Changes in Internal Control Disclosure and Analyst Forecasts Around Mandatory Disclosure Required by the China SOX

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 43-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xudong Ji ◽  
Wei Lu ◽  
Wen Qu ◽  
Vernon J. Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Internal Control ◽  
Forecast Error ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Analyst Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Listed Firms ◽  
Analyst Earnings ◽  
Basic Standard ◽  
Jel Classifications

SYNOPSIS Beginning January 1, 2012, all publicly listed firms in China are required, under the Basic Standard of Enterprise Internal Control (China SOX), to provide an internal control report (ICR). Prior to that, many firms had elected to voluntarily comply with this regulation. We examine the change in internal control disclosure regimes and its impact on the properties of analyst earnings forecasts. We compare the quantity and severity of ICWs disclosed under voluntary versus mandatory regimes, and find evidence suggesting that the disclosure of more serious ICWs increases when ICW disclosures become mandatory. We then investigate the effect of ICW disclosures on analyst forecast error and dispersion. We find that measures of ICWs are negatively associated with desirable properties of analyst earnings forecasts. We also find a less positive association between ICW disclosures and forecast error and dispersion in the mandatory regime. JEL Classifications: G34; G38; M41.

Stock Splits: Tests of the Earnings Signaling and Attention Directing Hypotheses Using Analyst Forecasts and Revisions

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Doran
Keyword(s):  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Specific Level ◽  
Future Earnings ◽  
Earnings Information ◽  
Stock Split ◽  
Forecast Revision ◽  
Earnings Performance ◽  
Signaling Hypothesis

The major findings of this study are: (1) earnings performance of splitting firms is favorable relative to preevent longterm analyst (Value Line) forecasts; (2) analysts significantly revise earnings forecasts upward in response to stock split announcements; and (3) in the case of stock split announcing firms, there is a high correlation between future earnings performance and analyst forecast revision. These findings indicate that stock split announcements convey “permanent” earnings information to the market, and security analysts scrutinize the earnings signal at the firm specific level. The results support both the earnings signaling hypothesis and the attention directing hypothesis concerning stock split events.

Discussion: “Dispersion in Analysts' Earnings Forecasts as a Measure of Uncertainty”

1998 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence D. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Stock Price ◽  
Annual Report ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Earnings Forecast ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Forecast Dispersion ◽  
Forecast Revision ◽  
Analyst Earnings ◽  
The Impact

This paper tackles an interesting question; namely, whether dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts reflects uncertainty about firms' future economic performance. It improves on the extant literature in three ways. First, it uses detailed analyst earnings forecast data to estimate analyst forecast dispersion and revision. The contrasting evidence of Morse, Stephan, and Stice (1991) and Brown and Han (1992), who respectively used consensus and detailed analyst data to examine the impact of earnings announcements on forecast dispersion, suggest that detailed data are preferable for determining the data set on which analysts' forecasts are conditioned. Second, it relates forecast dispersion to both analyst earnings forecast revision and stock price reaction to the subsequent earnings announcement. Previous studies related forecast dispersion to either analyst forecast revision (e.g., Stickel 1989) or to subsequent stock price movements (e.g., Daley et al. [1988]), but not to both revision and returns. Third, it includes the interim quarters along with the annual report. In contrast, previous research focused on the annual report, ignoring the interims (Daley et al. [1988]).

scholarly journals Are Analysts Overoptimistic about the Prospects of Sin Firms?

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Zhang ◽  
Haeyoung Shin
Keyword(s):  
Stock Price ◽  
Forecast Accuracy ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Negative Association ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Earnings Forecast ◽  
Absolute Value ◽  
Forecast Bias ◽  
The Difference

We investigate the association between the bias and accuracy of consensus analysts’ earnings forecasts and whether a firm is a sin firm or not. We measure analyst forecast bias as the difference between the consensus earnings forecast and the actual earnings, scaled by the stock price. We measure analyst forecast accuracy as the negative of the absolute value of the difference between the firms’ forecasted and actual earnings, scaled by the stock price. We find a positive association between the level of forecast optimism and sin firm membership. We find a negative association between the level of forecast accuracy and sin firm membership. Overall, these results imply that analysts tend to issue over-optimistic and less accurate earnings forecasts on sin firms.

Private lenders' use of analyst earnings forecasts when establishing debt covenant thresholds

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Call ◽  
John Donovan ◽  
Jared Jennings
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecasts ◽  
Debt Contracts ◽  
Private Debt ◽  
Debt Contracting ◽  
Variable Approach ◽  
Debt Covenant ◽  
Analyst Earnings ◽  
Instrumental Variable Approach

We examine whether lenders use analyst forecasts of the borrower's earnings as inputs when establishing covenant thresholds in private debt contracts. We find that, among debt contracts that include an earnings covenant, earnings thresholds are set closer to analyst forecasts when analysts have historically issued more accurate earnings forecasts. These results are robust to firm fixed effects and an instrumental variable approach. Further, we find that, following a plausibly exogenous decline in the availability of analyst earnings forecasts, debt contracts are less likely to include earnings covenants. Our evidence is consistent with lenders using analyst earnings forecasts as an input when establishing debt covenant thresholds and suggests sell-side analysts play a role in debt contracting.

I/B/E/S Reported Actual EPS and Analysts' Inferred Actual EPS

2012 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 853-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence D. Brown ◽  
Stephannie Larocque
Keyword(s):  
Majority Rule ◽  
Forecast Accuracy ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Earnings Forecast ◽  
Sample Period ◽  
Forecast Dispersion ◽  
Forecast Revisions ◽  
Earnings Surprises ◽  
Analyst Earnings

ABSTRACT Users of I/B/E/S data generally act as if I/B/E/S reported actual earnings represent the earnings analysts were forecasting when they issued their earnings estimates. For example, when assessing analyst forecast accuracy, users of I/B/E/S data compare analysts' forecasts of EPS with I/B/E/S reported actual EPS. I/B/E/S states that it calculates actuals using a “majority rule,” indicating that its actuals often do not represent the earnings that all individual analysts were forecasting. We introduce a method for measuring analyst inferred actuals, and we assess how often I/B/E/S actuals do not represent analyst inferred actuals. We find that I/B/E/S reported Q1 actual EPS differs from analyst inferred actual Q1 EPS by at least one penny 39 percent of the time during our sample period, 36.5 percent of the time when only one analyst follows the firm (hence, this consensus forecast is based on the “majority rule”), and 50 percent of the time during the last three years of our sample period. We document two adverse consequences of this phenomenon. First, studies failing to recognize that I/B/E/S EPS actuals often differ from analyst inferred actuals are likely to obtain less accurate analyst earnings forecasts, smaller analyst earnings forecast revisions conditional on earnings surprises, greater analyst forecast dispersion, and smaller market reaction to earnings surprises than do studies adjusting for these differences. Second, studies failing to recognize that I/B/E/S EPS actuals often differ from analyst inferred actuals may make erroneous inferences.

CEO Age and Financial Reporting Quality

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 725-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Wei Huang ◽  
Ena Rose-Green ◽  
Chih-Chen Lee
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Financial Reporting Quality ◽  
Financial Restatements ◽  
Ceo Age ◽  
Analyst Earnings

SYNOPSIS: This study examines the association between chief executive officer (CEO) age and the financial reporting quality of firms. The financial reporting qualities examined are the meeting or beating of analyst earnings forecasts and financial restatements. Based on extant research, we hypothesize that older CEOs are associated with higher-quality financial reporting. Using a sample of 3,413 firms for the period 2005 to 2008, we find a positive association between CEO age and financial reporting quality. Specifically, we find that CEO age is negatively associated with firms meeting or beating analyst earnings forecasts and financial restatements. Our study therefore extends the corporate governance and financial reporting quality literature by identifying CEO age as a determinant of financial reporting quality. Data Availability: Data are publicly available.

Do Investors Fully Unravel Persistent Pessimism in Analysts' Earnings Forecasts?

2017 ◽  
Vol 93 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Veenman ◽  
Patrick Verwijmeren
Keyword(s):  
Stock Returns ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Market Prices ◽  
Earnings Expectations ◽  
Earnings Surprises ◽  
Announcement Returns ◽  
Low Probability ◽  
Jel Classifications

ABSTRACT This study presents evidence suggesting that investors do not fully unravel predictable pessimism in sell-side analysts' earnings forecasts. We show that measures of prior consensus and individual analyst forecast pessimism are predictive of both the sign of firms' earnings surprises and the stock returns around earnings announcements. That is, we find that firms with a relatively high probability of forecast pessimism experience significantly higher announcement returns than those with a low probability. Importantly, we show that these findings are driven by predictable pessimism in analysts' short-term forecasts, as opposed to optimism in their longer-term forecasts. We further find that this mispricing is related to the difficulty investors have in identifying differences in expected forecast pessimism. Overall, we conclude that market prices do not fully reflect the conditional probability that a firm meets or beats earnings expectations as a result of analysts' pessimistically biased short-term forecasts. JEL Classifications: G12; G14; G20.

Audit Quality and Analyst Forecast Accuracy: The Impact of Forecast Horizon and Other Modeling Choices

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi (Ava) Wu ◽  
Mark Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Forecast Accuracy ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecasts ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Analyst Forecast ◽  
Forecast Horizon ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
Decision Usefulness ◽  
The Impact

SUMMARY The accuracy and other properties of analyst earnings forecasts represent potentially useful proxies for the impact of audit quality on client financial reports. Extant research in the auditing literature, however, is characterized by diametrically opposite predictions and inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between audit quality and analyst forecast accuracy. We argue that a potential reason for the inconsistency in the literature reflects these studies' focus on end-of-year forecast accuracy, which is subject to competing effects of audit quality. High-quality auditors may simultaneously improve forecast accuracy through their impact on the decision usefulness of clients' prior period reports, and reduce forecast accuracy by constraining client attempts to manage earnings in the direction of the consensus forecast. We argue and present evidence in support of the conjecture that analysts' beginning-of-year forecasts are a superior metric for identifying the impact of audit quality on the properties of analyst forecasts because the decision usefulness effect of audit quality should be dominant with respect to those forecasts. Data Availability: Data are available from sources identified in the article.

Annual Earnings Guidance and the Smoothing of Analysts’ Multi-Period Forecasts

2020 ◽  
pp. 0148558X2094557
Author(s):  
Jianchuan Luo ◽  
Joshua Ronen ◽  
Ron Shalev ◽  
Michael (Minye) Tang
Keyword(s):  
Capital Market ◽  
Earnings Forecasts ◽  
Analyst Forecasts ◽  
Earnings Guidance ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Earnings Expectations ◽  
Analyst Earnings ◽  
Annual Earnings ◽  
Market Benefits

This article examines the use of annual earnings guidance as a mechanism used by managers to reduce the volatility of analyst earnings forecasts and allow them to report smooth earnings without missing quarterly analyst forecasts. Facing the pressure to meet or beat analyst forecasts and driven by the perceived capital market benefits of reporting a smooth earnings path, managers attempting to influence investors’ earnings expectations over a longer horizon can issue annual guidance to smooth the time-series path of analyst forecasts, a strategy we term as “expectation smoothing.” Our empirical results suggest that annual guidance reduces the volatility of analysts’ multi-period forecasts, which in turn contributes to a smoother actual earnings and higher likelihood of meeting analysts’ quarterly forecasts. We also find that issuing quarterly guidance does not affect the smoothness of analysts’ earnings expectations and that managers with longer horizons are more likely to issue annual guidance, consistent with the unique long-term effects of annual earnings guidance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document