We provide evidence that dividends signal sustainable earnings generated by assets-in-place for firms with weak investment opportunities. In the cross-section, both dividend levels and changes contain more earnings information among firms with weaker investment opportunities. Intertemporally, when aggregate investment opportunities in the economy are worse, dividend changes convey more earnings information. In contrast, dividends have a more negative association with investment spending for firms with strong growth options, as funding investment is a higher priority for those firms. Collectively, our findings suggest that dividends serve as a counter-signal, whereby additional information about investment opportunities give rise to signaling that is non-monotonic in firm quality.

We show analysts’ own earnings forecasts predict error in their own forecasts of earnings at other horizons, which we argue provides a measure of the extent to which analysts inefficiently use information. We construct our measure by exploiting two sources of variation in analysts’ incentives: (i) more recent forecasts have greater salience at the time of the earnings release so accuracy incentives are higher (lower) at shorter (longer) forecast horizons and (ii) analysts have greater incentives for optimism (pessimism) at longer (shorter) horizons. Consistent with these incentives affecting the incorporation of information into forecasts, we document (i) current year forecasts underweight (overweight) information in shorter (longer) horizon forecasts and (ii) the mis-weighting is more pronounced when recent news is negative—when analysts have greater (weaker) incentives to incorporate the news into shorter (longer) horizon forecasts. Finally, returns tests suggest that forecasts adjusted for the inefficiency we document better represent market expectations of earnings.

Fund trades and stock prices vary systematically with the quarterly reporting cycle. Funds accelerate trades that complete the building of existing positions at quarter-end but delay trades that initiate the building of new positions until the start of the new quarter. Evidence suggests these trade dynamics are driven by a dual desire to make disclosures more informative about future holdings but avoid disclosing incomplete positions. Consistent with disclosure-based motives unrelated to new information about intrinsic values driving these quarterly trade dynamics, both stock price informativeness and commissions paid by funds drop at quarter-end.