IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/14971.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When are Analyst Recommendation Changes Influential?

Author

Listed:
  • Roger K. Loh
  • René M. Stulz

Abstract

Not all stock recommendation changes are equal. In a sample constructed to minimize the impact of confounding news, relatively few analyst recommendation changes are influential in the sense that they impact investors' beliefs about a firm in a way that could be noticed in that firm's stock returns. More than one-third of the stock-price reactions to analyst recommendation changes have the wrong sign and only approximately 10% have significant stock-price reactions at the 5% level using an extended market model. We find that the probability of an influential recommendation is higher for leader analysts, star analysts, away-from-consensus revisions, revisions issued contemporaneously with earnings forecasts, analysts with greater relative experience, and those with more accurate earnings estimates. Growth firms, small firms, high institutional ownership firms, and high prior turnover firms are also more likely to have influential stock recommendations. Strikingly, analyst recommendations are more likely to be influential after Reg FD and the settlement. Finally, influential recommendations are associated with increases in stock volatility and large absolute changes in consensus earnings forecasts.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger K. Loh & René M. Stulz, 2009. "When are Analyst Recommendation Changes Influential?," NBER Working Papers 14971, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:14971
    Note: CF
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14971.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karl B. Diether & Christopher J. Malloy & Anna Scherbina, 2002. "Differences of Opinion and the Cross Section of Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 2113-2141, October.
    2. Malmendier, Ulrike M. & Shanthikumar, Devin, 2004. "Are Investors Naive about Incentives?," Research Papers 1867, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Harrison Hong & Jeremy C. Stein & Jialin Yu, 2007. "Simple Forecasts and Paradigm Shifts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1207-1242, June.
    4. Daniel, Kent, et al, 1997. "Measuring Mutual Fund Performance with Characteristic-Based Benchmarks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(3), pages 1035-1058, July.
    5. Asquith, Paul & Mikhail, Michael B. & Au, Andrea S., 2005. "Information content of equity analyst reports," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 245-282, February.
    6. Mikhail, MB & Walther, BR & Willis, RH, 1997. "Do security analysts improve their performance with experience?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35, pages 131-157.
    7. Daniel J. Bradley & Bradford D. Jordan & Jay R. Ritter, 2008. "Analyst Behavior Following IPOs: The 'Bubble Period' Evidence," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 101-133, January.
    8. Ohad Kadan & Leonardo Madureira & Rong Wang & Tzachi Zach, 2009. "Conflicts of Interest and Stock Recommendations: The Effects of the Global Settlement and Related Regulations," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(10), pages 4189-4217, October.
    9. Barber, Brad M. & Lehavy, Reuven & McNichols, Maureen & Trueman, Brett, 2006. "Buys, holds, and sells: The distribution of investment banks' stock ratings and the implications for the profitability of analysts' recommendations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 87-117, April.
    10. AltInkIlIç, Oya & Hansen, Robert S., 2009. "On the information role of stock recommendation revisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 17-36, October.
    11. Frankel, Richard & Kothari, S.P. & Weber, Joseph, 2006. "Determinants of the informativeness of analyst research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 29-54, April.
    12. Alexander Ljungqvist & Christopher Malloy & Felicia Marston, 2009. "Rewriting History," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1935-1960, August.
    13. Stefano Dellavigna & Joshua M. Pollet, 2009. "Investor Inattention and Friday Earnings Announcements," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(2), pages 709-749, April.
    14. Knez, Peter J & Ready, Mark J, 1997. "On the Robustness of Size and Book-to-Market in Cross-Sectional Regressions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(4), pages 1355-1382, September.
    15. Gintschel, Andreas & Markov, Stanimir, 2004. "The effectiveness of Regulation FD," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 293-314, September.
    16. Eugene F. Fama & Kenneth R. French, 2006. "The Value Premium and the CAPM," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(5), pages 2163-2185, October.
    17. Cooper, Rick A. & Day, Theodore E. & Lewis, Craig M., 2001. "Following the leader: *1: a study of individual analysts' earnings forecasts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 383-416, September.
    18. Boni, Leslie & Womack, Kent L., 2006. "Analysts, Industries, and Price Momentum," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 85-109, March.
    19. Ivkovic, Zoran & Jegadeesh, Narasimhan, 2004. "The timing and value of forecast and recommendation revisions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 433-463, September.
    20. Loh, Roger K. & Mian, G. Mujtaba, 2006. "Do accurate earnings forecasts facilitate superior investment recommendations?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 455-483, May.
    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. Ramnath, Sundaresh & Rock, Steve & Shane, Philip, 2008. "The financial analyst forecasting literature: A taxonomy with suggestions for further research," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 34-75.
    2. Loh, Roger, 2008. "Investor Attention and the Underreaction to Stock Recommendations," Working Paper Series 2008-2, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    3. Roger K. Loh & René M. Stulz, 2018. "Is Sell‐Side Research More Valuable in Bad Times?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(3), pages 959-1013, June.
    4. Roger K. Loh, 2010. "Investor Inattention and the Underreaction to Stock Recommendations," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 1223-1252, September.
    5. Lily Fang & Ayako Yasuda, 2014. "Are Stars’ Opinions Worth More? The Relation Between Analyst Reputation and Recommendation Values," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 46(3), pages 235-269, December.
    6. Mehran, Hamid & Stulz, Rene M., 2007. "The economics of conflicts of interest in financial institutions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 267-296, August.
    7. O. Emre Ergungor & Leonardo Madureira & Nandkumar Nayar & Ajai K. Singh, 2011. "Banking relationships and sell-side research," Working Papers (Old Series) 1114, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    8. Brian Gibbons & Peter Iliev & Jonathan Kalodimos, 2021. "Analyst Information Acquisition via EDGAR," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 769-793, February.
    9. Nerissa C. Brown & Kelsey D. Wei & Russ Wermers, 2014. "Analyst Recommendations, Mutual Fund Herding, and Overreaction in Stock Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 1-20, January.
    10. Savor, Pavel G., 2012. "Stock returns after major price shocks: The impact of information," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 635-659.
    11. Leonardo Fernandez, 2012. "Price Discovery, Investor Distraction and Analyst Recommendations Under Continuous Disclosure Requirements in Australia," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 1-2012, January-A.
    12. Dan Bernhardt & Chi Wan & Zhijie Xiao, 2016. "The Reluctant Analyst," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 987-1040, September.
    13. Justin Birru & Sinan Gokkaya & Xi Liu & René M. Stulz, 2022. "Are Analyst Short‐Term Trade Ideas Valuable?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(3), pages 1829-1875, June.
    14. Leonardo Fernandez, 2012. "Price Discovery, Investor Distraction and Analyst Recommendations Under Continuous Disclosure Requirements in Australia," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 3, July-Dece.
    15. AltInkIlIç, Oya & Hansen, Robert S., 2009. "On the information role of stock recommendation revisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 17-36, October.
    16. Dambra, Michael & Field, Laura Casares & Gustafson, Matthew T. & Pisciotta, Kevin, 2018. "The consequences to analyst involvement in the IPO process: Evidence surrounding the JOBS Act," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 302-330.
    17. Kross, William J. & Suk, Inho, 2012. "Does Regulation FD work? Evidence from analysts' reliance on public disclosure," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 225-248.
    18. Andrey Kudryavtsev, 2018. "Holiday effect on stock price reactions to analyst recommendation revisions," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(7), pages 507-521, December.
    19. Ambrus Kecskés & Roni Michaely & Kent L. Womack, 2017. "Do Earnings Estimates Add Value to Sell-Side Analysts’ Investment Recommendations?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(6), pages 1855-1871, June.
    20. Minkwan Ahn & Michael Drake & Hangsoo Kyung & Han Stice, 2019. "The role of the business press in the pricing of analysts’ recommendation revisions," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 341-392, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G20 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - General
    • G24 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Investment Banking; Venture Capital; Brokerage

    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:nbr:nberwo:14971. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.