Yes / This study uses the quality of coverage decisions as a new metric to evaluate the performance of star and non-star analysts. We find that the coverage decisions of star analysts are better predictors of returns than those of non-star analysts. The return predictability of star analysts’ coverage decisions is stronger for informationally opaque stocks. We further exploit the staggered short selling deregulations, Google’s withdrawal, and the anti-corruption campaign as three quasi-natural experiments that create plausibly exogenous variations in the quality of information environment. These experiments show that the predictive power of star analysts’ coverage decisions strengthens (weakens) following a sharp deterioration (improvement) in firms’ information environment, consistent with the notion that star analysts possess superior ability to identify mispriced stocks. Overall, star analysts make better coverage decisions and play a superior role as information intermediaries, especially in poor information environment.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BRADFORD/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/19123 |
| Date | 22 August 2022 |
| Creators | Jin, H., Mazouz, K., Wu, Yuliang, Xu, B. |
| Publisher | Elsevier |
| Source Sets | Bradford Scholars |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Article, Accepted manuscript |
| Rights | © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license., CC-BY-NC-ND |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds