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
158143-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Recent research finds that there is significant variation in stock market participation by state and suggests that there might be state-specific factors that determine household stock market participation in the United States. Using household survey data, I examine how accounting quality of public companies at the state level affects households’

Recent research finds that there is significant variation in stock market participation by state and suggests that there might be state-specific factors that determine household stock market participation in the United States. Using household survey data, I examine how accounting quality of public companies at the state level affects households’ stock market participation decisions. I find that households residing in states where local public companies have better accounting quality are more likely to invest in stocks. Moreover, those households invest greater amounts of their wealth in the stock market. Cross-sectional tests find that the effect of accounting quality on stock market participation is more pronounced for less affluent and less educated households, consistent with prior findings that lacking familiarity with and trust in the stock market is an important factor deterring those types of households from stock investments. In state-level tests, I find that these household outcomes affect income inequality, which is less severe in states where high public-firm accounting quality spurs more stock market participation by poorer households. Conversely, in states where public firms have lower accounting quality, stock market participation among poorer households is less common, and a larger share of high equity returns accrues to richer households, exacerbating income inequality.
ContributorsKim, Min (Author) / Huang, Xiaochuan (Thesis advisor) / Rykaczewski, Maria (Committee member) / White, Roger (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020
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