Search results

The internal factors that influence the decision to change dividend growth rates include two competing models: the earnings and free cash flow models. As far as each of the components of each model is considered, the informative and efficient dividend payout decisions require that managers have to focus on the significant component(s) only. This study examines the cointegration, significance, and explanatory power of those components empirically. The expected outcomes serve two objectives. First, on an academic level, it is interesting to examine the extent to which payout practices meet the premises of the earnings and free cash flow models. The latter considers dividends and financing decisions as two faces of the same coin. Second, on a professional level, the outcomes help focus the management’s efforts on the activities that can be performed when considering a change in dividend growth rates.

This study uses data for the firms listed in two indexes: Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA30) and NASDAQ100. The data cover quarterly periods from 30 June 1989 to 31 March 2011. The methodology includes (a) cointegration analysis in order to test for model specification and (b) classical regression in order to examine the explanatory power of the components of earnings and free cash flow models.

The results conclude that: (a) Dividends growth rates are cointegrated with the two models significantly; (b) Dividend growth rates are significantly and positively associated with growth in sales and cost of goods sold only. Accordingly, these are the two activities that firms’ management need to focus on when considering a decision to change dividend growth rates, (c) The components of the earnings and free cash flow models explain very little of the variations in dividends growth rates. The results are to be considered a call for further research on the external (market-level) determinants that explain the variations in dividends growth rates. Forthcoming research must separate the effects of firm-level and market-level in order to reach clear judgments on the determinants of dividends growth rates.

This study contributes to the related literature in terms of offering updated robust empirical evidence that the decision to change dividend growth rate is discretionary to a large extent. That is, dividend decisions do not match the propositions of the earnings and free cash flow models entirely. In addition, the results offer solid evidence that financing trends in the period 1989–2011 showed heavy dependence on debt financing compared to other related studies that showed heavy dependence on equity financing during the previous period 1974–1984.

In this paper, it is argued that previous estimates of the expected cost of equity and the expected arithmetic risk premium in the UK show a degree of upward bias. Given the importance of the risk premium in regulatory cost of capital in the UK, this has important policy implications. There are three reasons why previous estimates could be upward biased. The first two arise from the comparison of estimates of the realised returns on government bond (‘gilt’) with those of the realised and expected returns on equities. These estimates are frequently used to infer a risk premium relative to either the current yield on index‐linked gilts or an ‘adjusted’ current yield measure. This is incorrect on two counts; first, inconsistent estimates of the risk‐free rate are implied on the right hand side of the capital asset pricing model; second, they compare the realised returns from a bond that carried inflation risk with the realised and expected returns from equities that may be expected to have at least some protection from inflation risk. The third, and most important, source of bias arises from uplifts to expected returns. If markets exhibit ‘excess volatility’, or f part of the historical return arises because of revisions to expected future cash flows, then estimates of variance derived from the historical returns or the price growth must be used with great care when uplifting average expected returns to derive simple discount rates. Adjusting expected returns for the effect of such biases leads to lower expected cost of equity and risk premia than those that are typically quoted.

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).

The authors use a sample of 1,657 NYSE, Amex and Nasdaq IPOs from 1972 to 2013.

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.

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.

Accounting studies have attempted to forecast future attributes of firms' financial statements, primarily earnings. These studies typically adopt a cross‐sectional approach in estimating forecasting models, combining firms from different industries in the same model. This cross‐sectional approach implicitly assumes the relations between earnings and the explanatory variables are consistent across industries.

We evaluate the performance of financial analysts versus naïve models in making long-term earnings forecasts. Long-term earnings forecasts are generally defined as third-, fourth-, and fifth-year earnings forecasts. We find that for the fourth and fifth years, analysts' forecasts are no more accurate than naïve random walk (RW) forecasts or naïve RW with economic growth forecasts. Furthermore, naïve model forecasts contain a large amount of incremental information over analysts' long-term forecasts in explaining future actual earnings. Tests based on subsamples show that the performance of analysts' long-term forecasts declines relative to naïve model forecasts for firms with high past earnings growth and low analyst coverage. Furthermore, a model that combines a naïve benchmark (last year's earnings) with the analyst long-term earnings growth forecast does not perform better than analysts' forecasts or naïve model forecasts. Our findings suggest that analysts' long-term earnings forecasts should be used with caution by researchers and practitioners. Also, when analysts' earnings forecasts are unavailable, naïve model earnings forecasts may be sufficient for measuring long-term earnings expectations.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the roles of earnings and book value (BV) in equity valuation.

The authors apply model’s explanatory power to analyze the roles of accounting data and test the hypotheses empirically with a sample of Chinese listed companies between 2004 and 2010.

The authors find that impact of accounting data on equity value is also dependent on profitability, but the behavior is non-monotonic. In the intermediate-profitability range, explanatory power of both earnings capitalization model and balance sheet model reach the peak, there are no significant differences between them. In the low-profitability range (small or negative profitability), explanatory power of balance sheet model is larger than earnings capitalization model. In the high-profitability range, explanatory power of balance sheet model is less than earnings capitalization model.

The results support that the role of BV is more stable in equity valuation. Moreover, this outcome provides reference for improving existing valuation model and setting accounting standard, and provides some empirical evidence for the practical application of BV in equity valuation.

Existing studies treat earnings as main variable of equity valuation, and BV is only added as a supplement. This paper compares roles of accounting earnings and BV in equity valuation, especially investigates the influence of BV in equity valuation, and fills up the deficiency in the related literature.

The choice of accounting policies by a company has implications for the market’s understanding of corporate performance. Whilst the critical areas of choice may change over time with new developments and changes in standards, the underlying issue remains relevant. This paper examines the effect of accounting techniques upon the relationship between accounting variables and UK share prices.

The fundamental relationship between accounting variables and firm valuation is a recurring theme in capital market research. This paper investigates this relationship within a balance sheet context and highlights the importance of controlling for relevant economic factors. We do this by conditioning explanatory power on the firm's relative financial leverage position, after controlling for cashflows and firm size, and using an arctan regression model to take account of temporary components in cash and earnings flows. Using data for 743 firm‐years for Australian Stock Exchange listed stocks, we find that for firms which are ‘above optimal leverage’: (i) earnings contain a greater level of transitory items, particularly when firm size is small; and (ii) cashflows provide higher incremental information. Our results are consistent with investors perceiving earnings as progressively less informative as the probability of failure increases, and the likelihood of earnings manipulation for the purpose of reducing proximity to debt covenants increases.

The study aims to understand how published accounting information relates to share prices in a developed market in Asia, outside Japan. More specifically, the study aims to extend the international literature in market‐based accounting research by examining empirical evidence on relationships between share prices and the two summary accounting variables of equity book value and earnings for firms listed on the stock exchange in Malaysia.