IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/bellje/v2y1971iautumnp434-469.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Measurement of Corporate Rates of Return: A Generalized Formulation

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas R. Stauffer

Abstract

General conditions are derived under which accounting ratios, such as the conventionally defined accounting rate of return, deviate from the economic rate of return for a firm. Cash revenue streams of arbitrary time-shape, non-depreciable capital, and corporate income taxes are considered. The sign and magnitude of the bias in the accounting rate of return depend upon the depreciation schedule, the revenue timestream, the firm's growth rate, and its capital structure.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas R. Stauffer, 1971. "The Measurement of Corporate Rates of Return: A Generalized Formulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(2), pages 434-469, Autumn.
    • Handle: RePEc:rje:bellje:v:2:y:1971:i:autumn:p:434-469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0005-8556%28197123%292%3A2%3C434%3ATMOCRO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W&origin=repec
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karel Janda, 2019. "Earnings Stability and Peer Company Selection for Multiple Based Indirect Valuation," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 69(1), pages 37-75, February.
    2. Küpper, Hans-Ulrich & Pedell, Burkhard, 2016. "Which asset valuation and depreciation method should be used for regulated utilities? An analytical and simulation-based comparison," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 88-103.
    3. Scherer, F.M., 2010. "Pharmaceutical Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 539-574, Elsevier.
    4. F. M. Scherer, 1993. "Pricing, Profits, and Technological Progress in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 97-115, Summer.
    5. Jedlicka, Lorenz & Jumah, Adusei, 2006. "The Austrian Insurance Industry: A Structure, Conduct and Performance Analysis," Economics Series 189, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    6. repec:dgr:rugsom:00e42 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Thomas Pfeiffer, 2004. "Net Present Value‐Consistent Investment Criteria Based on Accruals: A Generalisation of the Residual Income‐Identity," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7‐8), pages 905-926, September.
    8. Rajan, Madhav & Reichelstein, Stefan J. & Soliman, Mark T., 2006. "Conservatism, Growth, and Return on Investment," Research Papers 1956, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    9. Scherer, F. M., 2007. "Pharmaceutical Innovation," Working Paper Series rwp07-004, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    10. Madhav V. Rajan & Stefan Reichelstein, 2009. "Depreciation Rules and the Relation between Marginal and Historical Cost," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 823-865, June.
    11. Andrea Mantovi & Augusto Schianchi, 2015. "A Neo-Austrian Perspective on the Value of Growth Prospects," Working Paper series 15-41, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    12. Janda, Karel & Kaszas, Micha, 2017. "Indirect Firm Valuation and Earnings Stability," MPRA Paper 77234, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Scherer, F. M., 2013. "The F.T.C., Oligopoly, and Shared Monopoly," Working Paper Series rwp13-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    14. Feenstra, D.W. & Wang, H., 2000. "Economic and accounting rates of return," Research Report 00E42, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    15. F. Scherer, 2015. "The Federal Trade Commission, Oligopoly, and Shared Monopoly," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(1), pages 5-23, February.

    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:rje:bellje:v:2:y:1971:i:autumn:p:434-469. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.rje.org .

    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.