Back to Drew's Views
December 10, 2019
Previous
Next

On Sexual Chocolate and Semi-Annual Reporting

Asset Pricing
Markets

Following on the tweet below by President Trump, there is again a lot of discussion of the merits of quarterly reporting, potential corporate short-termism, and the impact it might have on managerial decision-making.

On Sexual Choc 1.jpg

At first blush, the suggestion seems compelling. The logic goes that corporate managers are spending too much time kowtowing to sell-side analysts, and are making short-term decisions in order to achieve investor expectations, or their own guidance, and this is all at the expense of long-term value. The only problem, is it is all wrong. The presupposition that quarterly earnings and guidance somehow breeds short-termism and suboptimal business strategy, just doesn’t have much evidence supporting it. In a recent paper “Stock Market Short-Termism’s Impact” Professor Mark Roe commented:

“None of these predicted economy-wide outcomes (of short termism or quarterly reporting) have been shown. Corporate R&D is not declining, corporate cash is not bleeding out, and the world’s developed nations with neither American-style quarterly-oriented stock markets nor aggressive activist investors are investing no more in capital equipment than the U.S….  the calamitous form of the stock-market-driven short-termist argument needs to be reconsidered, recalibrated, and, quite plausibly, rejected.”

In other words, it appears that the consequence of having a portion of shareholders focused on short-term datapoints doesn’t necessarily imply short-term management of companies (Exhibits A and B: Google and Netflix). In fact there is an argument that reducing the periodicity of reporting would increase the potential for chicanery (by bad management, or by cheaters with inside info). Professors Campbell Harvey and Itzhak Ben-David have even argued that the ultimate goal for pure transparency should be continuous, real-time reporting.  They suggest that:

“Such a policy (real time financial transparency) would decrease the possibility of misinformation and value distortion.”

Naturally, there can be volatility when companies report, and the “bad” kind of volatility when they report disappointing numbers. Yet, just because the market punishes a stock for bad news doesn’t mean it is short term. The market is collectively discounting the future, long-term prospects of the firm back to that very moment. If some fast-growing retailer reports LFLs that are decelerating beyond the biggest bear’s imagination, and lowers full year guidance, the stock should fall! Cliff Asness, in his “Shareholder Value is Undervalued” piece a few years back, suggested (and I am paraphrasing):

“When management takes action today, in principle and mostly (yes, just mostly, I’ll get to that) in fact, the price today moves based on the market’s collective assessment of that action’s effect on the long-term value of the company. It only looks short-term to those who don’t understand this, or don’t want to…”

Barry Ritholz also points out that moving to longer periods between financial reporting would make those earnings reports even more significant, with potentially higher volatility around the event. He suggests that:

“Moving to twice-a-year reporting will make the event so momentous, with such focus on it that any company that misses analysts’ forecasts will find their stock price shellacked.”
On Sexual Choc 2.jpg
Good and Terrible

Now, there is an argument that quarterly reporting is a good thing, but that offering forward guidance isn’t. While this is more reasoned and nuanced claim, we disagree with this too. Companies often set internal targets. No one is against that (in fact, most are for it). And there is no law or SEC mandate stating that companies must communicate those targets externally. In other words, companies aren’t required to offer guidance. Yet most of them choose to do so. Legislating against this communication doesn't seem very free market.

We believe the elimination of ambiguity is good for the market, and that we all are willing to pay more for something when we have more information and certainty.

Take this argument to the extremes and imagine daily vs five-yearly reporting, and this feature becomes more illuminated: After the first four years, is the same company going to have lower volatility and a higher stock price than if they haven’t spoken to the market in four years than if they have been transparent the whole way through? No chance.  

‍If you want more shareholder value, lower share price volatility and less corporate fraud, report more often, not less.


Subscribe and sign up with your email address to receive the latest news and updates
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

FOOTNOTES

Download PDF

Topics

Asset Pricing
Markets

DISCLAIMER

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the post’s author and do not reflect the views of Albert Bridge Capital, or its affiliates. This post has been provided solely for information purposes and does not constitute an offer or solicitation of an offer or any advice or recommendation to purchase any securities or other financial instruments and may not be construed as such. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in this post or found by following any link in this post.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Text Link

Heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Text Link
Text Link

Here We Go

I will try as always to be objective here, but maybe some bias will be revealed in the process. I hope not, and I am sure you will let me know if I do. Given how politically charged things can be these days, I am bound to upset someone. That is not my intention. Not one bit. I am trying to help. I’m trying to help our investors. I’m trying to help my friends. I’m trying to help myself.

Markets
Stock Picking
Read More
Text Link

On Stock-Picking in Volatile Environments

Whether stocks are heading dramatically north, or disastrously south, how do you know if it is overreaction and psychology, or actual economic fundamentals driving the share price? In other words, how do you know which is which?

Behavioral Finance
Markets
Stock Picking
Read More
Text Link

Stock Market History, Illuminated, 2024 Style

The Sustainability of US Equity Market Outperformance; a prologue.

Markets
Read More
Text Link

Faith

The importance of "faith" when diagnosing investor behavior, including our own.

Markets
Stock Picking
Behavioral Finance
Read More
Text Link

Drew Chats with Matt Zeigler at The Intentional Investor and Epsilon Theory YouTube Channel

In the importance of culture, critique, and civility; and the impact some pretty impressive folks had on yours truly.

Markets
Behavioral Finance
Stock Picking
Read More
Text Link

The Analyst's Code

There is no holy grail of investing, but there is a recipe for getting close...

Markets
Valuation
Portfolio Management
Read More
Navigations
HomeTeamDrew's viewsPressContact
Disclaimers
Legal & regulatoryPrivacy policyCookies policy
How to get in Touch
info@albertbridgecapital.com

Subscribe to Drew's Views

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
© Albert Bridge Capital 2022
Website by SW10media.com
homeTeamdrew's viewspressCOntactDisclaimers