Bad News on Earnings? Be More Skeptical
In something of a surprise, a study shows positive earnings forecasts from companies are more reliable.
Beware of bad-news earnings forecasts -- they tend to be less reliable than predictions of good news, according to a study by Helen Hurwitz, an accounting doctoral student at the Columbia University School of Business.
Hurwitz’s research, presented at the recent annual meeting of the American Accounting Association, finds that management’s bad-news forecasts are significantly more likely than the good-news variety to err on the upside, overestimating at what level earnings will be in an effort to soften market reaction.
Stock price swings suggest that’s the opposite of conventional wisdom. Investors usually view good-news forecasts with more skepticism than bad ones, with a negative forecast pushing a company’s stock down by as much as 10%, while the rise for good news is only 2%. If bad-news forecasts are less reliable, such a big drop is probably an overreaction.
From just $107.88 $24.99 for Kiplinger Personal Finance
Become a smarter, better informed investor. Subscribe from just $107.88 $24.99, plus get up to 4 Special Issues
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
It’s “not that bad-news forecasts are more credible, as is widely believed, but just the opposite -- that investors tend to view them as less credible,” said Ben Haimowitz of the American Accounting Association.
Managers tend to be more cautious when issuing good-news forecasts, something Hurwitz attributes in large part to Reg FD, the full-disclosure rule imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2000. This rule requires management forecasts to be made to the public instead of to selected groups of analysts or institutions, which “reduces the optimistic bias in good-news management forecasts,” Hurwitz says.
Forecasts were defined for the research as good news or bad news depending on whether they were higher or lower than analyst consensus forecasts over the three months prior to the company’s prediction. The degree of optimism was determined by comparing the forecasts to the actual earnings at year’s end.
Threat of litigation is the main reason for the gap in credibility between good-news and bad-news forecasts. Companies are less likely to get sued for having better than expected results than for issuing forecasts that later prove too rosy. In other words, it’s more difficult to sue a firm for issuing a bad-news forecast. “Litigation risk reduces the optimism in good-news forecasts, but has no effect on bad-news management forecasts,” Hurwitz says.
The takeaway for investors: If a downbeat annual forecast issued by a firm prompts a steep decline in its stock, and the news doesn’t seem to warrant such a sharp decline, proceed with caution, Hurwitz says. “The market believes that the company’s outlook is worse than its announcement suggests, and, based on the findings of this study, it is likely that the market is right.”
-
Don't Overpay the IRS: 6 Tax Mistakes That Could Be Raising Your BillTax Tips Is your income tax bill bigger than expected? Here's how you should prepare for next year.
-
Flashback Finance: The Cost of Retiring the Year You Were BornJust like groceries, gas and home prices, the cost of retiring is subject to inflation. Here is a look at what it cost to retire in the year you were born.
-
How One Hospital Visit Overseas Could Wreck Your FinancesProper planning can give you peace of mind and protection, regardless of what happens on your trips.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into UPS Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayUnited Parcel Service stock has been a massive long-term laggard.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Lowe's Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayLowe's stock has delivered disappointing returns recently, but it's been a great holding for truly patient investors.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into 3M Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayMMM stock has been a pit of despair for truly long-term shareholders.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Coca-Cola Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayEven with its reliable dividend growth and generous stock buybacks, Coca-Cola has underperformed the broad market in the long term.
-
If You Put $1,000 into Qualcomm Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You Would Have TodayQualcomm stock has been a big disappointment for truly long-term investors.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Home Depot Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayHome Depot stock has been a buy-and-hold banger for truly long-term investors.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Bank of America Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayBank of America stock has been a massive buy-and-hold bust.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Oracle Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayORCL Oracle stock has been an outstanding buy-and-hold bet for decades.
