Knowledge that Transforms

This study extends previous research that documents a stock price reaction leading accounting earnings. The primary issue is that prior studies use a naive earnings expectation model (random walk) as the benchmark for the information content of lagged returns and do not adequately address the “incremental” information content of lagged returns. This study identifies and estimates firm‐specific models of earnings to control directly for the autocorrelation in earnings. The explanatory power of lagged prices with respect to this earnings residual is investigated using both a multiple regression model of lagged returns and a multiple time‐series vector autoregressive model. In‐sample estimation of the models provides clear evidence that stock prices impound information about future earnings incremental to the information contained in historical earnings data. Holdout period analysis of the earnings forecasts from these lagged return models finds that both models outperform the naive seasonal random walk expectation, but neither model outperforms the more sophisticated Box‐Jenkins forecasts. On an individual firm basis, earnings forecasts supplemented with the lagged return data tend to be less precise than the Box‐Jenkins forecasts, but the price‐based models demonstrate an ability to rank the earnings forecast errors from the time‐series models. The analysis helps to characterize the limitations of lagged returns as a means of predicting future earnings innovations.

We examine the 49 Standard & Poor's (S&P) 500 firms that voluntarily disclosed in their 1993 proxy statements, the composition of the comparison group used by each board's compensation committee to set executive compensation policies. We hypothesize that the net benefits of this disclosure are largest when (1) there is a high degree of stakeholder concern about compensation, (2) compensation policies are defensible, and (3) corporate governance is strong. Consistent with our stakeholder concern prediction, disclosing firms have higher compensation levels and are more apt to have received prior shareholder proposals about executive compensation. Contrary to this prediction, we find a negative association between financial press coverage of compensation policies and the probability of disclosure. Additionally, the disclosure decision is unrelated to the defensibility of compensation policies and the firm's corporate governance profile. Industry‐adjusted firm performance, managerial entrenchment, CEO tenure, institutional holdings, and compensation committee independence variables are insignificant. We also compare the financial performance and compensation practices of compensation peers to two yardsticks — performance and pay practices at the sample firms and the corresponding S&P industry index firms. The compensation levels of compensation peers exceed those of the firms in the corresponding S&P industry indexes. Because (1) compensation levels and performance sensitivities at sample firms are more similar to those at compensation peers than to those at S&P industry index firms, and (2) the superior financial performance and higher performance sensitivities of disclosing firms justify high pay, this evidence suggests that the compensation peers of disclosing firms are an appropriate comparison group.

This paper investigates the usefulness of a dynamic analysis of audit‐market competition in terms of audit‐market‐share mobility, audit‐firm entry, and audit‐firm exit. These dynamic measures of market structure are compared between the more regulated German audit market and the more liberal Dutch audit market. Prior research on audit market structure has focused on static analyses in terms of seller concentration of single national audit markets. By using data on the number of auditors as the measure of audit‐firm size, this paper covers all firms active in the two audit markets in the period 1970 to 1994. The results indicate that the more liberal Dutch audit market has the highest dynamic measures of market structure and the highest concentration. Hence, the results show that high concentration can go hand in hand with high‐market‐share mobility and high audit‐firm entry and exit. The results for market‐share mobility also hold for an analysis including only the largest audit firms. The paper therefore concludes, that compared with a static seller concentration analysis, an analysis of audit‐market dynamics provides a better description of the degree of competition in audit markets.

This paper makes four contributions to the literature relating accounting choices to CEO compensation. First, it shows that discretionary accruals are associated with CEO cash compensation, a result that holds after controlling for both the nondiscretionary components of income and increases in shareholder wealth. Although significant, the coefficient on discretionary accruals is significantly lower than that on nondiscretionary accruals, which in turn is significantly lower than the coefficient on operating cash flows. Second, the paper shows a differential reaction to positive and negative discretionary accruals —‐ the association between positive discretionary accruals and CEO cash compensation is significantly greater than the association between negative discretionary accruals and CEO cash compensation. Third, the paper shows the association between discretionary accruals and CEO cash compensation varies depending upon the circumstances of the firm. In particular, when positive discretionary accruals allow the firm to reduce or avoid a loss, the association between CEO cash compensation and discretionary accruals is significantly greater. Finally, this paper shows that the association of CEO cash compensation with reported income generally increases with the level of discretionary accruals, consistent with management responding to the incentives provided.

Electric utilities in the United States are subject to a cost‐plus normal profits pricing that is designed to align the market value of equity with the balance sheet book value. Perfect alignment implies the equality of the market and book values. Extant empirical evidence suggests that, for these utilities, actual cost/profit recovery does not follow a pure cost‐plus pricing, raising the prospect that income statement items contribute to the determination of market value. What is not obvious is the extent to which the noted departure from pure cost‐plus pricing results in misalignment of the market and book values, or the relative contribution of income statement items to the valuation of electric utility shares. This study pursues this question, using benchmark results for a sample of manufacturing firms to highlight the degree of market‐to‐book alignment for regulated and competitive firms. The results show a considerable alignment of the market and book values for utilities. In examining the relevance of book value and income statement items in the determination of market value, it is found that the contribution of earnings level to explaining market value diminishes markedly in the presence of book value for electric utilities, and the contribution of earnings change to explaining returns diminishes markedly in the presence of earnings levels. Earnings level complements book value in explaining market value for manufacturing firms, while earnings change complements earnings level in explaining returns. The results further show that the market and accounting values exhibit pronounced misalignments in returns‐earnings models, especially for utilities.