We examine whether the properties of bond ratings from certified agencies (designated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)) differ from those of non-certified bond-rating agencies. Bond ratings from non-certified agencies are used solely for investment advice. Certified ratings are used by a variety of constituents, many of whom write contracts incorporating these ratings. We find that the properties of the ratings from the two agency types differ in predictable ways. Our results show that the non-certified agency's ratings are consistent with their role of providing information to investors. The certified agency is generally more conservative, consistent with their significant role in contracting.

We provide evidence consistent with firm managers opportunistically defining non-GAAP earnings in order to meet or beat analyst expectations. This result is robust to controlling for other tools of benchmark beating (e.g., discretionary accruals, real earnings management, and expectation management). We also find that managers tend to exclude more expenses from non-GAAP earnings when it is costlier to use accrual earnings management due to balance sheet constraints, indicating that these tools are substitutes. Lastly, we find that investors discount positive earnings surprises when accompanied by exclusions from GAAP earnings, suggesting that the market partially understands the opportunistic nature of these exclusions. Our evidence is consistent with managers opportunistically defining non-GAAP earnings in a way that analysts fail to fully anticipate, resulting in an increased likelihood of exceeding analyst forecasts.

This paper extends the work of Sloan (1996. The Accounting Review 71, 289) by linking accrual reliability to earnings persistence. We construct a model showing that less reliable accruals lead to lower earnings persistence. We then develop a comprehensive balance sheet categorization of accruals and rate each category according to the reliability of the underlying accruals. Empirical tests generally confirm that less reliable accruals lead to lower earnings persistence and that investors do not fully anticipate the lower earnings persistence, leading to significant security mispricing. These results suggest that there are significant costs associated with incorporating less reliable accrual information in financial statements.