File Download
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Less is more when analysts report bad news

TitleLess is more when analysts report bad news
Authors
Issue Date2012
PublisherThe Financial Management Association.
Citation
The 2012 Annual Meeting of the Financial Management Association (FMA), Atlanta, GA., 17-20 October 2012. How to Cite?
AbstractThis study documents the existence of a positive-negative asymmetry in analysts’ consensus earnings forecast revisions. We find that upward revisions are more informative than downward revisions. After controlling for momentum, extreme downward revisions contain little incremental information compared with moderate downward revisions. The differential richness of information set in good and bad news revisions is more pronounced among bigger, more heavily covered stocks and stocks with higher institutional holding, i.e. stocks typically are more prone to the analyst agency problem. These findings are consistent with the claim that analysts systematically struggle with bad news reporting as conflicts are exacerbated with bad news but are attenuated with good news.
DescriptionSession 166: Sell-Side Analysts
Top Ten Session
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/182132

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChang, ECen_US
dc.contributor.authorLi, Zen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-04-17T07:23:37Z-
dc.date.available2013-04-17T07:23:37Z-
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe 2012 Annual Meeting of the Financial Management Association (FMA), Atlanta, GA., 17-20 October 2012.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/182132-
dc.descriptionSession 166: Sell-Side Analysts-
dc.descriptionTop Ten Session-
dc.description.abstractThis study documents the existence of a positive-negative asymmetry in analysts’ consensus earnings forecast revisions. We find that upward revisions are more informative than downward revisions. After controlling for momentum, extreme downward revisions contain little incremental information compared with moderate downward revisions. The differential richness of information set in good and bad news revisions is more pronounced among bigger, more heavily covered stocks and stocks with higher institutional holding, i.e. stocks typically are more prone to the analyst agency problem. These findings are consistent with the claim that analysts systematically struggle with bad news reporting as conflicts are exacerbated with bad news but are attenuated with good news.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherThe Financial Management Association.-
dc.relation.ispartof2012 FMA Annual Meetingen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.titleLess is more when analysts report bad newsen_US
dc.typeConference_Paperen_US
dc.identifier.emailChang, EC: ecchang@business.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailLi, Z: lizhehk@yahoo.com.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityChang, EC=rp01050en_US
dc.description.naturepostprint-
dc.identifier.hkuros213826en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats