IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rfinst/v15y2002i3p869-900.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why New Issues and High-Accrual Firms Underperform: The Role of Analysts' Credulity

Author

Listed:
  • Siew Hong Teoh
  • T. J. Wong

Abstract

We find that analysts' forecast errors are predicted by past accounting accruals (adjustments to cash flows to obtain reported earnings) among both equity issuers and nonissuers. Analysts are more optimistic for the subsequent four years for issuers reporting higher issue-year accruals. The predictive power is greater for discretionary accruals than nondiscretionary accruals and is independent of the presence of an underwriting affiliation. Predicted forecast errors from accruals significantly explain the long-term underperformance of new issuers. The predictability of forecast errors among nonissuers suggests that analysts' credulity about accruals management more generally contributes to market inefficiency. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Siew Hong Teoh & T. J. Wong, 2002. "Why New Issues and High-Accrual Firms Underperform: The Role of Analysts' Credulity," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(3), pages 869-900.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:15:y:2002:i:3:p:869-900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:oup:rfinst:v:15:y:2002:i:3:p:869-900. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfsssea.html .

    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.