2020
DOI: 10.1007/s11142-020-09560-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysts’ annual earnings forecasts and changes to the I/B/E/S database

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Call, Hewitt, Watkins and Yohn (2020) find that EPS forecast accuracy improves for more recent vintages of I/B/E/S data, consistent with coverage bias by I/B/E/S. We compared a 2-year earlier vintage of our data, and found small decreases in dividend forecast errors across overlapping periods in the two samples (0.79% using the earlier vintage vs. 0.76% in Table4).…”
supporting
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Call, Hewitt, Watkins and Yohn (2020) find that EPS forecast accuracy improves for more recent vintages of I/B/E/S data, consistent with coverage bias by I/B/E/S. We compared a 2-year earlier vintage of our data, and found small decreases in dividend forecast errors across overlapping periods in the two samples (0.79% using the earlier vintage vs. 0.76% in Table4).…”
supporting
confidence: 75%
“…Nevertheless, conclusions from other tests are unaffected when using the earlier vintage data. The small impact in our setting likely reflects the fact that theCall et al (2020) results are concentrated in "younger, less followed firms with lower profits and stronger earnings growth" (p. 2), which are less likely to be reflected in our sample of dividend payers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Our examination of the 2009 I/B/E/S methodology change extends prior work documenting material changes in the I/B/E/S database over time (e.g., Call et al. [2021]), and helps explain the differences between I/B/E/S actuals and analyst‐inferred actuals documented by Brown and Larocque [2013]. Accordingly, our findings are relevant to both market participants and researchers who rely on FDP‐produced data.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Nonetheless, we conduct additional tests to mitigate the concern. In column (1) of Table 4 we first examine whether predictors of sell-side analyst forecast accuracy influence INTERSECTION by regressing the latter on past accuracy (Brown, 2001) and firm-specific experience (Brown et al, 2016;Call et al, 2021;Clement, 1999). 25 The results provide mixed evidence in that the relations between INTERSECTION and past accuracy and experience are marginally significantly negative and significantly positive, respectively.…”
Section: Endogeneity Due To Institutional Preferences For Certain Obs...mentioning
confidence: 99%