IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finlet/v86y2025ipcs1544612325016861.html

Financial regulation and bankruptcy prediction: The informational value of auditor opinions

Author

Listed:
  • Gavious, Ilanit
  • Milo, Orit
  • Weihs, Hagit

Abstract

We test whether auditors’ Going-Concern Opinions (GCOs) provide incremental predictive content for corporate bankruptcy beyond analysts’ information and accounting- and market-based indicators. Using U.S. firm-year data from 1992–2018 and conditioning on analysts’ forecast bias, error, dispersion, and coverage, we find that GCO issuance is associated with a 20%–56% higher probability of bankruptcy. Adding GCOs to the model increases explanatory power by 12%–18%. Analyst bias and error are positively related to failure, while coverage is negatively related, indicating that auditors and analysts supply distinct, complementary signals. The evidence positions GCOs as economically meaningful state variables for default-risk models—rather than mere narrative disclosures—with particular value when analyst coverage is thin or forecast precision is weak. These findings have direct implications for policymakers, regulators and capital market participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Gavious, Ilanit & Milo, Orit & Weihs, Hagit, 2025. "Financial regulation and bankruptcy prediction: The informational value of auditor opinions," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 86(PC).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:86:y:2025:i:pc:s1544612325016861
    DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2025.108432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612325016861
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.frl.2025.108432?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:finlet:v:86:y:2025:i:pc:s1544612325016861. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/frl .

    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.