This study examines the effect of peer-level analyst transitions (i.e., switching between brokerage houses) on associated regular incumbent analysts' forecasting performance. We employ a difference-in-differences research design with analyst fixed effects and compare incumbent analysts of different groups within the same broker and same time periods. We find that incumbents who cover at least one common industry as the transiting analyst (i.e., affected incumbents) issue more accurate and timely forecasts after a transiting analyst arrives than incumbents who cover different industries (i.e., unaffected incumbents). Further, affected incumbents issue less accurate forecasts after a transiting analyst leaves than do unaffected incumbents. We also examine potential mechanisms of knowledge spillover and find some evidence that the effect is more salient when the transiting analyst switches from a larger brokerage house, has greater industry scope, or covers geographically linked firms.

The many management guidance withdrawals during the COVID-19 pandemic have attracted considerable attention from the media, investors, and regulators. This study analyzes the determinants and consequences of these withdrawals. We find that guidance withdrawals are due to economic uncertainty, resulting from firms’ exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic rather than poor financial performance. Also, the effect of COVID-19 exposure on guidance withdrawals is stronger when firms face higher litigation risk. Further, guidance withdrawals result in abnormally large trading volumes and high analyst forecast dispersion but do not harm stock prices or the level of analyst earnings forecasts. Overall we believe the findings have implications for understanding corporate disclosure practices during periods with heightened economic uncertainty.