Analysts' recommendation revisions and subsequent earnings surprises : pre- and post-regulation FD by Dan Palmon and Ari Yezegel
Material type:data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6b0ba/6b0ba83dea1b2061c05bcfba62c4cc7e8d358d60" alt="Text"
- text
- unmediated
- volume
Item type | Current library | Call number | Vol info | Copy number | Status | Notes | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Main Library - Special Collections | HF5601 JOU (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Vol. 26, no. 3 (pages 475-501 ) | SP9777 | Not for loan | For in-house use only |
Browsing Main Library shelves, Shelving location: - Special Collections Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
This study examines the extent to which analyst recommendations were useful in identifying earnings surprises during the pre- and post-Regulation Fair Disclosure (FD) periods. A comparative analysis of the association between recommendation revisions and subsequent earnings surprises suggests a significant decline in the predictive value of analysts’ recommendations after Regulation FD took effect. Recommendation revisions are roughly 55% less useful in predicting earnings surprises in the post-Regulation FD period. Furthermore, the average abnormal return earned by investors following analysts’ advice to exploit earnings surprises is approximately 70% lower in the post-Regulation FD period. Overall, this article’s findings are consistent with Regulation FD having considerably reduced analysts’ comparative advantage in identifying earnings surprises.
There are no comments on this title.