IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Connecting the dots: the accruals quality premium vs the value premium


  • Doina C. Chichernea
  • Anthony D. Holder
  • Jie (Diana) Wei


Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the connection between the accrual quality and the growth/value characteristics (and their return premia) at firm level. Design/methodology/approach - The paper employs a battery of univariate and multivariate cross-sectional tests. Fama-MacBeth regressions with main effects and interaction effects are used to identify the relation between accrual quality, book-to-market and returns. The analysis is conducted on the overall sample, as well as after conditioning on up and down markets. Findings - Value (growth) stocks are more likely to be associated with high (low) accrual quality. Value stocks earn higher returns mainly in down markets, while poor accrual quality firms have significantly higher returns during up markets, but significantly lower returns during down markets. There is a significant interaction effect between accrual quality and the value premium, which only exhibits in the down markets (i.e. stocks with poor accrual quality earn a higher value premium in down markets than stocks with good accrual quality). Originality/value - Results in this paper help disentangle between various explanations proposed for the accrual quality premium and the value premium. These findings are consistent with the idea that the same underlying risk factor generating the value premium also generates the cross-sectional variation in accrual quality responsible for the accrual quality premium. From the corporate managers' perspective, the results imply that value firms can mitigate their higher costs of capital by providing high quality of accounting information. From an analyst's perspective, the study suggests that considering both accrual quality and growth characteristics can help make better portfolio allocation decisions than when these are considered separately.

Suggested Citation

  • Doina C. Chichernea & Anthony D. Holder & Jie (Diana) Wei, 2012. "Connecting the dots: the accruals quality premium vs the value premium," Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 38(12), pages 1106-1133, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:mfipps:v:38:y:2012:i:12:p:1106-1133

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Francis, Jennifer & LaFond, Ryan & Olsson, Per & Schipper, Katherine, 2005. "The market pricing of accruals quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 295-327, June.
    2. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. " The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    3. David Easley & Soeren Hvidkjaer & Maureen O'Hara, 2002. "Is Information Risk a Determinant of Asset Returns?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 2185-2221, October.
    4. Biddle, Gary C. & Hilary, Gilles & Verdi, Rodrigo S., 2009. "How does financial reporting quality relate to investment efficiency?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2-3), pages 112-131, December.
    5. Tarun Chordia, 2001. "Market Liquidity and Trading Activity," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(2), pages 501-530, April.
    6. Ronald Best & Charles Hodges & James Yoder, 2006. "Expected earnings growth and portfolio performance," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 431-437, June.
    7. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    8. David Aboody & John Hughes & Jing Liu, 2005. "Earnings Quality, Insider Trading, and Cost of Capital," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 651-673, December.
    9. Pettengill, Glenn N. & Sundaram, Sridhar & Mathur, Ike, 1995. "The Conditional Relation between Beta and Returns," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(01), pages 101-116, March.
    10. Sloan, Richard G., 1993. "Accounting earnings and top executive compensation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1-3), pages 55-100, April.
    11. Isabelle Huault & V. Perret & S. Charreire-Petit, 2007. "Management," Post-Print halshs-00337676, HAL.
    12. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    13. Richardson, Scott & Tuna, Irem & Wysocki, Peter, 2010. "Accounting anomalies and fundamental analysis: A review of recent research advances," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 410-454, December.
    14. Petkova, Ralitsa & Zhang, Lu, 2005. "Is value riskier than growth?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 187-202, October.
    15. Murphy, Kevin J., 1999. "Executive compensation," Handbook of Labor Economics,in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 38, pages 2485-2563 Elsevier.
    16. Williams, Joseph T., 1977. "Capital asset prices with heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 219-239, November.
    17. Wei He & Yen-Sheng Lee & Peihwang Wei, 2010. "Do option traders on value and growth stocks react differently to new information?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 371-381, April.
    18. Lee, Gemma & Masulis, Ronald W., 2009. "Seasoned equity offerings: Quality of accounting information and expected flotation costs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 443-469, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:eme:mfipps:v:38:y:2012:i:12:p:1106-1133. 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: (Virginia Chapman). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.