Worth the Hype? The Relevance of Paid-For Analyst Research for the Buy-and-Hold Investor

Author:

Billings Bruce K.1,Buslepp William L.2,Huston G. Ryan3

Affiliation:

1. Florida State University

2. Texas Tech University

3. University of South Florida

Abstract

ABSTRACT The SEC Advisory Committee on Smaller Public Companies recommends paid-for research to fill the void created by declining sell-side coverage. Potential conflicts of interest inherent in paid-for research challenge this recommendation. We evaluate whether paid-for research provides value to investors or merely reflects hype. Analyses of one- and two-year-ahead paid-for earnings forecasts fail to identify significant bias. Using a portfolio approach, favorable (unfavorable) paid-for recommendations yield positive (negative) stock returns at release, with upward (downward) drift over the following year. Regressing future stock returns on recommendations and valuation estimates using paid-for analysts' forecasts yields similar results. Further, results fail to indicate significant differences in paid-for and matched sell-side research. Overall, our evidence suggests that paid-for research provides relevant information for the buy-and-hold investor that is comparable to that of matched sell-side research, providing empirical support for the SEC Advisory Committee recommendation. JEL Classifications: G11; G14; G24. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.

Publisher

American Accounting Association

Subject

Economics and Econometrics,Finance,Accounting

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. The information externality of paid analysts;Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics;2023-12-30

2. Black mouth, investor attention, and stock return;International Review of Financial Analysis;2023-11

3. Independent analyst research: Does it matter who pays?;Advances in Accounting;2023-09

4. Exogenous Loss of Analyst Coverage and Choice of Audit Quality;Accounting Horizons;2023-03-01

5. Is Audit Partner Identification Useful? Evidence from the KPMG “Steal the Exam” Scandal;AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory;2023-02-17

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3