Search results

Though stock portfolio return autocorrelation is well documented in the literature, its cause is still not clearly understood. Presently, evidence of private information induced stock return autocorrelation is still very limited. The difficulty in obtaining foreign country information by small investors makes the private information of institutional investors in the ADR (American Depository Receipt) market more significant and influential. As such, the ADR market provides a favorable environment for testing the effect of private information on return autocorrelation. The purpose of this paper is to address this issue.

In this paper, ADRs are sorted annually into three groups based on market equity capitalization. Within each capitalization group, ADRs are further sorted into three groups based on the fraction of shares held by institutional investors. Each ADR is assigned to one of the nine groups and group membership is rebalanced each year. The return autocorrelation of individual ADR securities and ADR portfolios for each group are then calculated.

The results demonstrate that ADR individual stock and portfolio daily return autocorrelations are positively related to institutional ownership. It is also found that other explanations, such as non‐synchronous trading, bid‐ask spread and volatility of ADR, cannot explain the positive relation between daily return autocorrelations and institutional ownership of ADR.

Since ADR market is more suitable than other markets for testing the role of private information, stronger and clearer results are got accordingly. This paper suggests that trading strategy based on private information of institutional investors can lead to stock return autocorrelation in ADR daily returns.

This study aims to analyze the effect of ownership structure that consists of managerial ownership and institutional ownership of the extensive of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure.

The population in this study is manufacturing companies listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI), as the manufacturing companies are considered to have great potential on environmental damage (Mathews, 2000). The selected sample were the companies which meet certain criteria (purposive sampling) which published the complete annual financial statements from 2011 to 2015. This study used an analysis method using partial least square (WarpPLS) to assess the effect of the structure of ownership consists of managerial ownership and institutional ownership on the extent of the CSR disclosure.

The results showed that there is a direct effect of a negative and significant correlation between managerial ownership on CSR disclosure, and there is a direct effect of a positive and significant correlation between institutional ownership on CSR disclosure.

Originality of this paper shows PLS (WarpPLS) that applied to determine the effect between variables managerial and institutional ownership on CSR disclosure. This research is collected data financial statements and annual reports of manufacturing companies obtained from the Indonesia Capital Market Reference Center (PRPM), which is located in the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX), which there has not been research by the methods and the same location.

This study aims to explore the moderating role of institutional ownership in the impact of auditor industry specialization and the cost of equity on earnings management in Tehran Stock Exchange.

A total number of 198 firms were assessed in this study from 2014 to 2021. In this study, both accrual earning management (AEM) and real earnings management (REM) have been included. The industry-adjusted earnings price ratio and Gordon Growth Model were used for the cost of equity capital. In addition, auditor’s within-industry market share was used as a proxy for auditor industry specialization.

The results showed that institutional ownership positively moderates the impact of auditor industry specialization on AEM/REM. Furthermore, institutional ownership positively moderates the impact of cost of equity on AEM/REM. Hypothesis testing based on a robust regression and t + 1 test were also used for the results.

Previous studies have reported mixed results of this empirical question whether institutional ownership actually monitors managers and control earning management, considering the auditor industry specialization and the cost of equity. To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is a pioneering study to fill the existing gap. This study would not only benefit companies to manage financial and strategic decisions more efficiently but also help national and international society apply effective mechanisms to assist companies in decreasing earning management and increasing the firm performance, and try to push the market into a favorable direction.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain determining factors of ownership concentration and institutional portfolio ownership in the listed firms of an emerging market during pre-crisis and post-crisis periods and find variations in determining factors between the two varying market conditions.

This paper considers 316 listed firms for the pre-crisis period and 408 firms for the post-crisis period, from the NIFTY-500. Pre-crisis period ranges from FY2000-01 to FY2007-08 and post-crisis period ranges from FY2009-10 to FY2016-17. Two-step GMM is utilized to test the hypotheses by controlling the unobserved heterogeneity and endogeneity issues.

Higher investment and stock market growth leads to ownership dispersion in both the market conditions. Industry information asymmetry leads to dispersion in pre-crisis, while improves concentration in post-crisis phase. Firm size, legal environment and economic growth are found to be a positive determinant of institutional ownership irrespective of market conditions. Institutional investment proliferates with higher stock liquidity and PE ratio, while declines with augmented firm risk, current ratio and stock market turnover during post-crisis phase.

Policymakers should construct a robust legal environment and focus to improve economic conditions to boost institutional ownership. Corporate executives should concentrate to increase stock liquidity and earnings of the firms, and lower market risk to draw more institutional portfolio investments.

This study would enrich emerging governance literature since studies on the determining factors of ownership holdings are limited in the emerging world. It adds novelty by capturing two different market conditions such as pre-crisis and post-crisis phases to obtain the time-dependent and time-independent determinants. It adds uniqueness by considering the determinants of institutional ownership, which is scarce in ownership studies.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the level of compliance with, and disclosure of, good corporate governance (CG) practices among UK publicly listed firms and consequently ascertain whether board characteristics and ownership structure variables can explain observable differences in the extent of voluntary CG compliance and disclosure practices.

This study uses one of the largest data sets to-date on compliance and disclosure of CG practices from 2008 to 2013 containing 120 CG provisions drawn from the 2010 UK Combined Code relating to 100 UK listed firms to conduct multiple regression analyses of the determinants of voluntary CG disclosures. A number of additional estimations, including two stage least squares, fixed-effects and lagged structures, are conducted to address the potential endogeneity issue and test the robustness of the findings.

The results suggest that there is a substantial variation in the levels of compliance with, and disclosure of, good CG practices among the sampled UK firms. The authors also find that firms with larger board size, more independent outside directors and greater director diversity tend to disclose more CG information voluntarily, whereas the level of voluntary CG compliance and disclosure is insignificantly related to the existence of a separate CG committee and institutional ownership. Additionally, the results indicate that block ownership and managerial ownership negatively affect voluntary CG compliance and disclosure practices. The findings are fairly robust across a number of econometric models that sufficiently address various endogeneity problems and alternative CG indices. Overall, the findings are generally consistent with the predictions of neo-institutional theory.

This study extends, as well as contributes to, the extant CG literature by offering new evidence on compliance with, and disclosure of, good CG recommendations contained in the 2010 UK Combined Code following the 2007/2008 global financial crisis. This study also advances the existing literature by offering new insights from a neo-institutional theoretical perspective of the impact of board and ownership mechanisms on voluntary CG compliance and disclosure practices.

This study aims to test the asymmetric impact of institutional ownership on firm performance. This study does it through an examination of the hypotheses of efficient monitoring and convergence of interests from the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE).

Using a panel smooth transition regression model, as a new econometric technique, this paper examined the data to explore the asymmetric impact of institutional ownership on firm performance. With regard to 177 firms for the period 2009 to 2018 from TSE. Performance proxies are returned on asset (ROA), return on equity (ROE) and Tobins’ Q.

The empirical for three performance proxies results strongly rejected the null hypothesis of linearity and the test for no remaining nonlinearity indicated a model with one transition function and one threshold parameters. The first regime (levels of institutional ownership below 28.5% and 43.5% for ROA and Tobins’ Q) showed that performance increases with institutional ownership while the trend was reversed in the second regime (levels of institutional ownership above 28.5% and 43.5% for ROA and Tobins’ Q percent). Also, institutional shareholders percent between 4.2 and 14.1 explain the positive relationship between institutional shareholders and ROE.

Furthermore, the findings of this study suggest that the application of institutional ownership theories calls for more inquiry.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the impact of board financial expertise on the shareholding of foreign institutional investors in an emerging equity market of China and to explore whether ownership concentration moderates the relationship between board financial expertise and foreign institutional investment.

To test the hypothesized relationships, this study uses panel data regression models, i.e. static (fixed effect and random effect) and dynamic (two-step generalized methods of moments) models. Further, to control the possible endogeniety issue, this study uses two instrumental variables, namely, board size and industry average financial expertise of board to proxy board financial expertise. This study covers a period from 2006 to 2015 for 169 listed Chinese firms.

The results revealed that foreign institutional investors positively perceived board financial expertise and holds more shareholdings with the increasing level of financial experts at boards of directors. Moreover, ownership concentration positively moderated this relationship. It means that in highly concentrated firms, the board financial expertise conveys a stronger signal to foreign institutional investors that firms can manage financial resources rationally by controlling negative effects of ownership concentration. Further, the robustness model also confirmed the relationship between board financial expertise and foreign institutional shareholdings.

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to investigate board-level financial expertise as a determinant of foreign institutional ownership. Further, no previous study has used ownership concentration as a contextual variable on the relationship between board financial expertise and foreign institutional investment.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption complements corporate governance factors (e.g. ownership structure) in monitoring managers’ discretional behavior in an emerging market context.

The paper relies on a sample of listed companies in the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, South Africa and the Philippines during an eight-year period on average (four years of pre-adoption period and four years of post-adoption period).

The authors find no evidence of lower earnings management after the switch to IFRS reporting, suggesting that managerial discretional behavior is insensitive to a firm’s IFRS adoption. However, the authors document effective monitoring role of a firm’s ownership structure on earnings management. More interestingly, institutional investors are effective in constraining earnings management when holding a high level of ownership. Moreover, the effect of blockholders and institutional blockholders varies as their ownership rises following a non-linear pattern.

First, the assumption that discretionary accruals are adequate measure of earnings management may be criticized in different ways. Second, the findings, performed on listed companies in the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, South Africa and the Philippines, should be interpreted with caution and cannot be generalized to all emerging market countries.

Standards setters and market authorities should be aware of earnings management determinants to set adequate and fitting accounting standards limiting opportunistic behavior of managers and mainly to set up training programs to accounting professionals improving the IFRS implementation. Moreover, considering specific features of firms in emerging market countries related to ownership structure, international investors may rely on such criteria to evaluate firms. Finally, auditors should be aware of different incentives for earnings management in order to be able to detect eventual manipulation of accounting earnings.

This paper provides a timely contribution to the continuous debate of the effect of IFRS adoption on earnings management in a poorly exploited setting, emerging market context. When investigating, additionally, the eventual non-linear effect of institutional ownership, block ownership, institutional block ownership and non-institutional block ownership on earnings management, a major contribution is that it brings to light the finding of a differential influence of ownership levels on earnings management.

The study aims to investigate the comparatively under‐researched relationship between ownership structure and capital structure in an emerging market. It is also one of the first studies to apply both single and reduced‐form equation methods using a panel data approach. Design/methodology/approach – The study applies econometrics modelling using both single equation and reduces equation models for panel data.

The results demonstrate that Jordanian firms follow the same determinants of capital structure as occur in developed markets, namely: profitability, firm size, growth rate, market‐to‐book ratio, asset structure and liquidity. In addition, institutional ownership structure is found to be determined by: assets structure, business risk (BR), growth opportunities and firm size. Finally, the results reveal that assets tangibility, firm size, growth opportunities and BR are considered to be joint determinants of ownership structure and capital structure.

The practical implication of the study is that investors and managers should consider both capital structure and ownership structure when they take their investment decisions.

This is the first study of the interaction between institutional ownership and capital structure in Jordan where there are differences, as regards institutional and financial structures, relative to those in developed markets.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the firm’s capital market benefits in a high-quality information setting. More specifically, the authors address the question of whether the commonly documented IFRS benefits are capable of influencing inducing shareholders to increase their equity investment in adopting firms.

This study is performed on publicly listed firms in three emerging countries, namely, Morocco, South Africa and Turkey. The design of the ownership database allows a panel analysis for the years 2001 through 2011. The trend approach is suitable to account for concurrent effects that are unrelated to financial reporting while controlling for time-lasting behavior of investors. Overall, a minimum of four-year periods before and after the IFRS adoption date are warranted.

Overall, the findings support evidence of increases in equity holdings following a firm’s IFRS adoption. More specifically, institutional investors and institutional blockholders (both domestic and foreign) invest more heavily in the stocks of the firms that have committed to IFRS. By contrast, the authors fail to report evidence for ownership by blockholders and controlling shareholders.

The current empirical work should be of value to international investors, policy makers and market authorities. As for international investors facing reduced information disadvantage and comparable financial information across worldwide markets, they will find it easier to select and invest in value-creating stocks. This study may be useful for policy makers in acquiring a clear view of advantages, challenges and relevance of IFRS adoption to emerging markets. In particular, this study contributes to an understanding of potential capital market consequences of IFRS adoption. Furthermore, market authorities should be aware of the importance of institutional framework to enhance IFRS implementation and usage.

This work contributes to the ongoing empirical research on the intended capital market benefits of IFRS. The authors provide deeper insight into shareholdings changes of a number of key investors in a context where supply and demand of information are stained with asymmetry and mostly, influenced by differences in accounting practices. A major contribution of this study is the use of a methodological approach that outperforms commonly used approaches in the way how it considers concurrent events (compared to the shift specification) and time-lasting investor behavior (compared to the difference-in-differences analysis).