60 likes | 208 Views
Do Analysts Overreact to Good News and Underreact to Bad News: A Hazard Model Approach. Discussant: Yun-Yi Wang, Feng Chia University 2010 NTUICF, Taipei, Taiwan. Summary and Main Results.
E N D
Do Analysts Overreact to Good News and Underreact to Bad News: A Hazard Model Approach Discussant: Yun-Yi Wang, Feng Chia University 2010 NTUICF, Taipei, Taiwan
Summary and Main Results • This study isolates incentives and cognitive processing biases through the timing of analysts’ recommendation revisions. • when they control for favorable preceding recommendations • analysts delay conveying bad news • which is consistent with the incentives and cognitive dissonance hypotheses. • when they control for unfavorable preceding recommendations • analysts delay conveying good news • which is only consistent with the cognitive dissonance hypothesis.
Strengths and Contributions • The authors use analysts’ recommendation reversion to isolates incentives and cognitive processing biases. • Empirical strategy is innovative and new. • Security analyst optimism is a well-known phenomenon. • My points will be suggestions intented to improve the paper.
Comment and Suggestion 1 • Hazard model: • Previous literature (ex, Mokoaleli-Mokoteli et al., 2009, JBFA) shows that analysts’ recommendations are associated with • previous stock price performance, growth status of the firm (low book-to-market), firm size, corporate relationships between their investment bank employers and the firms they are following,… • Is it possible to include control variable in the hazard model?
Comment and Suggestion 2 • The observed behavior can be explained by several biases at the same time. • Can be explained by any other rational or irrational explanations?
169.72 Favorable ︿ Favorable • If the analyst need to reverse their preceding recommendation, they need more time to confirm whether the news is correct and whether the reversion is necessary. Unfavorable 175.33 Favorable 170.66 ﹀ Unfavorable Unfavorable 136.66