Search results

Historical stock prices have long been used to evaluate a stock’s future returns as well as the risks associated with those returns. Similarly, historical dividends have been used to evaluate the intrinsic value of a stock using, among other methods, a dividend discount model. In this chapter, we propose an alternate use of the dividend discount model to enable an investor to assess the risks associated with a particular stock based on its dividend history. In traditional applications of the dividend discount model for stock valuation, the value of a stock is the net present value of its future cash dividends. We propose an alternative approach in which we calculate the internal rate of return for a stream of future cash dividends assuming the current stock price. We use a bootstrapping approach to generate a stream of future cash dividends, and use a Monte Carlo simulation approach to run multiple trials of the model. The probability distribution of the internal rates of return obtained from the simulation model provides an investor with an expected percentage return and the standard deviation of the return for the stock. This allows an investor to not only compare the expected internal rates of return for a group of stocks but to also evaluate the associated risks. We illustrate this internal rate of return approach using stocks that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

Are share markets too volatile? While it is difficult to ignore share market volatility it is important to determine whether volatility is excessive. This paper replicates the Shiller (1981) test as well as applying standard time series analysis to annual Australian stock market data for the period 1883 to 1999. While Shiller’s test suggests the possibility of excess volatility, time series analysis identifies a long‐run relationship between share market value and dividends, consistent with the share market reverting to its fundamental discounted cash flow value over time.

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.

As one of the main purposes of financial statements is to provide relevant information for investors, relationships between share prices and accounting variables have been widely researched. Early studies focus mainly on earnings, but attention has turned in recent years to valuation models that include the book value of the equity. Many of these studies cite the residual income model as their theoretical base and, with the growing emphasis on shareholder value, residual income measures are more commonly used in the business community to track financial performance. Given such trends, the purpose of this paper is to review the theoretical background of the residual income model and discuss results of empirical studies that use it.

The study seeks an understanding of how published accounting information relates to share prices in the 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.

The findings imply that, the two accounting variables summarising the balance sheet and the income statement, respectively, are significant factors in the valuation process, and that managers are justified in using the accounting system as a primary source of information for monitoring financial performance.

These findings should be of interest to other researchers, and to managers and investors who currently use or are planning to use residual income to monitor business performance.

This paper aims to propose a new valuation method for income producing properties. The model originally called cyclical dividend discount models (d’Amato, 2003) has been recently proposed as a family of income approach methodologies called cyclical capitalization (d’Amato, 2013; d’Amato, 2015; d’Amato, 2017).

The proposed methodology tries to integrate real estate market cycle analysis and forecast inside the valuation process allowing the appraiser to deal with real estate market phases analysis and their consequence in the local real estate market.

The findings consist in the creation of a methodology proposed for market value and in particular for mortgage lending determination, as the model may have the capability to reach prudent opinion of value in all the real estate market phase.

Research limitation consists mainly in a limited number of sample of time series of rent and in the forecast of more than a cap rate or yield rate even if it is quite commonly accepted the cyclical nature of the real estate market.

The implication of the proposed methodology is a modified approach to direct capitalization finding more flexible approaches to appraise income producing properties sensitive to the upturn and downturn of the real estate market.

The model proposed can be considered useful for the valuation process of those property affected by the property market cycle, both in the mortgage lending and market value determination.

These methodologies try to integrate in the appraisal process the role of property market cycles. Cyclical capitalization modelling includes in the traditional dividend discount model more than one g-factor to plot property market cycle dealing with the future in a different way. It must be stressed the countercyclical nature of the cyclical capitalization that may be helpful in the determination of mortgage lending value. This is a very important characteristic of such models.

This study will examine the impact of cash dividends on the market value of banks listed in Middle East and North African (MENA) emerging countries during the period 2000–2015.

The current study adopts residual income approach based on Ohlson's (1995) valuation model. By testing different statistical techniques, fixed effect is applied on panel data for (144) banks listed on 11 MENA stock markets over the period 2000–2015. Furthermore, additional tests are applied to confirm the primary results.

The analysis reveals that current dividend payouts and dividend yield do not provide information relevant to the establishment of market values in MENA emerging markets; thus, they have no material impact on MENA banks' market values. This lack of current dividend payment effect is consistent with Miller and Modigliani (1961) dividend irrelevance assumption: there is no evidence of either an informational or real cash inflow effect of current dividend payments. The findings of this study can be attributed to the fact that MENA banks may be forced to place more emphasis on allocating money for investment instead of paying dividends given them they are subject to liquidity requirements for investment, expansion, general operations and compliance with regulations. Only after all these financial needs are covered can the remaining surplus be distributed as cash dividends. Therefore, cash dividends represent earnings residual rather than an active decision variable that impacts a firm's market value. This is consistent with the residual dividend hypothesis, which is the crux of Miller and Modigliani (1996) irrelevance theory of dividends.

The current study is restricted to a sample of one type of financial firms, banks, because of the problem of missing data and limited information related to other financial firms for the same period. Therefore, further research could be additional types of financial firms such as insurance firms that play a vital role in MENA emerging economies.

The results of this study have some important implications for banks' dividend policymakers. Dividend policymakers in MENA emerging markets seem to follow residual dividend policy, in which they distribute dividends according to what is left over after all acceptable investment opportunities have been undertaken. This makes for inconsistent and unstable dividend policy trends, making it difficult for investors to predict future dividend decisions. Further, this practice may deliver information to shareholders about a lack of positive future investment opportunities, and this may negatively affect the share value of banks.

This study is the first of its kind – up to the author's knowledge – that examines a large cross-country sample of MENA banks (144) to cover a long time period in the recent past, and, more importantly, after the banking sector in the region has experienced major transformations during last two decades. In addition, most of the MENA region countries included in this study, namely, banks, operate in tax-free environments (there are neither taxes on dividends nor on capital gains). This feature adds complexity to the ongoing dividend debate.

We tested for evidence of stock price bubbles in the Malaysian stock market from 1978 to 2004. Four different tests were used namely excess volatility tests, unit root/co-integration tests, duration dependence tests, and the intrinsic bubbles model. All four tests indicate that during the sample period, there was evidence of stock price bubbles. All tests results conform to the theoretical literature on asset price bubbles except for the results on the intrinsic bubbles model, which concludes that Malaysian investors under react to information on dividends. We find this result hardly surprising as anecdotal evidence does indicate that Malaysian investors place more importance on capital gains as compared to dividends. Although we do not go into a debate on whether authorities should be prick the bubble to stem its negative effects, we argue that transparent information dissemination will ensure that the stock market becomes more efficient in pricing stocks.

The purpose of this paper is to survey the accounting concepts of valuation and the direction of accounting research in terms of development of valuation models. It also simulates some of the models. Moreover, the Dividend Discount Model, a financial model, is the foundation of a number of accounting based models and is discussed.

The objectives are achieved by surveying the literature for accounting models and empirical evidence for the model. The methodology also incorporates simulating the models under different conditions to find out the valuation predicted.

It was found out that the accounting models predict that accrual principles play a role in increasing the discrepancy between the book value and the market value of equity. Some of the recent valuation models, like the Feltham–Ohlson linear information model, incorporate accrual principles like conservatism. Though the empirical evidences are mixed for these models, it provides a theoretical framework to incorporate accrual principles in the accounting valuation models.

This paper provides practitioners with a snapshot of different models and their limitations.

This paper provides a comprehensive picture of the state of accounting valuation models and provides input for further development of these models.

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.

This paper aims to investigate the relevance of two groups of valuations models as follows: the accounting models based on the residual income (RIM) and the standard market model, on equity price, return and volatility relevance.

The models are tested on companies traded on Palestine exchange from 2009 to 2018, using panel regression analysis. Two-price and two-return models derived from RIM to compare with the market model and four volatility models.

The standard RIM outperformed other models in equity price modeling. The dividend discount model (DDM) outperformed the rest of the models in terms of return estimation. However, the authors find that the market model can explain equity variance better than RIM and DDM models.

For investors, market beta does not necessarily capture all relevant factors of value and traditional financial statements are still important in providing relevant information and different models are used for different values perspectives (price, return and volatility).

Previous studies focus on comparing the price and return relevance of accounting-based models (RIM and cash flow models). Three aspects differentiate this paper and contribute to its originality, namely, the uniqueness of the context, incorporating the market model into the picture along with the accounting-based models and adding Volatility dimensions of relevance.