The relation between corporate financing activities, analysts’ forecasts and stock returns☆
Introduction
A large body of evidence documents a negative relation between external financing activities and future stock returns. Future stock returns are unusually low in the years following initial public offerings (Ritter, 1991), seasoned equity offerings (Loughran and Ritter, 1997), debt offerings (Spiess and Affleck-Graves, 1999) and bank borrowings (Billett et al., 2001). Conversely, future stock returns are unusually high following stock repurchases (Ikenberry et al., 1995). Ritter (2003), in a recent review of this literature, notes that this relation holds across a broad range of corporate financing activities. He concludes that despite the large expenditure of resources on analyst coverage, there is little academic work emphasizing the importance of analysts’ role in marketing corporate financing activities. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the relation between corporate financing activities, stock returns and analysts’ forecasts.
A key innovation of our research design is the use of statement of cash flows data to construct a comprehensive and parsimonious measure of the net amount of cash generated by corporate financing activities. In contrast to previous research that has focused on individual categories of corporate financing transactions, this feature of our research design allows us to simultaneously investigate the relation between a firm's entire portfolio of corporate financing activities and stock returns. A second innovation in our research design is that we analyze the properties of a comprehensive set of analyst forecasting variables, including short-term earnings per share (EPS) forecasts, long-term EPS growth forecasts, buy/sell recommendations and target prices. This feature of our research design enables us to develop and test hypotheses concerning how the properties of analysts’ forecasts vary by type of corporate financing activity.
Our results can be summarized as follows. First, we document a strong negative relation between our comprehensive measure of net external financing and future stock returns. For example, a long–short investment strategy based on net external financing generates a 15.5% average annual return over the 30 years covered by our study. The returns to this strategy dominate the returns to strategies based on individual categories of external financing activities. Second, we show that there is a negative relation between net external financing and future profitability. This relation is present for both equity and debt financing, though it is stronger for equity financing. Third, we show that there is a strong positive relation between net external financing and overoptimism in analysts’ forecasts. This relation holds for short-term EPS forecasts, long-term EPS growth forecasts, buy/sell recommendations and target prices. For example, firms in the top financing decile have 1-year (2-year) ahead earnings forecast errors that are 1.7 (2.2) times as optimistic as those for the bottom financing decile. We also find that the degree of overoptimism in specific forecasting variables is systematically related to the type of corporate financing activity. For debt transactions, overoptimism is concentrated in short-term EPS forecasts. For equity transactions, overoptimism extends to long-term EPS growth forecasts, buy/sell recommendations and target prices. Finally, we show that external financing activity dominates investment banking affiliation as a determinant of analyst optimism.
Our findings have several implications. First, our analysis of analyst forecast errors helps discriminate between risk and misvaluation as explanations for the predictable stock returns following corporate financing activities. Consistent with the misvaluation hypothesis, the predictable stock returns are directly related to predictable errors in analysts’ earnings forecasts. Additionally, we find that analysts set significantly higher target prices for firms raising new financing. If the lower future stock returns for firms raising new financing represent a lower risk premium, then we would expect analysts to set lower target prices for these firms. Overall, the results are consistent with the hypothesis that firms time their corporate financing activities to exploit the temporary misvaluation of their securities in capital markets.
Second, our results suggest that the negative stock returns following new security issuances are primarily attributable to firm misvaluation (Loughran and Ritter, 2000) rather than wealth transfers between stockholders and bondholders (Eberhart and Siddique, 2002). The misvaluation hypothesis posits that firms issue new securities when they are overvalued. Thus, both debt and equity issuances are predicted to be negatively related to future stock returns. The wealth transfer hypothesis discussed in Eberhart and Siddique (2002) posits that financing transactions reducing (increasing) leverage reduce (increase) the probability of financial distress and so transfer wealth from (to) stockholders to (from) bondholders. They also assume that the market value of equity responds to these changes with a lag, so transactions that increase (decrease) leverage are assumed to be positively (negatively) related to future stock returns. Thus, holding other financing activities constant, the wealth transfer hypothesis predicts that changes in debt should be positively related to future stock returns. We show that changes in debt are negatively related to future stock returns. This evidence is consistent with the firm misvaluation hypothesis, but inconsistent with the wealth transfer hypothesis.
Third, the strong relation that we document between analysts’ overoptimism and net external financing supports allegations that sell-side analysts routinely generate overly optimistic stock research for firms that are issuing new securities. Moreover, we find that the nature of the overoptimism is tailored to the type of security being issued. There are three non-mutually exclusive explanations for these findings. First, analysts could self-select into covering the particular issuing firms that they naively forecast to have the best future prospects. Second, management could self-select into issuing securities during periods in which their inside information indicates that analysts’ forecasts are most optimistic. Third, conflicts stemming from incentives to generate investment banking and/or brokerage business could lead analysts to intentionally bias their forecasts. Note that irrespective of the explanation, analysts’ forecasts can still be characterized as biased from a rational expectations viewpoint, because we find that the overoptimism remains even after the analysts learn of the new security issuances.
Finally, our tests for investment banking conflicts complement and extend previous research examining whether affiliated analysts issue more favorable research reports than unaffiliated analysts (see, e.g., Dugar and Nathan, 1995; Lin and McNichols, 1998; Dechow et al., 2000; Michaely and Womack, 1999; Lin et al., 2003; Agrawal and Chen, 2003). Affiliated analysts are defined as analysts working for firms having investment banking ties to the corporations that they cover. Collectively, these studies find mixed and inconclusive evidence as to whether affiliated analysts issue more optimistic research than unaffiliated analysts. Our research shows that external financing activity is more important than analyst affiliation in explaining analyst optimism. In other words, analysts are overoptimistic about the future performance of firms that are raising new financing regardless of whether or not the analysts have explicit investment banking affiliations with these firms. These results suggest that overoptimism is primarily attributable to some combination of indirect investment banking pressures, incentives to generate brokerage business and analyst naiveté, rather than to direct investment banking conflicts.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. The next section develops our motivation and research design. Section 3 describes our data and 4 External financing and stock returns, 5 External financing and analyst forecast errors present our empirical analyses. Section 6 concludes.
Section snippets
Motivation and research design
Ritter (2003) surveys research investigating the relation between corporate financing activities and future stock returns and shows that this relation is consistent across different types of corporate financing activities. Specifically, he notes that activities raising (distributing) cash are associated with lower (higher) future stock returns. Ritter hypothesizes that this relation arises because firms issue new securities when they are temporarily overvalued by the capital markets. We refer
Data
We obtain data from the COMPUSTAT annual files, the CRSP monthly returns files, the I/B/E/S summary files and the First Call detail files. We present tests of predictions P1–P3 for the ‘full sample,’ which includes firm-year observations with available external financing and pricing data from COMPUSTAT and CRSP. Data for the full sample span 1971–2000, with 1971 representing the first year that relevant cash flow data are widely available on COMPUSTAT.2
External financing and stock returns
We present our results in two sections. This section examines the relation between our external financing variables and future stock returns and provides tests of predictions P1–P3. Section 5 examines whether analysts’ forecast errors are systematically related to the external financing variables, providing tests of predictions P4–P6.
External financing and analyst forecast errors
The results in the previous section confirm that our measures of external financing are negatively related to future stock returns and future earnings performance. We conjecture that the negative stock return relation arises because investors do not anticipate the negative earnings performance relation. This section directly tests this conjecture by testing for a negative relation between analyst forecast errors and external financing.
Discussion and conclusion
This paper provides a comprehensive examination of the negative relation between external financing activities and future stock returns. Previous research in this area has been restricted to samples focusing on specific categories of corporate financing activities (e.g., equity issuances, equity repurchases, debt issuances). We show that exploiting aggregated information from the financial statements relating to such events results in more comprehensive measures and more powerful tests. The
References (36)
- et al.
Biased forecasts or biased earnings? The role of reported earnings in explaining apparent bias and over/underreaction in analysts’ earnings forecasts
Journal of Accounting and Economics
(2003) - et al.
Returns to contrarian investment strategies: tests of naïve expectations hypotheses
Journal of Financial Economics
(1997) - et al.
Liquidity risk, leverage and long-run IPO returns
Journal of Corporate Finance
(2005) - et al.
Seasoned public offerings: resolution of the ‘new issues puzzle’
Journal of Financial Economics
(2000) - et al.
Common risk factors in returns on stocks and bonds
Journal of Financial Economics
(1993) - et al.
Market underreaction to open market share repurchases
Journal of Financial Economics
(1995) - et al.
Uniformly least powerful tests of market efficiency
Journal of Financial Economics
(2000) Earnings management and the performance of seasoned equity offerings
Journal of Financial Economics
(1998)- et al.
Accrual reliability, earnings persistence and stock prices
Journal of Accounting and Economics
(2005) - et al.
The long-run performance of stock returns following debt offerings
Journal of Financial Economics
(1999)
Earnings management and the underperformance of seasoned equity offerings
Journal of Financial Economics
Is the US stock market myopic?
Journal of Accounting Research
The accuracy of analysts’ forecasts of earnings per share
Journal of Business Research
The pricing of options and corporate liabilities
Journal of Political Economy
Cited by (347)
Chaebol-affiliated analysts and biases in interpreting accruals
2024, Journal of Contemporary Accounting and EconomicsPricing and mispricing of accounting fundamentals: Global evidence
2024, Quarterly Review of Economics and FinanceFinancial statement comparability and analysts’ optimism for accruals
2024, British Accounting ReviewCan the changes in fundamentals explain the attenuation of anomalies?
2023, Journal of Financial EconomicsInformational role of analyst and investor days
2023, Global Finance JournalAsset pricing in bull and bear markets
2023, Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money
- ☆
We thank I/B/E/S and First Call for analyst data. We are also grateful for the comments of Patricia Dechow, Espen Eckbo, S.P. Kothari, Richard Leftwich (the referee) Tom Lys (the editor), Doron Nissim, Stephen Penman, Jay Ritter, Irem Tuna, and workshop participants at University of Alabama, Arizona State University, Barclays Global Investors, UCLA, Columbia University, Dartmouth, Emory University, University of Illinois, University of Iowa, London Business School, University of Michigan, University of New South Wales, University of North Carolina, Temple University, University of Virginia, the Boston College Finance Conference, the Information, Markets, and Organizations Conference at the Harvard Business School, and the 2004 Journal of Accounting and Economics Conference.