Accuracy of European Stock Target Prices

Joana Almeida, R. M. Gaspar
{"title":"Accuracy of European Stock Target Prices","authors":"Joana Almeida, R. M. Gaspar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3644963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Equity studies are conducted by professionals, who also provide buy/hold/sell recommendations to investors. Nowadays, target prices determined by financial analysts are publicly available to investors, who may decide to use them for investment purposes. Studying the accuracy of such analysts’ forecasts is, thus, of paramount importance. Based upon empirical data on 50 of the biggest (larger capitalisation) European stocks over a 15-year period, from 2004 to 2019, and using a panel data approach, this is the first study looking at overall accuracy in European stock markets. We find that Bloomberg’s 12-month consensus target prices have no predictive power over future market prices. Our panel results are robust to company fixed effects and subperiod analysis. These results are in line with the (mostly US-based) evidence in the literature. Extending common practice, we perform a comparative accuracy analysis, comparing the accuracy of target prices with that of simple capitalisations of current prices. It turns out target prices are not better at forecasting than simple capitalisations. When considering individual regressions, accuracy is still very low, but it varies considerably across stocks. By also analysing the relationship between both measures—target prices and capitalised prices—we find evidence that, for some stocks, capitalised prices partially explain how target prices are determined.","PeriodicalId":389424,"journal":{"name":"FinPlanRN: Other Investments (Topic)","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FinPlanRN: Other Investments (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3644963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Equity studies are conducted by professionals, who also provide buy/hold/sell recommendations to investors. Nowadays, target prices determined by financial analysts are publicly available to investors, who may decide to use them for investment purposes. Studying the accuracy of such analysts’ forecasts is, thus, of paramount importance. Based upon empirical data on 50 of the biggest (larger capitalisation) European stocks over a 15-year period, from 2004 to 2019, and using a panel data approach, this is the first study looking at overall accuracy in European stock markets. We find that Bloomberg’s 12-month consensus target prices have no predictive power over future market prices. Our panel results are robust to company fixed effects and subperiod analysis. These results are in line with the (mostly US-based) evidence in the literature. Extending common practice, we perform a comparative accuracy analysis, comparing the accuracy of target prices with that of simple capitalisations of current prices. It turns out target prices are not better at forecasting than simple capitalisations. When considering individual regressions, accuracy is still very low, but it varies considerably across stocks. By also analysing the relationship between both measures—target prices and capitalised prices—we find evidence that, for some stocks, capitalised prices partially explain how target prices are determined.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲股票目标价格的准确性
股票研究由专业人士进行,他们还向投资者提供买入/持有/卖出的建议。如今,金融分析师确定的目标价格对投资者是公开的,投资者可能决定将其用于投资目的。因此,研究这些分析师预测的准确性至关重要。基于2004年至2019年15年间50只欧洲最大(市值较大)股票的实证数据,并使用面板数据方法,这是首个研究欧洲股市整体准确性的研究。我们发现,彭博12个月的共识目标价对未来市场价格没有预测能力。我们的面板结果对公司固定效应和子周期分析是稳健的。这些结果与文献中的(大部分是基于美国的)证据一致。延伸一般做法,我们进行比较准确度分析,将目标价格的准确度与当前价格的简单资本化的准确度进行比较。事实证明,目标价格在预测方面并不比简单的资本化更好。当考虑单个回归时,准确性仍然很低,但在不同的股票中差异很大。通过分析目标价格和资本化价格这两个指标之间的关系,我们发现证据表明,对于某些股票,资本化价格部分解释了目标价格是如何确定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Factor Model for Cryptocurrency Returns Stock Price Level Effect A Dynamic Measure of Intentional Herd Behavior Causing Excess Volatility in U.S. Stock Markets (미국 주식시장의 초과변동성과 의도적 무리행동의 동태적 측정) Financial Intermediary Leverage, Volatility, and the Cross-Section of Asset Returns Parimutuel Betting Markets: Racetracks and Lotteries Revisited
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1