IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/joares/v41y2003i5p745-774.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What's My Line? A Comparison of Industry Classification Schemes for Capital Market Research

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjeev Bhojraj
  • Charles M. C. Lee
  • Derek K. Oler

Abstract

This study compares four broadly available industry classification schemes in a variety of applications common to capital market research. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes have been available since 1939 but are being replaced by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. The Global Industry Classifications Standard (GICS)SM system, jointly developed by Standard & Poor's and Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI), is popular among financial practitioners, whereas the Fama and French [1997] algorithm is used primarily by academics. Our results show that GICS classifications are significantly better at explaining stock return comovements, as well as cross‐sectional variations in valuation multiples, forecasted and realized growth rates, research and development expenditures, and various key financial ratios. The GICS advantage is consistent from year to year and is most pronounced among large firms. The other three methods differ little from each other in most applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjeev Bhojraj & Charles M. C. Lee & Derek K. Oler, 2003. "What's My Line? A Comparison of Industry Classification Schemes for Capital Market Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 745-774, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:41:y:2003:i:5:p:745-774
    DOI: 10.1046/j.1475-679X.2003.00122.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1475-679X.2003.00122.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1046/j.1475-679X.2003.00122.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kahle, Kathleen M. & Walkling, Ralph A., 1996. "The Impact of Industry Classifications on Financial Research," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 309-335, September.
    2. Frankel, Richard & Lee, Charles M. C., 1998. "Accounting valuation, market expectation, and cross-sectional stock returns," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 283-319, June.
    3. Kathleen M. Kahle & Ralph A. Walkling, "undated". "The Impact of Industry Classifications on Financial Research," Research in Financial Economics 9607, Ohio State University.
    4. Alford, Aw, 1992. "The Effect Of The Set Of Comparable Firms On The Accuracy Of The Price Earnings Valuation Method," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 94-108.
    5. Paul Hribar & Daniel W. Collins, 2002. "Errors in Estimating Accruals: Implications for Empirical Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 105-134, March.
    6. Guenther, David A. & Rosman, Andrew J., 1994. "Differences between COMPUSTAT and CRSP SIC codes and related effects on research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 115-128, July.
    7. Subramanyam, K. R., 1996. "The pricing of discretionary accruals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1-3), pages 249-281, October.
    8. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    9. Clarke, Richard N, 1989. "SICs as Delineators of Economic Markets," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(1), pages 17-31, January.
    10. Sanjeev Bhojraj & Charles M. C. Lee, 2002. "Who Is My Peer? A Valuation‐Based Approach to the Selection of Comparable Firms," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 407-439, May.
    11. Jing Liu & Doron Nissim & Jacob Thomas, 2002. "Equity Valuation Using Multiples," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 135-172, March.
    12. James Claus & Jacob Thomas, 2001. "Equity Premia as Low as Three Percent? Evidence from Analysts' Earnings Forecasts for Domestic and International Stock Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(5), pages 1629-1666, October.
    13. Fan, Joseph P H & Lang, Larry H P, 2000. "The Measurement of Relatedness: An Application to Corporate Diversification," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(4), pages 629-660, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2005-062 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Weiner, Christian, 2005. "The impact of industry classification schemes on financial research," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2005-062, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    3. Lee, Charles M.C. & Ma, Paul & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2015. "Search-based peer firms: Aggregating investor perceptions through internet co-searches," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 410-431.
    4. Brickley, James A. & Zimmerman, Jerold L., 2010. "Corporate governance myths: Comments on Armstrong, Guay, and Weber," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 235-245, December.
    5. Zura Kakushadze & Willie Yu, 2017. "Open Source Fundamental Industry Classification," Papers 1706.04210, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2017.
    6. Yasser Alhenawi & Martha L. Stilwell, 2019. "Toward a complete definition of relatedness in merger and acquisition transactions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 351-396, August.
    7. Eaton, Gregory W. & Guo, Feng & Liu, Tingting & Officer, Micah S., 2022. "Peer selection and valuation in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 230-255.
    8. Grimm Noh, 2019. "Strategic Decoupling in Korean Business Groups: Ambiguous Identity as a Strategy in Chaebol Groups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Gordon Richardson & Surjit Tinaikar, 2004. "Accounting based valuation models: what have we learned?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 44(2), pages 223-255, July.
    10. Francis, Jennifer & LaFond, Ryan & Olsson, Per & Schipper, Katherine, 2005. "The market pricing of accruals quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 295-327, June.
    11. Chunxia, Yang & Xueshuai, Zhu & Luoluo, Jiang & Sen, Hu & He, Li, 2016. "Study on the contagion among American industries," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 444(C), pages 601-612.
    12. Zura Kakushadze & Willie Yu, 2017. "Open Source Fundamental Industry Classification," Data, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-77, June.
    13. Karel Hrazdil & Thomas Scott, 2013. "The role of industry classification in estimating discretionary accruals," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 15-39, January.
    14. Dimitrios Vamvourellis & M'at'e Toth & Snigdha Bhagat & Dhruv Desai & Dhagash Mehta & Stefano Pasquali, 2023. "Company Similarity using Large Language Models," Papers 2308.08031, arXiv.org.
    15. Christian Bach, 2011. "Conservatism in Corporate Valuation," CREATES Research Papers 2011-32, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    16. Marcel Ausloos, 2020. "Valuation Models Applied to Value-Based Management—Application to the Case of UK Companies with Problems," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-17, December.
    17. David Flacher & Jacques Pelletan, 2007. "Le concept d'industrie et sa mesure : origines, limites et perspectives - Une application à l'étude des mutations industrielles," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 405(1), pages 13-46.
    18. Dittmann, I. & Maug, E.G., 2006. "Valuation Biases, Error Measures, and the Conglomerate Discount," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-011-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. Feng Chen & Bjorn Jorgensen & Yong Yoo, 2004. "Implied cost of equity capital in earnings-based valuation: international evidence," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 323-344.
    20. Christian Bach & Peter O. Christensen, 2016. "Consumption-based equity valuation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1149-1202, December.
    21. van der Heijden, Hans, 2022. "Predicting industry sectors from financial statements: An illustration of machine learning in accounting research," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(5).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:41:y:2003:i:5:p:745-774. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-8456 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.