This paper identifies and analyses previously published studies on annual earnings forecasts. Comparisons of forecasts produced by management, analysts, and extrapolative techniques indicated that: (1) management forecasts were superior to professional analyst forecasts (the mean absolute percentage errors were 15.9 and 17.7, respectively, based on five studies using data from [1967][1968][1969][1970][1971][1972][1973][1974] and (2) judgemental forecasts (both management and analysts) were superior .to extrapolation forecasts on 14 of 17 comparisons from 13 studies using data from 1964-1979 (the mean absolute percentage errors were 21 .O and 28.4 for judgement and extrapolation, respectively).These conclusions, based on recent research, differ from those reported in previous reviews, which commented on less than half of the studies identified here.
KEY WORDS Annual financial forecasts Judgement vs. extrapolation Management vs. analyst Amalgamated forecastsThis paper examines the accuracy of those methods currently used in forecasting annual earnings : management judgement, outside analyst judgement, and extrapolations. The first section draws upon research in finance and other fields to develop hypotheses concerning which forecasting methods would be most accurate for annual earnings forecasts. Section 2 presents a quantitative analysis of previously published studies, comparing management forecasts with analyst forecasts. In Section 3, a quantitative analysis is made of the evidence on judgement and extrapolative forecasts. The final sections offer proposals for further research and summarize the major conclusions.