Do regulations matter? The effects of cross‐listing on analysts' coverage and forecast errors

Abed AL-Nasser Abdallah

Review of Accounting and Finance, 2008, vol. 7, issue 3, 285-307

Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to compare foreign listings on regulated and unregulated exchanges, and civil and common‐law companies to test the effects of cross‐listing (CL) on the firm's number of analysts and the accuracy of their forecast. Design/methodology/approach - The study is a comparative one. The empirical test employs both univariate and multivariate analyses and a sample of 584 cross‐listed firms along with the number of analysts and analysts' forecast errors (FE). Findings - After controlling for the firm's size, risk, earnings surprise, and industry, the results show that analysts become more active around CL on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) and PORTAL compared to CL on AMEX, NASDAQ, NYSE and over the counter (OTC). On the contrary, no statistically significant decrease in the magnitude of analysts' FEs was reported, suggesting no increase in the quantity of analysts' information. The results hold for both civil and common‐law countries. Research limitations/implications - The study is limited to the use of cross‐listed firms only. Future research should include non‐cross‐listed firms. As for the implications, the evidence indicates that the choice between CL on regulated or unregulated exchanges in the USA has no impact, either on the decision of an analyst to follow the firm or on the quantity of information available about that firm. In addition, the evidence suggests that analysts are more inclined to follow firms that cross‐list on the LSE than on the US regulated exchanges. Moreover, PORTAL, as an unregulated market, provides surprising evidence on the significant role of the US large institutional investors in attracting the highest number of analysts per firm compared to other regulated exchanges. Originality/value - The paper compares CL on regulated and unregulated exchanges in the USA and UK for both civil and common‐law firms. It contributes to the existing literature on CL and information disclosure and has implications for academics, market regulators, professionals, and multinational firms.

Keywords: Regulation; Financial analysis; Financial forecasting; Civil law; Common law (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:rafpps:v:7:y:2008:i:3:p:285-307

DOI: 10.1108/14757700810898267

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Accounting and Finance is currently edited by Nawazish Mirza

More articles in Review of Accounting and Finance from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().