In this study we examine the impact of the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) decision to accelerate the filing of 10-Ks. The SEC argued that the accelerated deadline would increase the relevance of the disclosures, making the reports more useful. Opponents countered that the accelerated deadline would decrease the representational faithfulness of the disclosures, especially for smaller firms. We document a significant decrease in the 10-K market reaction for smaller firms as they accelerate from 90 to 75 days. For larger firms we find no significant change in the market reaction from 90 to 75 days. However, as these larger firms accelerate their 10-K deadline to 60 days, we find a significant increase in the market reaction. We also examine changes in reporting quality, shifts in information content, and changes in 10-K filing order and clustering and find results that are consistent with accelerated filing having significant impacts on representational faithfulness and relevance.

We investigate the stock returns subsequent to quarterly earnings surprises, where the benchmark for an earnings surprise is the consensus analyst forecast. By defining the surprise relative to an analyst forecast rather than a time‐series model of expected earnings, we document returns subsequent to earnings announcements that are much larger, persist for much longer, and are more heavily concentrated in the long portion of the hedge portfolio than shown in previous studies. We show that our results hold after controlling for risk and previously documented anomalies, and are positive for every quarter between 1988 and 2000. Finally, we explore the financial results and information environment of firms with extreme earnings surprises and find that they tend to be “neglected” stocks with relatively high book‐to‐market ratios, low analyst coverage, and high analyst forecast dispersion. In the three subsequent years, firms with extreme positive earnings surprises tend to have persistent earnings surprises in the same direction, strong growth in cash flows and earnings, and large increases in analyst coverage, relative to firms with extreme negative earnings surprises. We also show that the returns to the earnings surprise strategy are highest in the quartile of firms where transaction costs are highest and institutional investor interest is lowest, consistent with the idea that market inefficiencies are more prevalent when frictions make it difficult for large, sophisticated investors to exploit the inefficiencies.