Section 20 versus investment house underwriting of small equity initial public offerings in the USA

Abstract

This study examines corporate equity initial public offerings (IPOs) underwritten by Section 20 subsidiaries of commercial banks relative to those underwritten by non‐Section 20 underwriters (investment houses). Consistent with a ‘net certification effect’ for banks, corporate equity IPOs underwritten by Section 20 subsidiaries have lower underpricing than those underwritten by investment houses. Secondly, commercial banks brought a relatively larger proportion of small equity IPO issues to market, during the period of this study. Contrary to the contention that universal banking restricts the availability of financing to small firms, bank underwriting appears to benefit small firms. Further, Section 20s do not increase underwriting fees to offset the effect on potential profits from lower underpricing. This study also finds that the focus of Section 20 on small IPOs results in higher quality for the IPOs they underwrite, as indicated by a lower standard deviation of underpricing.

Citation

Beneda, N.L. (2002), "Section 20 versus investment house underwriting of small equity initial public offerings in the USA", Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 372-384. https://doi.org/10.1108/13581980210810355