Search results

In this study, we rely on the profitability of EP (earnings‐to‐price ratio) trading rules to infer the quality of earnings. Under the extrapolation hypothesis (Lakonishok, Shleifer, and Vishney 1994), the profitability of an EP trading rule that is based on higher quality earnings (i.e., earnings that are more representative of the fundamental profit generating power of the firm), should have higher return predictability. Among the four specifications of the EP ratio examined, i.e., the conventional earnings‐to‐price, core earnings‐to‐price, gross margin‐to‐price, and ex‐ante earnings‐to‐price, we find that core earnings‐to‐price and gross margin‐to‐price significantly outperform the other two in predicting returns. This result suggests that investors view the earnings components that reflect the fundamental operation of the firm, such as sales, to be of higher quality than the rest. Further, the evidence indicates that an EP trading rule based on gross margin‐to‐price generates an abnormal return not fully explained by the market, size, and book‐to‐market.

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 paper provides evidence that will help stock market participants interpret sell‐side analyst buy/sell recommendations. We examine whether recommendation levels (e.g. buy) correspond with traditional predictors of the underlying stock's performance, and whether recommendation revisions (e.g. an upgrade) are consistent with news analysts receive. Consistent with theory, we find that more optimistic recommendations are associated with higher mean forecast errors, forecast revisions, and forecasted earnings‐to‐price ratios. However, contrary to expectations, they also have higher market‐to‐book ratios, higher market values, and lower ratios of value to price (Lee et al. 1999). These results are probably driven by specific differences between buys and the less optimistic recommendations, as holds and sells are rarely distinguishable from each other. Our recommendation revision findings are consistent with our expectations. Upgrades have significantly larger earnings forecast errors, earnings forecast revisions, and unexpected earnings growth than do reiterations or downgrades.

This paper empirically examines whether dividends are value‐relevant in Japan by employing Ohlson’s (1995) accounting‐based equity valuation technique. The substantial U.S.‐based literature on dividends has confirmed the signalling role of dividends in mitigating information asymmetry between managers and investors, and is consistent with an environment characterized by dispersion of ownership. However, the most important corporate governance characteristic that distinguishes Japan from the U.S. is the predominance of inter‐corporate, interlocking ownership in Japan, which reduces information asymmetry and is therefore likely to diminish the role of dividends in mitigating such asymmetries. Pooled regression results provide evidence consistent with this hypothesis. However, even in such an environment, dividends are value relevant for firms that incur losses whilst paying dividends, and also for firms with permanent earnings.

This paper aims to examine the conditional and nonlinear relationship between price-earnings (P/E) ratio and payout ratio. A common finding of previous studies using linear regression model is that the P/E ratio is positively related to the dividend payout ratio. However, none of them investigates the condition under which the positive relationship holds.

This paper uses the fixed effects model to investigate the conditional and nonlinear relationship between P/E ratio and payout ratio. With the inclusion of fundamental factors and investor sentiment, this model allows for nonlinear relationship to be conditioned on the return on equity and the required rate of return.

Based on the annual data of industries in the USA over the period of 1998-2014, this paper produces new evidence indicating that when the return on equity is greater (less) than the required rate of return, the P/E ratio and dividend payout ratio exhibit a negative (positive) relationship and positive (negative) convexity.

Due to the curvature relationship between P/E ratio and payout ratio, the corporate managers and stock investors should pay more attention to the reduction in payout ratio than the rising payout ratio and the companies with low payout ratios than the companies with high payout ratios.

No previous study has tackled the issue of conditional and nonlinear relationship between P/E ratio and payout ratio. This paper attempts to fill the gap by allowing for nonlinear relationship conditional on the relative values of the return on equity and the required rate of return.

Past studies have shown that investment strategy using two popular metrics, the earnings‐price ratio (EP) and book‐to‐market ratio (BM) enable investors to reap abnormal returns. More recent development of another ratio, economic value‐added‐to‐market value (EVAM) can be seen as a hybrid of EP and BM ratios. The purpose of this study is to examine whether portfolios created by utilizing the EVAM ratio will generate higher returns than portfolios formed with EP or BM ratios.

Utilizing the EVA data obtained from Stern Stewart & Co. and financial data from COMPUSTAT and center for research in security prices (CRSP), portfolios are created following the Fama and French portfolio formation methodology. The authors form separate portfolios using EP, BM or EVAM ratios where firms are ranked by a ratio in year t, then split into deciles. Then portfolios are constructed in year t + 1 for each decile and equally weighted portfolio returns are calculated. The cumulative ten‐year returns are compared between portfolios formed with EP, BM and EVAM ratios.

There are three interesting findings. One, the EP portfolios depict results that have long been documented. That is, value stock (low price‐to‐earnings ratio firms) and growth stocks (high price‐to‐earnings ratio) exhibit the highest returns. Two, the ten BM portfolio performances are not statistically different. Three, the EVAM ratios indicate that the negative EVAM (lowest decile) portfolio exhibit the highest return and the second highest return is generated by the highest EVAM portfolio. The general results of the thirty portfolios show that the highest EVAM ratio (EVAM10) performs the best. However, the pairwise mean differences between EP, BM and EVAM portfolios do not show statistical differences over the 1995–2004 period.

Although investment strategies using EP ratio and BM ratio have been thoroughly studied, investment strategy using EVAM ratio has not. Given that it has been documented that EVA is a better conceptual measure of value, portfolio managers or investors would be interested to know whether utilizing EVA for investment strategy would earn a higher return than strategies that use EP or BM ratios.

The ratio between share price and current earnings per share, the Price Earning (PE) ratio, is widely considered to be an effective gauge of under/overvaluation of a corporation’s stock. Arguably, a more reliable indicator, the Cyclically Adjusted Price Earning ratio or CAPE, can be obtained by replacing current earnings with a measure of permanent earnings i.e. the profits that a corporation is able to earn, on average, over the medium to long run. In this study, we aim to understand the cross-sectional aspects of the dynamics of the valuation metrics across global stock markets including both developed and emerging markets. We use a time varying DCC model to exploit the dynamics in correlations, by introducing the notion of value spread between CAPE and the respective Market Index from 2002 to 2014 for 34 countries. Value spread is statistically significant during the 2008 crisis for asset allocation. The signal can be utilized for better asset allocation as it allows one to interpret the common movements in the stock market for under/overvaluation trends. These estimates clearly indicate periods of misvaluation in our sample. Furthermore, our simulations suggest that the model can provide early warning signs for asset mispricing in real time on a global scale and formation of asset bubbles.

A large number of empirical studies investigate the determinants of price-earnings (P/E) ratio by focusing on fundamental factors. However, there has been an increasing concern that stock valuation is also driven by investor sentiment. This paper aims to extend the existing literature by exploring whether investor sentiment impacts the P/E ratio.

The paper examines the determinants of P/E ratio by applying latent variable models with investor sentiment as a latent variable and several fundamental factors as control variables. Investor sentiment is proxied by trading volume, advance-decline ratio and price volatility.

Using annual data of the US industries over the period of 1998-2014, the current paper produces new empirical evidence that investor sentiment significantly affects the P/E ratio. This result is robust to the inclusion of several control variables that have been documented to explain the P/E ratio.

The findings have important implications for investors, as downplaying sentiment can lead to significant errors in making equity investment choices based on the P/E ratio.

The analytical framework of the current paper is differentiated from the conventional analysis in which the P/E ratio is regressed against control variables and proxies for sentiment, thus falling into the trap of implicitly presupposing that proxies are perfect measures of investor sentiment. As all proxies may have measurement errors to the true but unobservable investor sentiment, the current paper uses latent variable models to shed new light on the influence of investor sentiment on the P/E ratio.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of S&P 500 index fund money flow on the valuations of companies that are constituents of the index and those that are not.

To examine the impact of passive investing on corporate valuations, the authors run panel regressions of price‐to‐earnings ratio on aggregate money flow into S&P 500 index funds and control for various accounting variables that impact price‐to‐earnings ratio. These regressions involve two samples of stocks. The first sample consists of S&P 500 constituents. The second consists of large‐cap stocks that are not constituents of the S&P 500. The authors also run a set of separate regressions with price‐to‐book ratio rather than price‐to‐earnings ratio as the dependent variable.

It is found that the valuations of S&P 500 constituents increased by 139 to 167 basis points relative to nonconstituents, depending on valuation metric, due to S&P 500 index fund money flow when evaluated at mean values of money flow and valuation metrics. The valuations of firms within the S&P 500 index respond positively to changes in S&P 500 index fund money flow while the valuations of firms outside the index do not. Additionally, the impact of money flow on valuations persists the month after the flow occurs, suggesting that the impact does not dissipate over time.

Mispricings among individual stocks arising from index fund investing may reduce the allocative efficiency of the stock market and distort investors' performance evaluations of actively managed funds.

The paper is the first to explore the long‐run relationship between S&P 500 index fund money flow and corporate valuations.