"Orphan versus non-orphan IPO firms: the difference analyst coverage makes", pp.257-274

Romain Boissin
Additional contact information
Romain Boissin: UM - Université de Montpellier

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This paper examines the long-run performance of US IPOs carried out between 1991 and 2010. By using various methodologies, we find that IPOs in our sample performed abnormally relative to comparison portfolios over the 1991-2010 horizon. This abnormal long-run performance is much severe for orphan IPOs (without financial recommendation) than non-orphan IPOs from three to five-year horizon (statistically significant). The evidence suggests that analyst coverage is indeed important to issuing firm but the market do not fully incorporate the perceived value of this coverage. Further analysis reveals that this outperformance by non-orphan stems from high coverage. Investors pay more attention to non-orphan when IPOs have a large underwriting syndicate and are high underpriced. The difference between orphan and non-orphan subsists in VC backed or non VC backed IPOs and whatever the ownership structure of the IPOs. We establish that analyst coverage is significantly related to long-run performance of IPOs.

Date: 2013
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Handbook of research on IPOs, edited by Mario Levis and Silvio Vismara, Edward Elgar Publishing, 578 pages, 2013

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:hal:journl:hal-04887247

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().