We examine whether chief financial officers (CFOs) with accounting backgrounds (accountant CFOs) are associated with more conservative corporate outcomes. We find that, in high-growth industries, firms with accountant CFOs invest less in research and development and capital expenditures and are less likely to engage in external financing. In low-growth industries, we find that firms with accountant CFOs exhibit greater cost efficiency. Our results are consistent with risk aversion on the part of accountant CFOs. We further document that accountant CFOs are negatively associated with firm value in high-growth industries and positively associated with firm value in low-growth industries.

We propose a pairwise measure of financial statement benchmarking (FSB) that captures the degree of overlap in the financial statement line items reported by two firms. We validate FSB by showing its association with actual peer choices of analysts and corporate boards. We then test the practical implications of FSB in the context of strategic peer selection by these parties. We find that analyst (board) chosen peers with low pairwise FSB are more likely to be strategic selections and that the set of peers assembled by an analyst (board) collectively having low FSB is associated with more optimistic earnings forecasts (higher CEO overpay). We also demonstrate alternative applications of FSB by aggregating the pairwise measure at the firm level and decomposing it into finer financial statement-specific components. Our evidence suggests that FSB can be a relevant tool for those using benchmarking applications, including practitioners and academics. Data Availability: Data are available from sources identified in the paper.