The time-varying performance of UK analyst recommendation revisions: Do market conditions matter?

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Pub Date : 2020-04-29 DOI:10.1111/fmii.12126
Chen Su, Hanxiong Zhang, Robert S. Hudson
{"title":"The time-varying performance of UK analyst recommendation revisions: Do market conditions matter?","authors":"Chen Su,&nbsp;Hanxiong Zhang,&nbsp;Robert S. Hudson","doi":"10.1111/fmii.12126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examines the time-varying performance of investment strategies following analyst recommendation revisions in the UK stock market, with specific emphasis on the impact of changing market conditions. We find a negative relationship between the recommendation performance and market conditions as measured in terms of past market return and market volatility. In particular, the <i>upgrade</i> (<i>downgrade</i>) portfolio generates significantly positive (negative) net abnormal returns in bad market conditions (e.g., the <i>dot-com</i> bubble burst in 2000 and the <i>credit</i> crisis in 2007), but not in other periods of time. Moreover, our non-temporal threshold regression analysis shows that the reported negative relationship disappears when market conditions become better, i.e., when the past market return (market volatility) is higher (lower) than a certain level, indicating the importance of taking non-linearity into account in the long sample period as examined in this study. Our time-series bootstrap simulations further confirm that the superior recommendation performance in bad market conditions is not due to random chance; analysts have certain skills in making valuable up/downward revisions in bad markets.</p>","PeriodicalId":39670,"journal":{"name":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","volume":"29 2","pages":"65-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/fmii.12126","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

This study examines the time-varying performance of investment strategies following analyst recommendation revisions in the UK stock market, with specific emphasis on the impact of changing market conditions. We find a negative relationship between the recommendation performance and market conditions as measured in terms of past market return and market volatility. In particular, the upgrade (downgrade) portfolio generates significantly positive (negative) net abnormal returns in bad market conditions (e.g., the dot-com bubble burst in 2000 and the credit crisis in 2007), but not in other periods of time. Moreover, our non-temporal threshold regression analysis shows that the reported negative relationship disappears when market conditions become better, i.e., when the past market return (market volatility) is higher (lower) than a certain level, indicating the importance of taking non-linearity into account in the long sample period as examined in this study. Our time-series bootstrap simulations further confirm that the superior recommendation performance in bad market conditions is not due to random chance; analysts have certain skills in making valuable up/downward revisions in bad markets.

Abstract Image

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
英国分析师建议修订的时变表现:市场状况重要吗?
本研究考察了英国股票市场分析师建议修订后投资策略的时变表现,特别强调了不断变化的市场条件的影响。我们发现,在过去的市场回报和市场波动方面,推荐绩效与市场状况之间存在负相关关系。特别是,在恶劣的市场条件下(例如,2000年的互联网泡沫破裂和2007年的信贷危机),升级(降级)投资组合产生显著的正(负)净异常回报,但在其他时期则不然。此外,我们的非时间阈值回归分析表明,当市场条件变得更好时,即当过去的市场回报(市场波动率)高于(低于)某一水平时,报告的负相关关系就会消失,这表明在本研究中检验的长样本期间考虑非线性的重要性。我们的时间序列自举模拟进一步证实,在糟糕的市场条件下,优越的推荐性能不是由于随机的机会;分析师在市场不景气时做出有价值的向上/向下修正有一定的技巧。
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
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments bridges the gap between the academic and professional finance communities. With contributions from leading academics, as well as practitioners from organizations such as the SEC and the Federal Reserve, the journal is equally relevant to both groups. Each issue is devoted to a single topic, which is examined in depth, and a special fifth issue is published annually highlighting the most significant developments in money and banking, derivative securities, corporate finance, and fixed-income securities.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Do banks adjust their capital when they face liquidity shortages? Evidence from U.S. commercial banks Piercing through the haze: Did PPP increase versus decrease bank efficiency? Issue Information
×
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