IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/finmar/v29y2020i2p65-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The time‐varying performance of UK analyst recommendation revisions: Do market conditions matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Chen Su
  • Hanxiong Zhang
  • Robert S. Hudson

Abstract

This study examines the time‐varying performance of investment strategies following analyst recommendation revisions in the UK stock market, with specific emphasis on the impact of changing market conditions. We find a negative relationship between the recommendation performance and market conditions as measured in terms of past market return and market volatility. In particular, the upgrade (downgrade) portfolio generates significantly positive (negative) net abnormal returns in bad market conditions (e.g., the dot‐com bubble burst in 2000 and the credit crisis in 2007), but not in other periods of time. Moreover, our non‐temporal threshold regression analysis shows that the reported negative relationship disappears when market conditions become better, i.e., when the past market return (market volatility) is higher (lower) than a certain level, indicating the importance of taking non‐linearity into account in the long sample period as examined in this study. Our time‐series bootstrap simulations further confirm that the superior recommendation performance in bad market conditions is not due to random chance; analysts have certain skills in making valuable up/downward revisions in bad markets.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:finmar:v:29:y:2020:i:2:p:65-89
    DOI: 10.1111/fmii.12126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/fmii.12126
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/fmii.12126?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:finmar:v:29:y:2020:i:2:p:65-89. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.