This paper examines whether the phenomena of price drift around quarterly earnings re-leases exist among firms listed on the large cap. list at the Stockholm Stock Exchange for a time period ranging from the first quarter of 2003 to the second quarter of 2006. It fur-thermore examines the ability of the variables forecast error, relative to analyst’s estimates, and firms’ size to explain the variation in price drift among firms. A sample of some 30 firms were drawn in the first three quarters of each year between 2003 and 2005, for the year of 2006 only the fist two quarters were included in the study. For each quarter all firms were classified into three different portfolios on the basis of earnings deviations relative to mean analyst’s estimates (forecast error). The returns for each firm in all portfolios were investigated during 20 days post- and pre quarterly earnings release date, resulting in an event window totaling 41 days. In order to clear out effects from general market movements the Capital Asset Pricing Model, CAPM, was used in which betas were estimated for all firms each quarter. The findings from this study indicate that price drift, measured by cumulative abnormal re-turn, occur for firms with both negative forecast error as well as positive. For firms with positive error, statistically significant positive price drift was found for both the pre- and post period. As for the firms with earnings below analyst’s mean estimates, negative prean-nouncement drift was statistically supported. The ability of firms size and forecast error to explain the variation in price drift on a stock level was very weak, R2 measures of below 5% was reported. However, forecast error was a strongly significant independent variable in the context of the regressions run for both pre- and post-announcement drift. The firms below the lower market cap. quartile in the sample show, on average, lower pre-announcement drift than the firms belonging in the largest quartile. Concerning market efficiency among the large cap. firms the price drift found is an indica-tion of market inefficiency both it terms of the semi strong and the strong form. However, care should be taken before generalizing the results from this study but. Possible misspeci-fication of the equilibrium return model will skew the price drift measurement. Moreover, speculation is not explicitly controlled for in this test. Finally, this study is done within a li-mited time span; hence generalization over time is not possible

<p>This paper examines whether the phenomena of price drift around quarterly earnings re-leases exist among firms listed on the large cap. list at the Stockholm Stock Exchange for a time period ranging from the first quarter of 2003 to the second quarter of 2006. It fur-thermore examines the ability of the variables forecast error, relative to analyst’s estimates, and firms’ size to explain the variation in price drift among firms.</p><p>A sample of some 30 firms were drawn in the first three quarters of each year between 2003 and 2005, for the year of 2006 only the fist two quarters were included in the study. For each quarter all firms were classified into three different portfolios on the basis of earnings deviations relative to mean analyst’s estimates (forecast error). The returns for each firm in all portfolios were investigated during 20 days post- and pre quarterly earnings release date, resulting in an event window totaling 41 days. In order to clear out effects from general market movements the Capital Asset Pricing Model, CAPM, was used in which betas were estimated for all firms each quarter.</p><p>The findings from this study indicate that price drift, measured by cumulative abnormal re-turn, occur for firms with both negative forecast error as well as positive. For firms with positive error, statistically significant positive price drift was found for both the pre- and post period. As for the firms with earnings below analyst’s mean estimates, negative prean-nouncement drift was statistically supported.</p><p>The ability of firms size and forecast error to explain the variation in price drift on a stock level was very weak, R2 measures of below 5% was reported. However, forecast error was a strongly significant independent variable in the context of the regressions run for both pre- and post-announcement drift. The firms below the lower market cap. quartile in the sample show, on average, lower pre-announcement drift than the firms belonging in the largest quartile.</p><p>Concerning market efficiency among the large cap. firms the price drift found is an indica-tion of market inefficiency both it terms of the semi strong and the strong form. However, care should be taken before generalizing the results from this study but. Possible misspeci-fication of the equilibrium return model will skew the price drift measurement. Moreover, speculation is not explicitly controlled for in this test. Finally, this study is done within a li-mited time span; hence generalization over time is not possible</p>