IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iea/carech/0803.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investment and Value: A Neoclassical Benchmark

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Which investment model best fits firm-level data? To answer this question we estimate alternative models using Compustat data. Surprisingly, the two best-performing specifications are based on Hayashi’s (1982) model. This model’s foremost implication, that Q is a sufficient statistic for determining a firm’s investment decision, has been often rejected because cash-flow and lagged-investment effects are present in investment regressions. However, we find that these regression are ineffectual for evaluating model performance. So, forget what investment regressions tell you. Models based on Hayashi (1982) provide a very good description of investment behavior at the firm level.

Suggested Citation

  • Janice Eberly & Sergio Rebelo & Nicolas Vincent, 2008. "Investment and Value: A Neoclassical Benchmark," Cahiers de recherche 08-03, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    • Handle: RePEc:iea:carech:0803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hec.ca/iea/cahiers/2008/iea0803_nvincent.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilchrist, Simon & Himmelberg, Charles P., 1995. "Evidence on the role of cash flow for investment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 541-572, December.
    2. Lee, Bong-Soo & Ingram, Beth Fisher, 1991. "Simulation estimation of time-series models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2-3), pages 197-205, February.
    3. Timothy Erickson & Toni M. Whited, 2000. "Measurement Error and the Relationship between Investment and q," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(5), pages 1027-1057, October.
    4. King, Mervyn A. & Fullerton, Don, 2010. "The Taxation of Income from Capital," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226436319, September.
    5. Michael Salinger & Lawrence H. Summers, 1983. "Tax Reform and Corporate Investment: A Microeconometric Simulation Study," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral Simulation Methods in Tax Policy Analysis, pages 247-288, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The United Kingdom," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 31-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jorgenson, D.W., 1992. "Tax Reform and the Cost of Capital : An International Comparison," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1621, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    8. repec:bla:jfinan:v:59:y:2004:i:5:p:2061-2092 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Russell Cooper & Joao Ejarque, 2003. "Financial Frictions and Investment: Requiem in Q," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 6(4), pages 710-728, October.
    10. Steven M. Fazzari & R. Glenn Hubbard & Bruce C. Petersen, 1988. "Financing Constraints and Corporate Investment," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 19(1), pages 141-206.
    11. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Charles L. Evans, 2005. "Nominal Rigidities and the Dynamic Effects of a Shock to Monetary Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 1-45, February.
    12. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "Introduction to "The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany"," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 1-6, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Hayashi, Fumio, 1982. "Tobin's Marginal q and Average q: A Neoclassical Interpretation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 213-224, January.
    14. Russell W. Cooper & John C. Haltiwanger, 2006. "On the Nature of Capital Adjustment Costs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(3), pages 611-633.
    15. Damba Lkhagvasuren, 2005. "Big Locational Differences in Unemployment Despite High Labor Mobility," Working Papers 12002, Concordia University, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2012.
    16. Mark E. Doms & Timothy Dunne, 1998. "Capital Adjustment Patterns in Manufacturing Plants," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(2), pages 409-429, April.
    17. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The United States," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 193-267, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Schiantarelli, F. & Georgoutsos, D., 1990. "Monopolistic competition and the Q theory of investment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1061-1078, July.
    19. Aydoḡan Alti, 2003. "How Sensitive Is Investment to Cash Flow When Financing Is Frictionless?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 707-722, April.
    20. Burnside, Craig, 1996. "Production function regressions, returns to scale, and externalities," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 177-201, April.
    21. Janice C. Eberly & Andrew B. Abel, 2004. "Q Theory Without Adjustment Costs & Cash Flow Effects Without Financing Constraints," 2004 Meeting Papers 205, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    22. Joao F. Gomes, 2001. "Financing Investment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1263-1285, December.
    23. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number king84-1.
    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. Eberly, Janice & Rebelo, Sergio & Vincent, Nicolas, 2012. "What explains the lagged-investment effect?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 370-380.
    2. Jean-Bernard Chatelain, 2003. "Structural modelling of financial constraints on investment: where do we stand?," Chapters, in: Paul Butzen & Catherine Fuss (ed.), Firms’ Investment and Finance Decisions, chapter 2, pages 40-58, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Caggese, Andrea, 2007. "Testing financing constraints on firm investment using variable capital," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 683-723, December.
    4. Cao, Dan & Lorenzoni, Guido & Walentin, Karl, 2019. "Financial frictions, investment, and Tobin’s q," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 105-122.
    5. Cummins, Jason G. & Hassett, Kevin A. & Hubbard, R. Glenn, 1996. "Tax reforms and investment: A cross-country comparison," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 237-273, October.
    6. Timothy Erickson & Toni M. Whited, 2006. "On the Accuracy of Different Measures of Q," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 35(3), Autumn.
    7. Tsoukalas, John D., 2011. "Time to build capital: Revisiting investment-cash-flow sensitivities," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1000-1016, July.
    8. Andrew B. Abel, 2015. "The Analytics of Investment, q, and Cash Flow," NBER Working Papers 21549, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Jason G. Cummins & Kevin A. Hassett & Stephen D. Oliner, 2006. "Investment Behavior, Observable Expectations, and Internal Funds," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 796-810, June.
    10. Carpenter, Robert E. & Guariglia, Alessandra, 2008. "Cash flow, investment, and investment opportunities: New tests using UK panel data," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1894-1906, September.
    11. Peters, Ryan H. & Taylor, Lucian A., 2017. "Intangible capital and the investment-q relation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 251-272.
    12. Andrei, Daniel & Mann, William & Moyen, Nathalie, 2019. "Why did the q theory of investment start working?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 251-272.
    13. Andrew B Abel & Stavros Panageas, 2022. "An Analytic Framework for Interpreting Investment Regressions in the Presence of Financial Constraints," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(9), pages 4055-4104.
    14. Warusawitharana, Missaka, 2008. "Corporate asset purchases and sales: Theory and evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 471-497, February.
    15. Abel, Andrew B., 2018. "The effects of q and cash flow on investment in the presence of measurement error," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(2), pages 363-377.
    16. Missaka Warusawitharana, 2007. "Corporate asset purchases and sales: theory and evidence," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2007-27, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    17. Lewe, Stefan, 2003. "Wachstumseffiziente Unternehmensbesteuerung," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 20042, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    18. Chen, Huafeng (Jason) & Chen, Shaojun (Jenny), 2012. "Investment-cash flow sensitivity cannot be a good measure of financial constraints: Evidence from the time series," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 393-410.
    19. Bayraktar, Nihal, 2014. "Fixed investment/fundamental sensitivities under financial constraints," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 25-59.
    20. François Gourio & Jianjun Miao, 2010. "Firm Heterogeneity and the Long-Run Effects of Dividend Tax Reform," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 131-168, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E22 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Investment; Capital; Intangible Capital; Capacity
    • D92 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Intertemporal Firm Choice, Investment, Capacity, and Financing

    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:iea:carech:0803. 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: Patricia Power (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehecca.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.