Search results

This study examines the value relevance of recognised and disclosed revaluations of land and buildings for a large sample of Australian firms from 1993 through 1997. In contrast to prior research, we control for risk and cyclical effects and find no difference between recognised and disclosed revaluations, using yearly‐cross‐sectional and pooled regressions and using both market and non‐market dependent variables. We also find only weak evidence that revaluations of recognised and disclosed land and buildings are value relevant.

This paper aims to empirically investigate the market-to-book/return on equity valuation model.

The authors use a worldwide commodities sector panel of 6,323 firms from 69 countries with annual observations from 1999 to 2010 to estimate panel ordinary least squares (OLS), instrumental variables (IV) and quantile regressions. They also measure the impact of return on equity on market-to-book uncovering value versus growth and positive versus negative profitability dimensions.

The new evidence is that the impact of return on equity on market-to-book is time-varying and declining across the years in the sample. There is positive and strong persistence in the market-to-book of companies in this sector worldwide, but value stocks are more persistent than growth stocks. The coefficient of return on equity is positive at the 10th percentile of the market-to-book, but it becomes negative for growth stocks at 90th percentiles. Conditional on negative profitability, the coefficient of return on equity on market-to-book is negative for growth stocks. The effect of the S&P500 volatility index (VIX) is negative, significant and large in magnitude, but declines in absolute value, as the quantiles increase toward the upper 90th percentile.

The commodities sector is important for countries that depend on it for development.

The paper provides a rich panel data approach, and the market-to-book/return on equity valuation model is naturally applied to the commodities sector, as this sector tends to have more tangibles relative to intangibles.

This paper examines whether earnings and its components are relevant and sufficient to bridge the gap between banks' market and book values, and also considers if bank efficiency is “value relevant” for banks valuation.

This paper follows the value relevance literature methodology which tests for the difference between book and market values using a variety of indicators including net income and its components as well as bank efficiency (derived using DEA) and risk indicators. The regression models are estimated using OLS, random and fixed effects approaches for a sample of listed Jordanian banks between 1993 and 2004.

The main findings of this paper are twofold. First, it is found that earnings (and its components) are value relevant and explain the gap between market and book values. Secondly, cost efficiency, as an economic performance measure, provides incremental information, not contained directly in banks financial statements, to the market. Overall it is found that the components of net income are more important than aggregate net income in explaining bank value. Furthermore, bank operational efficiency adds incremental information in explaining the gap between market and book value. These results support the view that stock prices aggregate signals received by the market as well as from firm's accounting systems.

The study shows that bank efficiency indicators (along with more traditional accounting measures) help explain market values.

This is one of only a limited number of studies that link bank efficiency to market valuation. It is the first, we believe, to do this for banks operating in an emerging economy.

The purpose of the paper is to offer some advancing in the understanding of the market-to-book value (MBV) gap (or ratio) as the symptom and the metrics for intellectual capital (IC) value, and to discuss the major criticisms against it. The original contribution of the paper lies in developing the analysis of the meaning of the MBV from a theory-of-the-firm perspective. Such an approach is employed to shed light on the two sides of MBV: book and market values.

The paper reviews research on MBV and the theory of the firm, employing a deductive approach that explores criticisms and advantages of the use of the MBV gap as the symptom and the metrics of IC according to a specific theory of the firm.

The paper finds that the presumption that an “accounting fallacy” exists, which refers to the gap between market and book values, must be revised depending on the chosen theory of the firm. In fact, depending on the theory of the firm to which IC scholars refer, book value could not necessarily equate to market value, even if the latter was unbiased. Again, market value could not be able to express the value of IC.

Implications of the paper are mainly for improving consistency in research, but they also support practice for consciousness and awareness. Limitations are the following. First, the paper offers an analysis of just three selected theories of the firm. Second, the analysis is based on a deductive reasoning that can be criticised for results even if not for the aim. Third, one could feel that an IC-centred theory of the firm does not yet exist at all.

Once reasons for abandoning the misbelief that accounting standards should be set in order to close the gap are highlighted, research on IC can move towards more appropriate goals. On the basis of the criticism presented in the paper, empirical research, which makes use of market and book data, could be carried out in a much more consistent way in relation to theoretical background. The paper highlights how the use of the MBV approach can lead to mistakes without a clear reference to the theory of the firm.

The paper focuses on the meaning of the MBV from a theory-of-the-firm perspective, assisting the researcher in avoiding potential mistakes and inconsistencies in their work, and also suggesting some consequences on the practice of IC.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether investors value the future growth from acquisitions and the subsequent realisations thereof accurately.

The paper calculates conventional and adjusted market-to-book ratios and investigates abnormal cumulative returns over 20 quarters after portfolio formation for a sample of Standard & Poor’s 500 firms using a hedge portfolio and regression approach.

Hedge portfolios formed using adjusted market-to-book ratios underperform conventional hedge portfolios over a five-year period. Dividing the hedge into its comprising elements reveals that the underperformance of the adjusted hedge is mainly caused by weaker returns from value firms.

Findings are specific to large firms in a specific setting, and future research is needed to determine if findings are equally applicable to other situations. Findings imply that investors underrate the growth from new acquisitions and overrate the extent to which this has materialised.

The paper highlights that the extrapolation of future growth rates should be carefully considered in any equity valuation of a firm with current or past acquisitions.

This paper shows that inaccurate valuation of the growth of new acquisitions and the realisation thereof is at least partially responsible for the value versus growth phenomenon. It shows that the accounting information could be improved and highlights the importance of extrapolating past growth rates with care.

Daniel and Titman (1997) contend that the Fama‐French three‐factor model’s ability to explain cross‐sectional variation in expected returns is a result of characteristics that firms have in common rather than any risk‐based explanation. The primary aim of the current paper is to provide out‐of‐sample tests of the characteristics versus risk factor argument. The main focus of our tests is to examine the intercept terms in Fama‐French regressions, wherein test portfolios are formed by a three‐way sorting procedure on book‐to‐market, size and factor loadings. Our main test focuses on ‘characteristic‐balanced’ portfolio returns of high minus low factor loading portfolios, for different size and book‐to‐market groups. The Fama‐French model predicts that these regression intercepts should be zero while the characteristics model predicts that they should be negative. Generally, despite the short sample period employed, our findings support a risk‐factor interpretation as opposed to a characteristics interpretation. This is particularly so for the HML loading‐based test portfolios. More specifically, we find that: the majority of test portfolios tend to reveal higher returns for higher loadings (while controlling for book‐to‐market and size characteristics); the majority of the Fama‐French regression intercepts are statistically insignificant; for the characteristic‐balanced portfolios, very few of the Fama‐French regression intercepts are significant.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the connection between the accrual quality and the growth/value characteristics (and their return premia) at firm level.

The paper employs a battery of univariate and multivariate cross‐sectional tests. Fama‐MacBeth regressions with main effects and interaction effects are used to identify the relation between accrual quality, book‐to‐market and returns. The analysis is conducted on the overall sample, as well as after conditioning on up and down markets.

Value (growth) stocks are more likely to be associated with high (low) accrual quality. Value stocks earn higher returns mainly in down markets, while poor accrual quality firms have significantly higher returns during up markets, but significantly lower returns during down markets. There is a significant interaction effect between accrual quality and the value premium, which only exhibits in the down markets (i.e. stocks with poor accrual quality earn a higher value premium in down markets than stocks with good accrual quality).

Results in this paper help disentangle between various explanations proposed for the accrual quality premium and the value premium. These findings are consistent with the idea that the same underlying risk factor generating the value premium also generates the cross‐sectional variation in accrual quality responsible for the accrual quality premium. From the corporate managers' perspective, the results imply that value firms can mitigate their higher costs of capital by providing high quality of accounting information. From an analyst's perspective, the study suggests that considering both accrual quality and growth characteristics can help make better portfolio allocation decisions than when these are considered separately.

This study documents that high book‐to‐market (value) and low book‐to‐market (glamour) stock prices react asymmetrically to both common and firm‐specific information. Specifically, we find that value stock prices exhibit a considerably slow adjustment to both common and firm‐specific information relative to glamour stocks. The results show that this pattern of diferential price adjustment between value and glamour stocks is mainly driven by the high arbitrage risk borne by value stocks. The evidence is consistent with the arbitrage risk hypothesis, predicting that idiosyncratic risk, a major impediment to arbitrage activity, amplifies the informational loss of value stocks as a result of arbitrageurs’ (informed investors) reduced participation in value stocks because of their inability to fully hedge idiosyncratic risk.

Earlier studies establish a positive relationship between volatility index (VIX) and the stock index returns. These studies are mainly restricted to developed markets and research in this regard in emerging markets is scarce. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap.

The paper studies the direct and cross‐sectional relationship of India VIX in relation to three important parameters: viz., stock beta, market to book value of equity and market capitalization. The paper constructs value weighted portfolio sorted on the basis viz., stock beta, market to book value of equity and market capitalization. The paper employs three‐factor multiple regression to find out the results.

The paper finds that India VIX has a positive and significant relationship with the returns of the value‐weighted high‐low portfolios sorted on the basis of the above parameters. The paper examines the behavior of India VIX in the presence of the above two parameters. The India VIX yields a positive and significant relationship with the above sorted portfolio returns.

India VIX was recently introduced in November, 2007 and therefore the research is expected to suffer from small sample bias.

The findings suggest India VIX is a distinct risk factor capable of predicting the price discovery mechanism of the market.

In the rapidly expanding emerging markets the introduction of Volatility Index is a recent phenomenon. Research in this regard is scarce, particularly in the area of finding predictive ability of the Volatility Index. This research is in this direction and would definitely help the market regulators and policy‐makers with their understanding of the market and market direction. It would help them to correct the market imbalances and avert crisis, which has been recently witnessed.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of equity market misvaluation on manager behavior. Using a sample of 535 French-listed over 2000–2018, the authors analyze whether corporate investment decision is sensitive to equity market overvaluation.

The study adopts market-to-book (M/B) decomposition developed by Rhodes-Kropf and Viswanathan (2004, RKV) that proxies for market misvaluation at the firm and industry levels. The authors conducted a long-term performance analysis via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors tested the relationship between equity misvaluation, corporate investment decisions and equity issuance. The authors ran several robustness tests.

The empirical results show that equity market misvaluation affects corporate investment positively as the stock price deviates further away from its fundamental. Based on market timing theory, the authors find that corporate investment occurs in periods of high valuation motivated by equity issuance to benefit from the low cost of capital. This effect is more prominent for financially constrained firms. Consistent with the catering channel, the authors find that the misvaluation-investment nexus is more pronounced in firms with short-horizon investors. By examining the stocks’ long-term performance of misvalued firms, via a sorting portfolio procedure, the authors find that undervalued firms outperform and generate higher abnormal returns (Jensen’s alpha) than overvalued firms, suggesting that mispricing-driven investment appear to be short-lived and lead to lower return in the long term.

Corporate decision-makers and governance structures should pay attention to the rationality of the corporate investment decision in the context of equity market misvaluation. Managers who focus on maximizing the stock market value in the short-run at the expense of its long-term performance must give preference to value-creating investment, not driven by an external mechanism such as equity market mispricing. More generally, investors and portfolio managers must take into account the market mispricing process in decision-making. Nonetheless, from the portfolio sorting perspective, decision-makers must act in terms of high governance quality to mitigate suboptimal investment due to stock market mispricing (Jensen, 2005). Finally, equity market overvaluation, leading managers to invest via equity financing in particular, should be a signal to attract investors’ attention to seize the window of opportunity and embark on a short-term portfolio strategy. Such a strategy promises high returns in the short term.

This paper investigates jointly two theoretical channels: equity market timing and catering. The authors propose for the analysis three components of the M/B decomposition to dissociate market misvaluation at the firm and industry level from the fundamental component of market value (growth). This procedure provides a better understanding of the role of firm and industry misvaluation in explaining corporate investments. The authors provide evidence of the equity market misvaluation via a portfolio sorting procedure and a Carhart (1997) four-factor pricing model. The authors examine the effect of misvaluation on both the investment and the financing decisions.