Do Investors Perceive Marking-to-Model as Marking-to-Myth? Early Evidence from FAS 157 Disclosure

2019 ◽  
Vol 09 (02) ◽  
pp. 1950005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalin S. Kolev

Capitalizing on the disclosure mandated by FAS 157, I examine the equity market’s perception of the reliability of internally generated fair value estimates. For the sample of S&P 1,500 financial institutions for the first three quarters of 2008, I document a significantly positive association between stock price and fair values measured using unadjusted market prices (FAS 157 Level 1), other observable inputs (Level 2), and significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), with valuation coefficients generally increasing in the observability of the measurement inputs. Using the reconciliation of the change in Level 3 net assets, I then directly examine the periodic re-measurement of the fair value estimates and document a significantly positive association between Level 3 net gains and quarterly returns. This result manifests even among observations with thin capital cushion, poorer information environment, and weaker corporate governance. Collectively, the findings are consistent with the conjecture that investors perceive the management-provided, mark-to-model, fair value estimates sufficiently reliable to use in firm valuation and do not discard them as “markings-to-myth.”

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Ettredge ◽  
Yang Xu ◽  
Han S. Yi

SUMMARY: Using publicly traded bank holding company data from 2008 through 2011, this paper documents that the proportions of fair-valued assets held by banks are positively associated with audit fees. The positive association between audit fees and the proportions of total assets that are fair-valued using Level 3 inputs is greater than its positive association with the proportions of total assets that are fair-valued using Level 1 or Level 2 inputs. These results are consistent with a hypothesized scenario in which audit effort increases in the difficulty of verifying asset fair values. We also document that bank specialist auditors, defined as in Behn, Choi, and Kang (2008), charge lower audit fees to bank clients on average, suggesting cost efficiencies passed to clients as lower fees. However, bank expert auditors charge more for auditing the proportions of total assets that are fair-valued. Overall, the results support concerns expressed by some observers that greater use of fair value measurements for financial instruments will trigger increased audit fees. Data Availability: All data used in this study are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1001-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Fortin ◽  
Ahmad Hammami ◽  
Michel Magnan

PurposeThis study examines the long-term link between fair valuation uncertainty and discounts/premia in closed-end funds. This study argues that, in exploring the close-end funds puzzle, prior research generally omits to consider the uncertainty surrounding the measurement of funds' financial disclosure, as reflected in the fair value hierarchy, when investment specialty differs across funds.Design/methodology/approachRegressions were employed to explore how the fair value hierarchy affects closed-end funds' discounts/premia when investment specialty differs. The authors also examine the effects pre- and post-2012 to explore if that relationship changes due to the additional disclosure requirements enacted at the end of 2011.FindingsThe authors find that the three levels of the fair value hierarchy have effects that vary according to a fund's specialty. For equity specialized funds, Level 3 significantly increases discounts and decreases premia, suggesting the impact of valuation uncertainty that underlies Level 3 estimates; this relationship disappears (decreases in severity) for premia (discount) experiencing funds post-2012. In contrast, Level 1 and Level 2 do not have any significant effect on discounts or premia except that post-2012, Level 2 begins to display discount decreasing effects. For bond specialized funds, no significant association was noted between premia and any of the fair value levels except that post-2012, Level 3 begins to display premium increasing effects. However, results are different for discounts. The authors note that Level 1 valuations significantly increase discounts, but only post-2012; Level 2 valuations significantly decrease discounts (pre- and post-2012), consistent with such estimates incorporating unique and relevant information; and Level 3 valuations do not have a significant effect on discounts.Originality/valueThe results of this study revisit prior evidence and indicate that results about the effects of fair value measurement and the closed-end funds' puzzle are sensitive to the period length being considered and the investment specialty of the fund. The authors also note that additional disclosure regarding Level 3 valuation inputs decreases market concern for valuation uncertainty and increases the liquidity benefits of investing in Level 3 carrying funds.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 3012-3028
Author(s):  
Desni Ramadhani ◽  
Nurzi Sebrina

The purpose of this research is to examine the relevance of fair value hierarchy information and the effect of institutional ownership on the relevance of fair value hierarchy information. This research is a causal associative research with a quantitative approach. Research conducted on banking companies listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange period 2015-2018, which were determined by purposive sampling method so that 37 companies were selected as samples. The hypotheses were tests using multiple regression. The results indicate that the fair value level 2 is more relevant than the level 1 and 3, this research proves that the fair value level 2 is relevant for decision making of investor. In subsequent tests, institutional ownership does not have a positive effect on the relevance of fair value level 1, level 2 and level 3.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wray Bradley ◽  
Li Sun

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the relation between managerial ability and fair value inputs (measured as fair value intensity) for nonfinancial firms. Design/methodology/approach This study uses regression analysis to investigate the impact of managerial ability on the level of fair value inputs. Findings This study finds significant and positive relations between managerial ability and use of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value inputs. On the other hand, this study finds an insignificant relation between managerial ability and Level 3 inputs. Originality/value The findings contribute to two research streams. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is perhaps the first study that directly examines the link between managerial ability and fair value inputs.


2015 ◽  
Vol 91 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alastair Lawrence ◽  
Subprasiri Siriviriyakul ◽  
Richard G Sloan

ABSTRACT Prior research examining the ASC 820 fair value hierarchy concludes that Level 3 fair value measurements are significantly less value-relevant than Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements. We reevaluate this conclusion using the closed-end fund setting, in which fair value measurements are available for substantially all assets. Contrary to prior research, we find that Level 3 fair values are of similar value relevance to Level 1 and Level 2 fair values. Our findings suggest that the results in previous research are attributable to correlated omitted variable bias arising from the absence of fair value data for most assets. JEL Classifications: M41; G12; G29. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from sources identified in the article.


Author(s):  
Giulio Anselmi

The paper investigates the impact of fair value accounting for illiquid assets (so-called ‘Level 2’ and ‘Level 3’ assets by accounting rules) on banks’ valuation and focuses on the change in relative weight of Level 3 (the most opaque and illiquid assets) with respect to Level 2 assets. The boundary between Level 3 and Level 2 assets is blurred and less clear than the one between Level 1 and Level 2 assets. Such unclear borderline entails corporate governance issues and provides room for opportunistic behavior by managers to opt for less transparent instruments. The paper proposes the change in Level 3-to-Level 2 assets ratio as a new measure to capture deviations in the opacity of bank assets and suggests a negative relationship between this ratio and bank’s price-to-book value. The rationale behind this relationship is that market participants interpret growth in Level 3-to-Level 2 assets ratio as an increase in bank’s opacity, since Level 3 assets might be as illiquid as Level 2 assets with the benefit of a less transparent model-based valuation technique. Based on a sample of 33 European banks from 2009 to 2018, I find that an increase of 100[Formula: see text]bps in Level 3-to-Level 2 assets ratio is linked to a decrease of about 74[Formula: see text]bps in the price-to-book value. Results are robust for different measures of firm relative valuation and using a different measure of illiquidity in fair value assets holdings (Level 2-to-Level 1 assets ratio).


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Velte

The purpose of this paper is the link between women on management board and the value relevance of fair value accounting according to IFRS 13. The empirical quantitative study covers a sample of German companies listed at the Prime Standard of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange for the business years 2013-2015 (411 firm-year observations). Value relevance is measured by the modified Ohlson (1995) model and we separate fair value accounting in level 1, level 2 and level 3 fair values. Multiple regressions state that female members in the man-agement board do have a positive impact on the value relevance of fair value accounting according to IFRS 13. Surprisingly, gender diversity only has a significant impact on the value relevance of fair valued assets on level 1 and 2 (“mark to market”) but not on level 3 (“mark to model”).


2010 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 1375-1410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang Joon Song ◽  
Wayne B. Thomas ◽  
Han Yi

ABSTRACT: Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 (FAS No. 157), Fair Value Measurements, prioritizes the source of information used in fair value measurements into three levels: (1) Level 1 (observable inputs from quoted prices in active markets), (2) Level 2 (indirectly observable inputs from quoted prices of comparable items in active markets, identical items in inactive markets, or other market-related information), and (3) Level 3 (unobservable, firm-generated inputs). Using quarterly reports of banking firms in 2008, we find that the value relevance of Level 1 and Level 2 fair values is greater than the value relevance of Level 3 fair values. In addition, we find evidence that the value relevance of fair values (especially Level 3 fair values) is greater for firms with strong corporate governance. Overall, our results support the relevance of fair value measurements under FAS No. 157, but weaker corporate governance mechanisms may reduce the relevance of these measures.


Author(s):  
Lania Muharsih ◽  
Ratih Saraswati

This study aims to determine the training evaluation at PT. Kujang Fertilizer. PT. Pupuk Kujang is a company engaged in the field of petrochemicals. Evaluation sheet of PT. Fertilizer Kujang is made based on Kirkpatrick's theory which consists of four levels of evaluation, namely reaction, learning, behavior, and results. At level 1, namely reaction, in the evaluation sheet is in accordance with the theory of Kirkpatrick, at level 2 that is learning should be held pretest and posttest but only made scale. At level 3, behavior, according to theory, but on assessment factor number 3, quantity and work productivity should not need to be included because they are included in level 4. At level 4, that is the result, here is still lacking to get a picture of the results of the training that has been carried out because only based on answers from superiors without evidence of any documents.   Keywords: Training Evaluation, Kirkpatrick Theory.    Penelitian ini bertujuan mengetahui evaluasi training di PT. Pupuk Kujang. PT. Pupuk Kujang merupakan perusahaan yang bergerak di bidang petrokimia. Lembar evaluasi PT. Pupuk Kujang dibuat berdasarkan teori Kirkpatrick yang terdiri dari empat level evaluasi, yaitu reaksi, learning, behavior, dan hasil. Pada level 1 yaitu reaksi, di lembar evaluasi tersebut sudah sesuai dengan teori dari Kirkpatrick, pada level 2 yaitu learning seharusnya diadakan pretest dan posttest namun hanya dibuatkan skala. Pada level 3 yaitu behavior, sudah sesuai teori namun pada faktor penilaian nomor 3 kuantitas dan produktivitas kerja semestinya tidak perlu dimasukkan karena sudah termasuk ke dalam level 4. Pada level 4 yaitu hasil, disini masih sangat kurang untuk mendapatkan gambaran hasil dari pelatihan yang sudah dilaksanakan karena hanya berdasarkan dari jawaban atasan tanpa bukti dokumen apapun.   Kata kunci: Evaluasi Pelatihan, Teori Kirkpatrick.


Atmosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 869
Author(s):  
Xiuguo Zou ◽  
Jiahong Wu ◽  
Zhibin Cao ◽  
Yan Qian ◽  
Shixiu Zhang ◽  
...  

In order to adequately characterize the visual characteristics of atmospheric visibility and overcome the disadvantages of the traditional atmospheric visibility measurement method with significant dependence on preset reference objects, high cost, and complicated steps, this paper proposed an ensemble learning method for atmospheric visibility grading based on deep neural network and stochastic weight averaging. An experiment was conducted using the scene of an expressway, and three visibility levels were set, i.e., Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3. Firstly, the EfficientNet was transferred to extract the abstract features of the images. Then, training and grading were performed on the feature sets through the SoftMax regression model. Subsequently, the feature sets were ensembled using the method of stochastic weight averaging to obtain the atmospheric visibility grading model. The obtained datasets were input into the grading model and tested. The grading model classified the results into three categories, with the grading accuracy being 95.00%, 89.45%, and 90.91%, respectively, and the average accuracy of 91.79%. The results obtained by the proposed method were compared with those obtained by the existing methods, and the proposed method showed better performance than those of other methods. This method can be used to classify the atmospheric visibility of traffic and reduce the incidence of traffic accidents caused by atmospheric visibility.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document