Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

149722-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Responding to the allegedly biased research reports issued by large investment banks, the Global Research Analyst Settlement and related regulations went to great lengths to weaken the conflicts of interest faced by investment bank analysts. In this paper, I investigate the effects of these changes on small and large investor

Responding to the allegedly biased research reports issued by large investment banks, the Global Research Analyst Settlement and related regulations went to great lengths to weaken the conflicts of interest faced by investment bank analysts. In this paper, I investigate the effects of these changes on small and large investor confidence and on trading profitability. Specifically, I examine abnormal trading volumes generated by small and large investors in response to security analyst recommendations and the resulting abnormal market returns generated. I find an overall increase in investor confidence in the post-regulation period relative to the pre-regulation period consistent with a reduction in existing conflicts of interest. The change in confidence observed is particularly striking for small traders. I also find that small trader profitability has increased in the post-regulation period relative to the pre-regulation period whereas that for large traders has decreased. These results are consistent with the Securities and Exchange Commission's primary mission to protect small investors and maintain the integrity of the securities markets.
ContributorsDong, Xiaobo (Author) / Mikhail, Michael (Thesis advisor) / Hwang, Yuhchang (Committee member) / Hugon, Artur J (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
155350-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Insider trading potentially reveals proprietary information, allowing rivals to compete more effectively against the insiders' firm. This paper examines whether proprietary costs are associated with insiders' trading decisions and the profitability of their trades. Using a variety of approaches to identify proprietary information risk, I find proprietary costs significantly deter

Insider trading potentially reveals proprietary information, allowing rivals to compete more effectively against the insiders' firm. This paper examines whether proprietary costs are associated with insiders' trading decisions and the profitability of their trades. Using a variety of approaches to identify proprietary information risk, I find proprietary costs significantly deter insiders' trading activities. The deterrence effect is more pronounced when insider trading is likely to be more informative to rivals. Specifically, trades by top executives, non-routine trades, and trades at low complexity firms are curbed to a greater extent by proprietary costs. Examining the mechanisms of this deterrence effect, I find firms with higher proprietary costs are more likely to impose insider trading restrictions, and insiders' trading decisions are more sensitive to proprietary costs when they have higher share ownership of the company. These results suggest insiders reduce trading activities not only due to firm policies, but also due to incentive alignment. Finally, when insiders trade despite higher proprietary costs, they earn significantly higher abnormal profits from their purchase transactions. Overall, this study suggests product market considerations are an important factor associated with insiders' trading decisions and profitability of their trades. These findings are likely to be of interest to regulators and corporate boards in setting insider trading policies, and help investors make investment decisions using insider trading signals.
ContributorsChoi, Lyungmae (Author) / Hillegeist, Stephen (Thesis advisor) / Faurel, Lucile (Thesis advisor) / Hugon, Jean (Committee member) / Huang, Xiaochuan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
158309-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This study examines how short selling threats affect firms’ non-generally accepted accounting principles (non-GAAP) reporting quality. From 2005 to 2007, the SEC implemented a Pilot Program under Regulation SHO, in which one-third of the Russell 3000 index stocks were randomly chosen as pilot stocks and exempted from short-sale price tests.

This study examines how short selling threats affect firms’ non-generally accepted accounting principles (non-GAAP) reporting quality. From 2005 to 2007, the SEC implemented a Pilot Program under Regulation SHO, in which one-third of the Russell 3000 index stocks were randomly chosen as pilot stocks and exempted from short-sale price tests. As a result, short selling threats increased considerably for pilot stocks. Using difference-in-differences tests, I find that pilot firms respond to the increased short selling threats by reducing the use of low-quality non-GAAP exclusions, resulting in an improvement in the quality of overall non-GAAP exclusions. Further tests show that this effect of short selling threats is more pronounced for smaller firms, firms with lower institutional ownership, firms with lower analyst coverage, and firms with lower ratios of fundamental value to market value. These findings suggest short sellers play an important monitoring role in disciplining managers, as evidenced by the non-GAAP reporting choices of managers.
ContributorsLiu, Junjun (Author) / Faurel, Lucile (Thesis advisor) / Li, Yinghua (Committee member) / Rykaczewski, Maria (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020