IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

BE/ME and E/P work better than ME/BE or P/E in regressions

  • Musumeci, Jim
  • Peterson, Mark
Registered author(s):

    Researchers often form ratios of variables to measure firm characteristics, but which ratios create the most powerful tests? For example, if we use ratios of book value of equity (BE) and market value of equity (ME), or earnings (E) and price (P), does it matter which variable appears in the denominator? Any variable in the denominator, when close to zero, creates outliers and is less likely to produce effective tests. Our tests, using data from 1972 to 2008, indicate the choice between reciprocals often produces significantly different outcomes. While ME/BE is a more commonly used control variable than BE/ME or LN(BE/ME), we find the latter two produce better results, even if the data are trimmed to mitigate the outlier problem. Similarly, using E/P generally produces better results than P/E, and while ratios with book value of assets (BA) in the numerator work better than those with it in the denominator, the difference is less pronounced than when BE or E is part of the ratio. While the focus of our empirical findings is on growth measures, the principal applies anytime a ratio has a denominator that is frequently near zero.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Corporate Finance.

    Volume (Year): 17 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 5 ()
    Pages: 1272-1288

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:17:y:2011:i:5:p:1272-1288
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2011.06.003
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:17:y:2011:i:5:p:1272-1288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.