310 likes | 557 Views
2. Theory Versus Practice. Theory
E N D
1. The Economics of Short-Term Performance Obsession Al Rappaport
Q Group Seminar
October 19, 2004
2. 2 Theory Versus Practice Theory—Discounted cash flows (DCF)
Practice—Short-term earnings and tracking error
3. 3 Five Basic Questions Why do investment managers focus on quarterly earnings?
Can stock prices be allocatively efficient when short-term earnings and tracking error dominate investment decisions?
Can investment managers earn excess returns if they buy and sell stocks they believe the market has mispriced on a discounted cash-flow basis?
Is corporate management’s focus on short-term earnings self-serving or also in the best interests of its shareholders?
What can be done to alleviate the obsession with short-term performance and improve allocative efficiency?
4. 4 The Limitations of Earnings Earnings
Facts—realized cash flows
Assumptions about the future—accruals
Accruals
Existing (incomplete) contracts
Value
Existing plus future contracts
Accruals/ Stock Price
Typically less than 5%
5. 5 The Appeal of Earnings Investment managers
Asymmetric information
Estimating distant cash flows too speculative
Short-horizon investors and the Keynes beauty contest
Stock prices respond to “earnings surprises”
CEOs
Belief that earnings drive company stock price
Concern with reputation
Incentive compensation
6. 6 Market Efficiency Informational efficiency
No free lunch
Fundamental efficiency
The price is right
Allocative efficiency
Degree to which stock prices allocate resources to firms with the most promising long-term prospects
7. 7 Informational Efficiency The evidence
Scarcity of investment strategies and money managers that earn excess returns
Huge expenditures for investment research—why?
“Subsidized informational efficiency”
Conventional wisdom
Efficiency depends on market participants disbelieving it
Paradoxical reality
Active managers contribute to informational efficiency by closely tracking their benchmarks
Stock prices reflect information relevant to the models investors employ and therefore an informationally-efficient market is not necessarily allocatively-efficient
8. 8 Fundamental Efficiency The “right price” is indeterminate
Heterogeneous beliefs and risk preferences
The right price is unknowable today and cannot be determined at a later date
Those who contend that stocks were “mispriced” in the past typically rely on information available only after the alleged mispricing
Event studies
Address informational efficiency of stock price changes, not fundamental efficiency of stock price levels
9. 9 Allocative Efficiency Allocative efficiency
Depends on skills of informed investors with competing estimates of DCF value
An ideal
A nearly informationally efficient market (no free lunch, but occasional early bird specials) dominated by informed DCF investors.
Today’s reality
Pervasive use of non-DCF models
10. 10 Non-DCF Models Portfolio benchmarking
Earnings expectations game
“Fundamental” analysis that’s not fundamental
Shortcut metrics—P/E, Price/Sales, Price/Book
Pervasive use of relative valuation (multiples, comparables)
Relative valuation does not independently estimate absolute value of stocks and thereby does not directly contribute to allocatively-efficient prices
Technical analysis
Indexing
Restrictions on short-selling
Limits ability of pessimistic investors to reflect their opinions in prices
Socially responsible funds
Employees with undiversified positions in their company’s stock
11. 11 How Allocatively-Efficient Is the Equity Market? Who are the guardians of allocative efficiency?
Can allocatively-efficient prices emerge in Adam Smith invisible-hand fashion given the dominance of non-DCF traders?
12. 12 Are Mispriced Stocks Exploitable? Limits to arbitrage in equity market
Imperfect substitute securities to hedge
Noise trader risk
Costs
Trading commissions
Bid-ask spreads
Market impact costs
Short-sale fees and constraints
13. 13 Are Mispriced Stocks Exploitable? If arbitrage is not feasible, investors must develop better estimates of value than the current price
Why should long-term investors use DCF if prices are dominated by short-term earnings?
Stock prices ultimately depend on a company’s ability to generate cash flow
View prices as if they reflect DCF expectations and assess whether your expectations are sufficiently different to warrant purchasing or selling shares
Competitive advantage of skilled investors
Superior ability to anticipate long-term valuation implications of currently available information
14. 14 Are Mispriced Stock Exploitable? Factors that shape returns
Size of mispricing relative to current price
Extent to which price moves toward investor’s estimate of value
Time it takes for stock price to converge toward investor’s estimate of value
Unanticipated information that triggers price changes
15. 15 Corporate Executives and Earnings Obsession Graham, Harvey and Rajgopal (2004) survey of financial executives
Earnings the most important performance measure reported to outsiders
Quarterly earnings for the same quarter last year
Analyst consensus estimate for the current quarter
Failure to meet earnings targets
Sign of managerial weakness
If repeated, can lead to career-threatening dismissal
May signal presence of more serious problems
Executives willing to forego or delay value-creating activities to meet quarterly earnings targets.
16. 16 Managing for Long-Term Value Primary commitment to continuing shareholders and not to day traders, momentum investors, and other short-term oriented market participants
Managing for short-term earnings compromises shareholder value
Companies forego or delay value-creating opportunities to meet earnings expectations
Companies exploit the discretion allowed in calculation of earnings by accelerating revenues and deferring expenses
Borrowing from the future inevitably catches up with companies when they can no longer deliver on expectations. When this happens a significant fraction or all of its value is destroyed (WorldCom, Enron)
Maximizing long-term cash-flow, even in an earnings-dominated market, is the most effective means of creating value for continuing shareholders
17. 17 A Three-Pronged Attack on Short-Term Performance Obsession Corporate performance reporting
Incentives for investment managers
Incentives for corporate executives
18. 18 Corporate Performance Reporting The Corporate Performance Statement
Separates cash flows and accruals
Classifies accruals by levels of uncertainty
Provides a range as well as the most likely estimate for each accrual
Excludes arbitrary, value-irrelevant accruals
Details assumptions and risks for each line item
19. 19
20. 20 Corporate Performance Statement
If CPS information isn’t already available internally, shareholders should be concerned with management’s grasp of the business and the board’s exercise of its oversight responsibility
Statement makes it easier for boards to champion executive compensation plans that reward long-term value creation
21. 21 Incentives for Investment Managers
The fear of being wrong and alone induced by benchmark performance evaluation shrinks differences between the best and worst performers
Benchmark tracking and a herd-like focus on the short-term earnings may create mispricing opportunities for long-term investors
22. 22 Incentives for Investment Managers The problem is not benchmarking, but
Short-horizon benchmarking
Tight tracking-error constraints
Benchmarks that limit investment breadth
Information ratio depends on skill and breadth (Grinold)
The problem with open-end fund structure
Withdrawal of funds due to short-term underperformance or when equity prices fall
Discourages investments that are only attractive in the long-run
23. 23 Incentives for Investment Managers Closed-end funds (Stein, 2004)
Managers can undertake longer-horizon trades
Instability of closed-end structure
Will the best managers move to open-end form to increase assets and their compensation?
Incentives for retaining skilled closed-end managers
Total compensation competitive with open-end alternative
Annual bonus paid on rolling three- to five-year performance
Defer some payouts against future performance
Require managers to make a meaningful investment in the fund
Same incentives appropriate for open-end managers but fund withdrawal risk remains
24. 24 Incentives for Corporate Executives Problems with standard executive stock options
Performance targets are too low
Holding periods are too short
Underwater options undermine motivation and retention
Options can induce too little or too much risk-taking
25. 25 Incentives for Corporate Executives Indexed-options plans
Peer versus broader market indexes
Difficulty of constructing peer index
Overcome two of the problems with standard options
Performance targets too low
Underwater options driven by falling equity prices
The other two problems—short holding periods and too little or too much risk-taking—are addressed by
Extending vesting period and requiring executives to maintain meaningful equity stakes
26. 26 Incentives for Corporate Executives Indexed-option plans—why has no one adopted them?
Misplaced accounting concerns
Require a higher level of performance
Dealing with the underwater options problem
Discounted index options
Index rises from 100 to 110
1% discount on exercise price reduces index from 110 to 108.9—a rise of 8.9% instead of 10%
27. 27 Incentives for Corporate Executives Discounted equity-risk options (DEROs) for companies unable to construct a peer index
Change in exercise price=Yield on ten-year Treasury + x% of equity risk premium – dividends per share
ERP forecast “error” pales in comparison to failure of standard options to incorporate any shareholder opportunity cost
DEROs balance the tradeoff between setting performance at levels that compensate shareholders for equity risk and the need to keep executives motivated
Dividends are deducted from exercise price to remove management incentive to hold back distributions in the absence of value-creating opportunities.
28. 28 Incentives for Corporate Executives Restricted stock versus discounted index options or DEROs
“Pay for pulse” rather than pay for performance
Restricted stock grants are options with an exercise price of zero
Because three to four options are granted for each restricted share, options provide greater upside when the stock performs well while restricted stock has greater payoffs when the stock performs poorly. What’s wrong with this picture?
Example: 20,000 restricted shares versus 70,000 standard ten-year options; stock trading at $40
Stock must rise 40% to $56 for CEO to have an identical pre-tax gain
CEO gains more from options if stock price appreciates more than 4% annually
CEO gains more from restricted stock for any appreciation of less than 4% annually all the way down to a near-100% decrease from price at grant date.
Performance shares require not only that executives remain on the payroll but that the company achieve predetermined performance goals.
Short-run earnings, revenue or return on capital goals can however conflict with maximizing long-term value
29. 29 Essential Ideas Short-termism is the disease-earnings and benchmark tracking the carriers.
Accounting conveys information about a small fraction of a company’s value.
The “right” prices are unknowable, there are only transacting investors who believe they are “wrong.”
Prices in a “no-free-lunch” market are not necessarily allocatively-efficient.
30. 30 Essential Ideas The guardians of allocative efficiency are difficult to identify.
DCF matters because prices ultimately depend on cash flow.
Estimate price-implied cash-flow expectations and assess whether there are exploitable mispricings.
Only those with brains, resources, a long investment horizon, and no agency conflicts are promising candidates for exploiting mispricings.
31. 31 Essential Ideas Corporate executives obsessed with earnings misallocate capital and compromise shareholder value.
Maximizing long-term cash flows is best means of creating value for continuing shareholders.
Alleviating short-term performance obsession requires meaningful changes in corporate performance reporting and incentives for investment managers and corporate managers.