IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jfinqa/v44y2009i05p1149-1171_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflicts of Interest in the Stock Recommendations of Investment Banks and Their Determinants

Author

Listed:
  • Shen, Chung-Hua
  • Chih, Hsiang-Lin

Abstract

This study explores the phenomena associated with conflicts of interest, particularly as they pertain to the brokerage and proprietary trading divisions of investment banks. This distinguishes it from past studies, which have researched conflicts of interest between underwriting and brokerage divisions. We examine whether or not an investment bank issues buy recommendations to the market and buys (sells) the same recommended stocks through its proprietary trading division before (after) recommendations, and if so, to what extent this goes on. We find that these conflicts of interest do exist and that these investment banks can profit from their recommendations in the short run.

Suggested Citation

  • Shen, Chung-Hua & Chih, Hsiang-Lin, 2009. "Conflicts of Interest in the Stock Recommendations of Investment Banks and Their Determinants," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 1149-1171, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jfinqa:v:44:y:2009:i:05:p:1149-1171_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S002210900999024X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chih-Hsiang Chang, 2017. "Exploring stock recommenders’ behavior and recommendation receivers’ sophistication," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 41(1), pages 1-26, January.
    2. Andreas Charitou & Irene Karamanou, 2020. "Sleeping with the enemy: should investment banks be allowed to engage in prop trading?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 513-557, June.
    3. Chen Su & Hanxiong Zhang & Robert S. Hudson, 2020. "The time‐varying performance of UK analyst recommendation revisions: Do market conditions matter?," Financial Markets, Institutions & Instruments, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 65-89, May.
    4. Tsung-Yu Hsieh & Tsai-Yin Lin & Fangjhy Li & Yi-Ting Huang, 2023. "Analyst’s Target Price Revision and Dealer’s Trading Behavior Analysis: Evidence from Taiwanese Stock Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-9, February.
    5. Hung, Weifeng, 2014. "Institutional trading and attention bias," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 71-91.

    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:cup:jfinqa:v:44:y:2009:i:05:p:1149-1171_99. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jfq .

    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.