Updated April 2015
A paper by Ilia Dichev, John Graham, Campbell R. Harvey and Shiva Rajgopal entitled "Earnings Quality: Evidence from the Field" provides investors with some interesting insights into the quality of earnings statements from publicly traded companies. Given that we always seem to be in the middle of one earnings reporting cycle or another, this study shows us that we can't always believe what we read.
A paper by Ilia Dichev, John Graham, Campbell R. Harvey and Shiva Rajgopal entitled "Earnings Quality: Evidence from the Field" provides investors with some interesting insights into the quality of earnings statements from publicly traded companies. Given that we always seem to be in the middle of one earnings reporting cycle or another, this study shows us that we can't always believe what we read.
Earnings statements form
the heart of internal data used by most savvy investors to pick and choose
their equity investment portfolio. Since most of us invest in companies
(and sectors) that we have no internal knowledge about, we rely heavily on the
honesty of Chief Financial Officers and their fellow executives; we assume that
because the data they release to the public has been verified by accountants, that it is trustworthy.
The authors of the report
surveyed 169 CFOs and had in-depth interviews with 12 CFOs. The authors
selected CFOs rather than CEOs or other senior executives because CFOs are the
direct producers of earning data and they "intimately know and potentially
cater to consumers of earnings information such as investment managers and
analysts." CFOs usually have formal training in accounting which
allows them to determine the quality of their own earnings statements.
The authors found the
following:
1.) CFOs believe that
quality earnings are sustainable and repeatable. This viewpoint is
consistent with the view taken by investors who believe that a given firm is a
long-lived profit-generating entity and that corporate value is based on
estimating and discounting a long stream of future profits.
2.) CFOs believe that
reporting discretion has declined over time and that current GAAP (Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles) standards are a constraint in reporting high
quality earnings. CFOs would like to see standard setters issue fewer rules
and take the viewpoint that financial reporting has become a compliance
activity rather than a means to innovate to deliver the best possible
information to stakeholders, in other words, to be self-policing and self-determining.
To me, this is the most
interesting find:
3.) CFOs estimate that
in any given reporting period, roughly 20 percent of firms manage earnings and
that the typical misrepresentation for such firms is about 10 percent of
reported earnings per share. They believe that 58.8 percent of earnings
management is "income-increasing" and 41.2 percent
is"income-decreasing" also known as cookie jar reserving or cookie
jar accounting. The cookie jar method of accounting is used during periods of good financial results to shore up profits in poorer performing years, giving investors a misleading impression that a company has a never-ending stream of increasing earnings. CFOs of private firms believe that the
proportion of private firms managing earnings is 30.4 percent compared to 18.4
percent for public firms. This is often done using
one-time charges and other special accounting items. CFOs feel that
earnings misrepresentation takes place for three main reasons:
1.) In an attempt to
influence stock price.
2.) Because of internal
pressures to meet or exceed earnings projections.
3.) Because of external
pressures to meet or exceed earnings projections.
Most CFOs that were
interviewed agreed that there was "unrelenting pressure from Wall Street
to avoid surprises" because "you will always be penalized if there is
any kind of surprise.".
As well, and even more
importantly from their perspective, CFOs believe that by managing earnings,
companies are able to avoid negative compensation and career consequences for
the senior executive team. This follows from the fact that many
corporations now hinge their executive compensation, particularly stock- and
bonus-based compensation, on meeting some arbitrary earnings threshold. CFOs
believe that the odds of getting caught managing earnings are relatively low
because most outsiders (i.e. investors) would not be able to detect earnings
adjustments.
Here is a summary table
showing how CFOs perceive the rationale behind managed earnings:
For those of us that are
small investors, here is an interesting look at what red flags CFOs believe
will provide investors with a clue that a given company is managing its
earnings:
1.) Earnings are
inconsistent with cash flows: For example, earnings grow continuously but
cash flow deteriorates for a number of quarters.
2.) Deviation from
industry or peer norms: For example, a given company sees its earnings grow
continuously while its peers see their earnings contract.
3.) Consistently meeting
or beating earnings projections.
4.) Frequent one-time or
special items on a balance sheet.
5.) Earnings patterns
that are very smooth when compared to the fundamentals for the industry.
6.) High turnover rate
among the company's executive team.
7.) Using non-GAAP measures
to make results appear better than they may be.
Here is a chart that
shows all of the red flags that may indicate earnings management:
No comments:
Post a Comment