirical evidence supports the earnings fixation hypothesis for the accruals anomaly and is inconsistent with the notion that the investment anomaly subsumes earnings fixation in explaining future stock returns.     

The Persistence and Pricing of the Cash Component of Earnings

Prior research shows that the cash component of earnings is more persistent than the accrual component. We decompose the cash component into: (1) the change in the cash balance, (2) issuances/distributions to debt, and (3) issuances/distributions to equity. We find that the higher persistence of the cash component is entirely due to the subcomponent related to equity. The other subcomponents have persistence levels almost identical to accruals. We investigate whether investors understand the implications of the differential persistence of the three subcomponents. Our results suggest that investors correctly price debt and equity issuances/distributions but misprice the change in the cash balance in a similar manner to accruals. Our tests enable us to empirically distinguish the “accrual” and “external financing” anomalies with results implying that the accrual anomaly subsumes the external financing anomaly. Our results also suggest that naive fixation on earnings is unlikely to be a complete explanation for the accrual anomaly. Our findings are more consistent with investors misunderstanding diminishing returns to new investments.     

The q-Theory Approach to Understanding the Accrual Anomaly

Interpreting accruals as working capital investment, we hypothesize based on  q -theory that firms optimally adjust their accruals in response to discount rate changes. A higher discount rate means less profitable investments and lower accruals, and a lower discount rate means more profitable investments and higher accruals. Our evidence supports this optimal investment hypothesis: (1) adding an investment factor into standard factor regressions substantially reduces the magnitude of the accrual anomaly, often to insignificant levels; (2) accruals covary negatively with discount rate estimates from the dividend discounting model, and for the most part, with estimates from the residual income model; (3) accruals with low accounting reliability covary more with capital investment than accruals with high accounting reliability; and (iv) expected returns to accruals-based trading strategies are time-varying, suggesting that the deterioration of the accrual effect in recent years might be temporary and likely to mean-revert in the near future.     

Further evidence of the relationship between accruals and future cash flows

Focusing only on operating accruals in accrual‐based studies results in a loss of information and noisy measures of both accrual and cash flow components of earnings. Thus, we examine the relative importance of working capital accruals, non‐current operating accruals, and financing accruals with regard to future cash flows from operations (CFO). Using Australian data, we provide evidence that both working capital and non‐current operating accruals are important for explaining future CFO but that the contribution of financing accruals is not significant. Moreover, the asset component of accruals plays a more important role in explaining future CFO than the liability component.     

Explaining the accrual anomaly by market expectations of future returns and earnings

This study examines the accrual anomaly under the framework of the Campbell [Campbell, J.Y. (1991). A variance decomposition for stock returns. Economic Journal 101 (405), 157-179.] model. The Campbell (1991) model shows that realized asset returns are a joint function of 1) expected returns, 2) revisions in market expected future returns (i.e., return news), and 3) revisions in market expected future cash flows (i.e., cash flow news). The current study adopts the Easton [Easton, P. (2004). PE ratios, PEG ratios, and estimating the implied expected rate of return on equity capital. The Accounting Review 79 (1), 73-96.] model to estimate proxies for expected returns, return news, and cash flow news. The results show that firms with low accruals have lower expected returns than firms with high accruals, which is contradictory to prior research that argues that firms with low accruals are more risky. However, investors underestimate (overestimate) future earnings growth, a proxy for cash flow growth, for low (high) accrual firms. Further analysis demonstrates that earnings news (proxy for cash flow news) plays a major role in explaining abnormal returns associated with the accrual anomaly.     

The predictive power of investment and accruals

We test whether investment explains the accrual anomaly by splitting total accruals into investment-related and “nontransaction” accruals, items such as depreciation and asset write-downs that do not represent new investment expenditures. The two types of accruals have very different predictive power for firm performance, not just for future earnings but also for future cash flow and stock returns. Most importantly, nontransaction accruals have the strongest negative predictive slopes for earnings and stock returns, contrary to the predictions of the investment hypothesis. A long-short portfolio based on nontransaction accruals has a significant average return of 0.71 % monthly from 1972 to 2010 and remains profitable at the end of the sample when returns on other accrual strategies decline. Our results suggest that nontransaction accruals are the least reliable component of accruals and show that a significant portion of the accrual anomaly cannot be explained by investment.     

Further evidence on analyst and investor misweighting of prior period cash flows and accruals

We empirically investigate three questions: (i) whether analysts and investors mis-estimate the persistence of operating cash flows, (ii) if so, is the cash flow effect distinct from the accrual effect in the sense that one effect holds after controlling for the other, and (iii) if these are distinct effects, which effect is stronger in magnitude? We find that prior period operating cash flows have a significant positive effect on forecast errors and stock returns consistent with analysts and investors underestimating the persistence of operating cash flows. Further, we find that not only is the operating cash flow effect distinct from the accrual (more specifically the working capital accrual) effect but it is also considerably larger in magnitude. To our knowledge, this is the first study that documents the relative magnitude of prior period cash flow and working capital accrual effects on forecast errors and stock returns. Our findings have several implications for future research and practice. First, the consistency of results across the two sets of users (analysts and investors) suggests that analyst-forecast inefficiencies are less likely to be driven by their incentives to promote stocks and more likely to be a manifestation of a broader phenomenon that has not been thoroughly investigated in prior studies. Second, for practitioners, our results suggest that a trading strategy based on prior period working capital accruals and cash flows would earn higher abnormal returns than a trading strategy based on accruals alone.     

Robust anomalies? A close look at accrual‐based trading strategy returns

The last 40 years have seen an extensive literature documenting so‐called anomalies in major capital markets. Evidence of ‘abnormal’ returns associated with trading strategies based on readily observable phenomena such as accounting‐based data involves experimental design choices that can be expected to influence the results. We show how evidence of an accrual anomaly in Australia is sensitive to research design specifications such as the choice of proxy for total accruals; the definition of abnormal returns (i.e. the return generating model); the impact of data trimming as a response to exceptionally large returns; and the choice between value and equal weighting of returns. We show that research design choices do matter and help reconcile conflicting prior evidence of any accrual anomaly in Australia. More broadly, our results suggest the need for caution in drawing inferences from trading strategy tests which claim to identify anomalies.     

The accrual anomaly in Europe: The role of accounting distortions

Numerous studies claim that the accrual anomaly in the U.S. stock market is due mostly to temporary accounting distortions arising from accrual accounting. We examine the validity of this explanation in an international setting. Across the 15 developed European equity markets we examine, accounting distortions contribute to the negative relation between accruals and future earnings performance in 14 equity markets. Further, we show that the negative relation between accruals and stock returns could be at least attributable to accounting distortions. In particular, accruals related to accounting distortions predict returns in 7 out of the 9 markets where the accrual anomaly occurs in Europe. Finally, we show that the impact of accounting distortions on the pricing of the accrual component of earnings is stronger in markets with a higher level of trust and a lower level of secrecy.     

Analyst cash flow forecasts and pricing of accruals

This paper investigates how analyst cash flow forecasts affect investors' valuation of accounting accruals. We find that the strength of the accrual anomaly documented in Sloan (1996) is weaker for firms with analyst cash flow forecasts, after controlling for idiosyncratic risk, transaction costs and firm characteristics associated with the issuance of cash flow forecasts. We further show that this reduction in mispricing of accounting accruals is at least partially attributed to the improved ability of investors to price earnings manipulations imbedded in accruals. We investigate several non-mutually exclusive alternative explanations for this improvement in investors' ability and demonstrate that the increased investor attention and the improved accuracy of analyst earnings forecasts both contribute to the mitigation of the accrual anomaly.     

The accrual anomaly: Australian evidence

This paper investigates whether there is evidence of the accrual anomaly ( Sloan, 1996 ) in Australia, whereby investors overestimate the impact of accruals on the persistence of earnings. While our results provide general support for the existence of the anomaly in Australia, there are a number of idiosyncrasies. First, there is evidence of Australian investors underestimating the persistence of earnings. Second, there is evidence of investors incorrectly assessing the implications of accruals and cash flows for the persistence of earnings (i.e. an accrual anomaly and a cash‐flow anomaly). Third, returns to a hedged portfolio trading strategy based on reported accruals are decreasing over the three‐year period subsequent to portfolio formation. Furthermore, they are statistically significant only in the first year. Additional analysis of the hedge portfolio results indicates that these results are primarily attributable to a limited number of firm‐year observations in the extreme positive tail of returns.     

Accrual mispricing: Evidence from European sovereign debt crisis

PurposeThis paper examines the accrual anomaly on the European market and the impact of the financial crisis on its dynamics.Design/methodology/approachUsing a sample of public European firms, during the period 2005-2016, this paper follows Sloan (1996) seminal work and measures accruals as Dechow, Sloan and Sweeney (1995).FindingsThere is no evidence that accrual anomaly persists on European markets. The study shows that, contrary to previous research, investors are not underweighting the accrual component of earnings and that accruals are not a good predictor of future stock returns.Research limitations/implicationsOur study has two limitations. First, due to the lack of data, the original sample was reduced to about one third. Second, results must be interpreted carefully since the sample period may be seen as an outlier case attributed to the crisis. Research on future years may unveil a conclusion on this.Practical implicationsResults suggest that transaction costs and idiosyncratic risk are no longer a barrier to investors. Results also point toward a possible new outcome in investor´s behaviour during crisis. Economically, given the lower returns that can be obtained on today markets, it makes sense that investors may reduce their risk aversion levels to get more returns.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the ongoing debate about accruals anomaly and market efficiency. To the best of our knowledge, it provides an original contribution to the literature by framing the accrual anomaly during the European debt crisis.     

How does the corporate bond market value capital investments and accruals?

This paper examines whether the mispricing of accruals documented in equity markets extends to bond markets. The paper finds that corporate bonds of firms with high operating accruals underperform corporate bonds of firms with low operating accruals. In the first year after portfolio formation, the underperformance is 115 basis points using an accrual measure that includes capital investments and 93 basis points using an accrual measure that is based only on working capital investments. The Sharpe ratios of the zero-investment bond accrual portfolios are comparable to those of the corresponding zero-investment stock accrual portfolios. The results are also robust to risk adjustments based on both a factor model consisting of the Fama and French (J. Financial Econ 33 (1993) 3) stock and bond market factors and a characteristics model based on bond ratings and duration. Cross-sectional Fama–MacBeth regressions that use individual bond data and control for stock and bond issuances in addition to ratings and duration also confirm the time-series portfolio findings. Overall, our results reveal an accrual anomaly among bonds similar to that observed among stocks.

Are investment and financing anomalies two sides of the same coin?

It is commonly believed that the negative financing-return anomaly is associated with the negative investment-return anomaly. The purpose of this research is to thoroughly investigate this issue to answer the question of whether the return predictabilities based on investment and financing activity are interrelated and share the same underlying cause. We find that investment and financing activities are only weakly correlated and that the profitability profiles surrounding these two activities differ. After controlling for the book-to-market ratio, high investment firms are more profitable than low investment firms, while high financing firms are less profitable than low financing firms. In addition, the investment-return relation weakens after controlling for financing, while the financing-return relation remains significant after controlling for investment. Our evidence suggests that the investment-return relation does not explain the external financing anomaly.     

The persistence of earnings and cash flows and the role of special items: Implications for the accrual anomaly

We argue that high accruals are likely to be the outcome of rules with an income statement perspective, while low accruals are likely to be the outcome of rules with a balance sheet perspective, and that this has implications for the properties of earnings. Specifically, earnings persistence is affected both by the magnitude and sign of the accruals. Accruals improve the persistence of earnings relative to cash flows in high accrual firms, but reduce earnings persistence in low accrual firms. We show that the low persistence of earnings in low accrual firms is primarily driven by special items. We then show that special item-low accrual firms have higher future stock returns than other low accrual firms. This is consistent with investors misunderstanding the transitory nature of special items. Further analysis reveals that special item-low accrual firms have poor past performance and declines in investor recognition (analyst coverage and institutional holdings). Special items continue to explain future returns after controlling for these factors.     

Accrual and cash flow accounting models: A comparison of the value relevance and timeliness of their components

This research uses the empirical framework developed by Easton, Harris and Ohlson (1992) to examine the relative ability of the accrual and cash flow accounting models to capture value relevant events. In particular, components of clean surplus accrual earnings are compared with components of total cash flows to determine their relative abilities to recognise value relevant events in a timely manner. The results indicate that the association between stock returns and earnings is higher than that with total cash flows for return intervals of between one and ten years. Cash flows from operations and current accruals are able to recognise value relevant events in a timely manner, while non-current and non-operating accruals only become consistently value relevant when longer return intervals are considered. Cash flows from investing and financing activities are less value relevant than the other components considered, especially over longer return intervals.     

An Analysis of the Theories and Explanations Offered for the Mispricing of Accruals and Accrual Components

Numerous accounting studies claim that investors fail to rationally price accrual‐related information and that investors are functionally fixated. This study documents the importance of performing robustness tests when testing economic or behavioral explanations for apparent accounting‐related security mispricing. We find that performing robustness tests that exclude a small number of firm‐year observations (approximately 200 firm‐year observations or about 1% of the entire sample) reveals an inverted U‐shaped relation between buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns and total accruals. An inverted U‐shaped relation is inconsistent with the functional fixation (earnings fixation) hypothesis. We conduct similar robustness tests for the abnormal accrual anomaly and the net operating assets anomaly proposed by other investigators, and also find an inverted U‐shaped relation between buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns and abnormal accruals and net operating assets. These findings are inconsistent with the explanations put forth by those investigators. Such evidence leads us to conclude that the accrual‐related anomalies are unlikely to be due to investors' inability to process accounting information, as suggested by the functional fixation hypotheses tested.     

Accrual mispricing,value-at-risk,and expected stock returns

We investigate the extent to which a parsimonious measure of maximum likely loss that captures the tail risk of returns—known as value-at-risk (VaR)—explains the relationship between accruals and the cross-sectional dispersion of expected stock returns. We construct portfolios based on Sloan’s (Account Rev 71(3):289–315, 1996) total accruals (TA) measure and individual asset-level VaR, which reflects the dynamic behavior of the asset distribution. We document that VaR is in congruence with portfolio-level accruals and that there is a significant positive relationship between VaR and the cross-section of portfolio returns. Allowing a double-sort involving VaR and TA further suggests that the spread between low- and high-TA portfolios is significantly attenuated after controlling for VaR. We also conduct a firm-level cross-sectional regression analysis and demonstrate that the TA- and VaR-based characteristics—but not the factor-mimicking portfolios—are compensated with higher expected returns, and that VaR neither subsumes nor is subsumed by TA. Finally, our cross-sectional decomposition analysis suggests that the firm-level VaR captures at least 7% of the accrual premium even in the presence of size and book-to-market. These findings lend support for the mispricing explanation of the accrual anomaly.

     

Is the accrual anomaly robust to firm-level analysis?

This study investigates whether firm-level accrual mispricing exists and if such mispricing is persistent. Our results show both under and overpricing of accruals that persevere. Specifically, we show that a trading strategy going a dollar long (short) in underpriced (overpriced) accrual firms yields significant abnormal returns in most years investigated. We examine whether firm characteristics such as size, analyst following and real activities management can explain why some firms are mispriced and others not. Our findings show that firm-level mispricing differs from that documented at the country-level. Whilst the country-level anomaly seems to have diminished; the firm-level accrual anomaly remains.     

Analyst Earnings Forecast Revisions and the Pricing of Accruals

We investigate the relation between two market anomalies to provide insights into analysts role as information intermediaries. Prior research finds that accruals and analyst earnings forecast revisions predict future returns. We find that the accrual and forecast revision strategies generate hedge returns of 15.5% and 5.5% when implemented independently. Strikingly, a combined strategy that uses forecast revisions to refine the accrual strategy generates a hedge return of 28.5%. Firms with consistent accrual and forecast revision signals have less persistent accruals and earnings. We also find that accruals can be used to refine the forecast revision strategy—high accruals are associated with overoptimism in analyst forecasts. Our findings indicate that although forecast revisions reflect information about accrual and earnings persistence beyond that reflected in the level of current year accruals, investors do not fully incorporate this information into their valuation assessments.