This paper presents evidence that stock return prediction errors are less positively skewed in the time period surrounding accounting earnings report announcements than in a subsequent non- announcement period. Assuming that information available about firms in non-announcement periods depends on discretionary disclosure practices of firms and discretionary search for information by investors, the results suggest that earnings reports cause more extreme ‘bad news’ to be reflected in stock prices relative to discretionary sources of information.

This study provides a test of the relationship between changes in a firm's disclosure environment and its security price behavior. The initiation of interim reporting is examined. Theory suggests that the marginal information content of an annual report is greater when it has not been preceded by interim reports and that greater return variability will be observed at the annual report announcement date. The variance of returns upon release of the annual report is compared in the ‘annual-report-only’ and ‘annual-plus-quarterly-reports’ environments. As predicted by the theory, variability is significantly greater in the ‘annual-report-only’ environment.

We examine the effect of underwriting relationships on analysts' earnings forecasts and recommendations. Lead and co-underwriter analysts' growth forecasts and recommendations are significantly more favorable than those made by unaffiliated analysts, although their earnings forecasts are not generally greater. Investors respond similarly to lead underwriter and unaffiliated `Strong buy' and `Buy' recommendations, but three-day returns to lead underwriter `Hold' recommendations are significantly more negative than those to unaffiliated `Hold' recommendations. The findings suggest investors expect lead analysts are more likely to recommend `Hold' when `Sell' is warranted. The post-announcement returns following affiliated and unaffiliated analysts' recommendations are not significantly different.

This paper examines how public disclosure affects private inforamtion acquisition activity in a market economy. We analyze a setting where traders with short-term investment horizons are allowed to trade on their private information prior to a public disclosure. We demonstrate in this setting that public disclosure stimulates investment in private information acquisition. This result is shown to have implications for the magnitude of the pre-announcement and announcement price reactions to the disclosure.

We examine the role of concurrent information in the striking increase in investor response to earnings announcements from 2001 to 2016, as measured by return variability and volume following Beaver (1968). We find management guidance, analyst forecasts, and disaggregated financial statement line items are more frequently bundled with earnings announcements, and each of these items explains part of the increase in market response. Furthermore, collectively, these concurrent information releases explain a substantial fraction of the increase in market response to earnings announcements since 2001. This is in contrast to the decline in market response to management guidance issued separately from earnings and the much smaller increase in market response to analyst forecasts issued separately from earnings over this time. The findings indicate that information arrival at earnings announcement dates has increased significantly over the past two decades, and that key components of this are increased disclosures by management of guidance and financial statement line items and forecasts by analysts.

We show that tests of market efficiency are sensitive to the inclusion of delisting firm-years. When included, trading strategy returns based on anomaly variables can increase (for strategies based on earnings, cash flows and the book-to-market ratio) or decrease (for a strategy based on accruals). This is due to the disproportionate number of delisting firm-years in the lowest decile of these variables. Delisting firm-years are most often excluded because the researcher does not correctly incorporate delisting returns, because delisting return data are missing or because other research design choices implicitly exclude them.

This paper analyzes the distribution of stock ratings at investment banks and brokerage firms and examines whether these distributions can predict the profitability of analysts’ recommendations. We document that the percentage of buys decreased steadily starting in mid-2000, likely due, at least partly, to the implementation of NASD Rule 2711, requiring the public dissemination of ratings distributions. Additionally, we find that a broker's ratings distribution can predict recommendation profitability. Upgrades to buy (downgrades to hold or sell) issued by brokers with the smallest percentage of buy recommendations significantly outperformed (underperformed) those of brokers with the greatest percentage of buys.

We document that property-casualty insurers with small positive earnings understate loss reserves relative to insurers with small negative earnings. Furthermore, loss reserves are managed across the entire distribution of earnings, with the most income-increasing reserve accruals reported by small profit firms, and the most income-decreasing reserve accruals reported by firms with the highest earnings. We analyze this pattern separately for public, private, and mutual companies, and find that public companies and mutuals manage loss reserves to avoid losses, but that private companies do not. We also find evidence of reserve management to avoid losses by financially healthy and distressed firms.