The Change in Financial Analysts' Forecast Attributes for Value and Growth Stocks


Book Description

This research will concentrate on the changes in earnings forecasts, forecast accuracy and forecast dispersion for growth and value stocks after Reg FD. Each topic is presented in a separate essay. The first essay tests if growth and value stock returns respond more to forecasted earnings changes than they do to changes in earnings and whether these stock returns respond in a different fashion before and after Reg FD. This phenomenon is stronger for growth stock portfolio strategies than it is for value stock portfolios. After Reg FD, the overall impact of earnings expectations on stock returns is smaller, especially for growth stock returns. The second essay examines financial analysts' earnings forecast accuracy in value and growth stocks before and after the introduction of Reg FD. Accuracy for both stock groups (value and growth stocks) has improved after the introduction of Reg FD. The results in this essay provide additional evidence indicating that analysts did not just misinterpret available news but consciously tried to maintain relationships with managers. However, Reg FD efficiently limited these relationships between managers of growth firms and analysts so that the monetary advantage from manipulating earnings forecasts before the introduction of Reg FD no longer exists. The third essay evaluates the hypothesis stating that forecast dispersion, on both growth and value stock returns, has increased after the introduction Reg FD. However, the increased dispersion found at the second quarter of 2001 drastically dissipates at the second quarter of 2002, although value stock forecast dispersion before earnings announcement and value stock belief jumbling remain higher. The results in this essay suggest that corporate voluntary disclosure created a greater variety of opinions and, therefore, more uncertainty about value stocks. Also, value stock returns have a stronger inverse relationship with dispersion because financial analysts have become more uncertain about value firms' performance. The bigger the disagreement about a stock's value, the higher the market price relative to the true value of the stock, and the lower its future return.













Three Essays in Finance


Book Description

This dissertation research comprises three essays in finance. The first essay shows how dynamic institutional trading constraints related to capital, diversification, and short- selling asymmetrically affect the incorporation of new information as reflected in the Permanent price impact of their trades. The sign of the permanent price impact asymmetry between institutional buys versus sells is positive at the initial stage of a price run-up and reverses due to changing constraints with a prolonged price run-up in a stock. Idiosyncratic volatility, analyst forecast dispersion, trading intensity, price dispersion, and bullish market conditions further sharpen the initial asymmetry, as well as its reversal after a price run-up. The second essay we provide a new explanation for the post-earnings announcement drift (PEAD). We hypothesize that the PEAD results from information production and the drift observed is a movement towards the changes in expectations and not an under-reaction or delayed response to the earnings announcement. We create a new measure that captures the changes in expectations over and above the earnings surprise. Our proxy is based on annual EPS forecasts by equity research analysts and takes into consideration both the responsiveness and the magnitude of the net changes in EPS forecasts. A long-short trading strategy based on portfolios formed using our new measure generates higher returns compared to portfolios formed based on the earnings surprise measure. Most importantly, the earnings surprise based portfolio rankings lose its significance in explaining the PEAD when considered together with our new measure based portfolio ranking. In the third essay, we study trading by institutional investors around delayed disclosures. A disclosure is said to be delayed if there is a gap between the event date and the actual announcement of the event. We show that connected institutional trading can predict the information contained in these events, prior to it being disclosed.




Essays on Predicting and Explaining the Cross Section of Stock Returns


Book Description

My dissertation consists of three chapters that study various aspects of stock return predictability. In the first chapter, I explore the interplay between the aggregation of information about stock returns and p-hacking. P-hacking refers to the practice of trying out various variables and model specifications until the result appears to be statistically significant, that is, the p-value of the test statistic is below a particular threshold. The standard information aggregation techniques exacerbate p-hacking by increasing the probability of the type I error. I propose an aggregation technique, which is a simple modification of 3PRF/PLS, that has an opposite property: the predictability tests applied to the combined predictor become more conservative in the presence of p-hacking. I quantify the advantages of my approach relative to the standard information aggregation techniques by using simulations. As an illustration, I apply the modified 3PRF/PLS to three sets of return predictors proposed in the literature and find that the forecasting ability of combined predictors in two cases cannot be explained by p-hacking. In the second chapter, I explore whether the stochastic discount factors (SDFs) of five characteristic-based asset pricing models can be explained by a large set of macroeconomic shocks. Characteristic-based factor models are linear models whose risk factors are returns on trading strategies based on firm characteristics. Such models are very popular in finance because of their superior ability to explain the cross-section of expected stock returns, but they are also criticized for their lack of interpretability. Each characteristic-based factor model is uniquely characterized by its SDF. To approximate the SDFs by a comprehensive set of 131 macroeconomic shocks without overfitting, I employ the elastic net regression, which is a machine learning technique. I find that the best combination of macroeconomic shocks can explain only a relatively small part of the variation in the SDFs, and the whole set of macroeconomic shocks approximates the SDFs not better than only few shocks. My findings suggest that behavioral factors and sentiment are important determinants of asset prices. The third chapter investigates whether investors efficiently aggregate analysts' earnings forecasts and whether combinations of the forecasts can predict announcement returns. The traditional consensus forecast of earnings used by academics and practitioners is the simple average of all analysts' earnings forecasts (Naive Consensus). However, this measure ignores that there exists a cross-sectional variation in analysts' forecast accuracy and persistence in such accuracy. I propose a consensus that is an accuracy-weighted average of all analysts' earnings forecasts (Smart Consensus). I find that Smart Consensus is a more accurate predictor of firms' earnings per share (EPS) than Naive Consensus. If investors weight forecasts efficiently according to the analysts' forecast accuracy, the market reaction to earnings announcements should be positively related to the difference between firms' reported earnings and Smart Consensus (Smart Surprise) and should be unrelated to the difference between firms' reported earnings and Naive Consensus (Naive Surprise). However, I find that market reaction to earnings announcements is positively related to both measures. Thus, investors do not aggregate forecasts efficiently. In addition, I find that the market reaction to Smart Surprise is stronger in stocks with higher institutional ownership. A trading strategy based on Expectation Gap, which is the difference between Smart and Naive Consensuses, generates positive risk-adjusted returns in the three-day window around earnings announcements.




Further Evidence on the Relation Between Analysts' Forecast Dispersion and Stock Returns


Book Description

Prior research reports seemingly conflicting evidence and interpretations concerning the relation between dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts and stock returns. Diether et al. (2002) and Johnson (2004) find a negative relation between levels of dispersion in analysts' forecasts and future stock returns. Yet, changes in forecast dispersion are negatively associated with contemporaneous stock returns (L'Her and Suret 1996). We demonstrate that levels and changes in dispersion reflect different theoretical constructs. Changes in dispersion primarily reflect changes in information asymmetry whereas levels of dispersion primarily reflect levels of uncertainty. Further, the uncertainty component of dispersion levels reflects idiosyncratic risk that is negatively associated with future stock returns. These findings provide support for Johnson's (2004) explanation that dispersion levels reflect idiosyncratic uncertainty that increases the option value of the firm and generally refute Diether et al.'s (2002) explanation that dispersion levels reflect information asymmetry.In addition, we reconcile L'Her and Suret's (1996) findings with the findings of Johnson (2004). We find that the negative association between changes in dispersion and contemporaneous stock returns is not due to increased uncertainty but rather increased information asymmetry.