IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jfinqa/v44y2009i02p411-437_09.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are the Wall Street Analyst Rankings Popularity Contests?

Author

Listed:
  • Emery, Douglas R.
  • Li, Xi

Abstract

We investigate the (sell-side) analyst rankings of Institutional Investor (I/I) and The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), using data from 1993–2005. We find that factors with a primary component of recognition are the most important determinants of the rankings, although performance measures are statistically significant determinants in some cases. The single exception to this finding is with existing WSJ stars, where industry-adjusted investment-recommendation performance is the only significant determinant of repeating as a star. Further, in the year after becoming stars, the recommendations of WSJ stars are significantly worse than those of nonstars; and the recommendations and earnings forecasts of I/I stars, as well as the earnings forecasts of WSJ stars, are not significantly different from those of nonstars. We conclude that these rankings are largely “popularity contests.â€

Suggested Citation

  • Emery, Douglas R. & Li, Xi, 2009. "Are the Wall Street Analyst Rankings Popularity Contests?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 411-437, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jfinqa:v:44:y:2009:i:02:p:411-437_09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022109009090140/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jfinqa:v:44:y:2009:i:02:p:411-437_09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jfq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.