A study of the reliability of cross-sectional earnings forecasting models for estimating IPO firms’ implied cost of capital

Purpose This study aims to evaluate the earnings forecasting models of Hou et al. (J Account Econ, 53:504–526, 2012) and Li and Mohanram (Rev Account Stud, 19:1152–1185, 2014) in terms of bias and accuracy and validity of the implied cost of capital (ICC) estimates for a sample of initial public offerings (IPOs). Design/methodology/approach The authors use a sample of 1,657 NYSE, Amex and Nasdaq IPOs from 1972 to 2013. Findings The models of Hou et al. and Li and Mohanram produce relatively inaccurate and biased earnings forecasts, leading to unreliable ICC estimates, particularly for small and loss-making IPOs that constitute the bulk of new listings. As a remedy, the authors propose a new earnings forecasting model, a combination of Hou et al.’s and Li and Mohanram’s earnings persistence models, and show that it produces more accurate and less biased earnings forecasts and more valid ICC estimates. Originality/value The study contributes novel results to the literature on the validity of cross-sectional earnings models in forecasting IPO firm earnings and estimating the ICC. The findings are directly relevant for practitioners, who can improve their earnings forecasting accuracy for IPO firms and related ICC estimates. The insights can be extended to other settings where investors have limited access to financial information, such as acquisitions of private targets.

Is the new issue puzzle real? Evidence from implied cost of capital

PurposeThis study aims to provide new explanation of the new issue puzzle.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses market implied cost of capital (ICC), rather than ex post realized returns, as proxy for ex ante expected returns, and sheds new light on the question why initial public offering (IPO) firms underperform the market within a 3–5 years period after the offerings.FindingsUsing ICC, the author finds that the market expects to earn higher risk premium for new listing firms than similar firms, which is contradictory to the documented new issue puzzle. The higher expected returns come from higher idiosyncratic volatility for newly listed firms, which are young and have more growth opportunities. The author also reports that investors are negatively surprised by lower-than-expected performances of newly listed firms.Originality/valueThe author’s results provide new empirical evidence that the new issue puzzle does not exist. Previous results observed IPO firms' under-performance is attributable to that ex post realized returns are a noisy proxy for ex ante expected returns, especially for newly listed firms with limited information.

Company Reputation, Implied Cost of Capital and Tax Avoidance: Evidence from Korea

This study aims to investigate the relationship between company reputation and the implied cost of capital in Korean companies from 2003 to 2016, based on research by Cao et al. (2015). In addition, we would like to examine the effect of tax avoidance. Company reputation increases corporate sustainability and enables sustainable management. In this study, Brandstock Top Index (BSTI), which represents Korea’s top 100 brands, was used as an interest variable representing company reputation. To examine the relationship between company reputation and implied cost of capital, the multiple linear regression analysis was conducted using various measures of implied cost of capital as a dependent variable. As a result of empirical analysis, company reputation and implied cost of capital showed a significant negative relationship. The higher the company’s reputation, the less information asymmetry in the stock market, indicating that the implied cost of capital decreases. A significant negative relationship between company reputation and implied cost of capital was not found in a group that was aggressive in tax avoidance. The contributions of this study are as follows. First, we presented the empirical result that company reputation and implied cost of capital were negatively related in Korea. It showed empirically the importance of company reputation in the Korean stock market. Second, in addition to the relationship between company reputation and implied cost of capital, prior research was expanded considering tax avoidance.

The Small-Sized Premium: Is It Really Relevant? Evidence from the European Equity Market

The valuation of a company reflects the expected return or equivalently, the cost of capital that investors demand in exchange for the risk assumed. Despite the ex-ante nature of the problem, the majority of empirical analysis has focused on factors explaining expected returns from an ex-post perspective. In this paper, we take a different approach and try to identify which factors are ex-ante included in discount rates, with particular attention to the so-called size premium. Starting from observed market capitalisations and company fundamentals, we obtain the implied cost of capital from the reverse engineering of a carefully designed fundamental valuation model. Panel data regressions are used to investigate the existence of a relation between the implied cost of capital and the firm’s size, including other control variables representative of the most cited asset pricing “anomalies”. Our sample comprises European non-financial stocks listed on primary markets, with half-yearly observations starting from the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis. Contrary to common wisdom, we find that the firm’s size has no tangible impact to explain the implied cost of capital.