IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhb/hastba/2004_005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of pro forma profits on analyst forecasts: Some experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Andersson, Patric

    (Center for Economic Psychology)

  • Hellman, Niclas

    (Department of Accounting and Managerial Finance)

Abstract

The trend of pro forma (non-GAAP) reporting has made it increasingly difficult for financial analysts and investors to evaluate company performance. This study investigates how pro forma reporting affects analysts’ judgments in a non-US experimental setting. The results show that analysts who received both pro forma and GAAP information made significantly higher EPS forecasts compared to analysts who only received GAAP information. The positive framing and the higher anchor level that the pro forma report creates are suggested explanations for this result.

Suggested Citation

  • Andersson, Patric & Hellman, Niclas, 2004. "The impact of pro forma profits on analyst forecasts: Some experimental evidence," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2004:5, Stockholm School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhb:hastba:2004_005
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Bhattacharya, Nilabhra & Black, Ervin L. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Larson, Chad R., 2003. "Assessing the relative informativeness and permanence of pro forma earnings and GAAP operating earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 285-319, December.
    3. Mark T. Bradshaw & Richard G. Sloan, 2002. "GAAP versus The Street: An Empirical Assessment of Two Alternative Definitions of Earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 41-66, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Andersson, Patric, 2004. "How well do financial experts perform? A review of empirical research on performance of analysts, day-traders, forecasters, fund managers, investors, and stockbrokers," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2004:9, Stockholm School of Economics.

    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. Karola Bastini & Rainer Kasperzak, 2013. "Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Rechnungslegung durch experimentelle Forschung? — Diskussion methodischer Grundsatzfragen anhand der Entscheidungsnützlichkeit des Performance Reporting," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 65(7), pages 622-660, December.
    2. Y. Sekou Bermiss & Edward J. Zajac & Brayden G King, 2014. "Under Construction: How Commensuration and Management Fashion Affect Corporate Reputation Rankings," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 591-608, April.
    3. Bradley Blaylock & Bradley P. Lawson & Michael A. Mayberry, 2020. "Taxable income, future profitability, and stock returns," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7-8), pages 858-881, July.
    4. Florian Meier, 2020. "The Age of Cheap Money and Passive Investing: Are Pro Forma Earnings Value Relevant?," Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 1-1.
    5. Anantharaman, Divya & Chuk, Elizabeth & Kamath, Saipriya, 2024. "A demotion in disguise? The real effects of relocating pension smoothing from operating income to non-operating income," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 124405, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Mei Luo & Shuai Shao & Frank Zhang, 2018. "Does financial reporting above or below operating income matter to firms and investors? The case of investment income in China," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1754-1790, December.
    7. Dirk E. Black & Ervin L. Black & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee, 2022. "Comparing Non-GAAP EPS in Earnings Announcements and Proxy Statements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1353-1377, February.
    8. Bradshaw, Mark T. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Gee, Kurt H. & Whipple, Benjamin C., 2018. "Analysts’ GAAP earnings forecasts and their implications for accounting research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 46-66.
    9. Campbell, Linda & Pitman, Marshall K., 2009. "Post-regulation G findings," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 100-106.
    10. Zachary Kaplan & Xiumin Martin & Yifang Xie, 2021. "Truncating Optimism," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1827-1884, December.
    11. Theodore E. Christensen & Enrique Gomez & Matthew Ma & Jing Pan, 2021. "Analysts’ role in shaping non-GAAP reporting: evidence from a natural experiment," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 172-217, March.
    12. Mark A. Clatworthy & Tuan Ho & Jude Mengzhu Zhu, 2022. "Disagreement about the past: An empirical assessment of bank analysts' GAAP and non‐GAAP earnings measures," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3-4), pages 588-624, March.
    13. Jeremiah W. Bentley & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee & Benjamin C. Whipple, 2018. "Disentangling Managers’ and Analysts’ Non‐GAAP Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 1039-1081, September.
    14. Asher Curtis & Valerie Li & Paige H. Patrick, 2021. "The use of adjusted earnings in performance evaluation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1290-1322, December.
    15. Greg Clinch & Ann Tarca & Marvin Wee, 2023. "Cross‐country diversity and non‐IFRS financial performance measures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 2473-2502, June.
    16. Edward J. Riedl & Suraj Srinivasan, 2007. "Signaling Firm Performance Through Financial Statement Presentation: An Analysis Using Special Items," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-031, Harvard Business School.
    17. Gary Entwistle & Glenn Feltham & Chima Mbagwu, 2006. "Misleading Disclosure of Pro Forma Earnings: An Empirical Examination," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 355-372, December.
    18. Jeffery S. Abarbanell & Reuven Lehavy, 2007. "Letting the “Tail Wag the Dog†: The Debate over GAAP versus Street Earnings Revisited," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 675-723, September.
    19. Susan M. Albring & María T. Cabán‐García & Jacqueline L. Reck, 2010. "The value relevance of a non‐GAAP performance metric to the capital markets," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(3), pages 264-284, August.
    20. Gu, Zhaoyang & Xue, Jian, 2008. "The superiority and disciplining role of independent analysts," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 289-316, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Financial analysts; analyst forecasts; pro forma profits;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhb:hastba:2004_005. 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: Helena Lundin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erhhsse.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.