IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/nbripp/v2y2011i1p64-78.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do security analysts follow diversified firms?

Author

Listed:
  • Weixing Cai
  • Cheng Zeng

Abstract

Purpose - By using data on China's security market, this paper aims to examine the relationship between corporate diversification and security analyst following in terms of behavioral decision‐making process. Design/methodology/approach - This is an empirical study. Findings - The results show that the numbers of analysts covering a firm are negatively associated with the firms level of diversification. As the lines of business of firms increase, the cost of analysts' acquiring information will accordingly go up, forcing security analysts to give up following such firms. A further study finds that the firms with related diversification are more likely to be followed by analysts than those with irrelevant diversification, because the related lines that make information and analysis technique generally used could reduce the cost of security analysts. Originality/value - Extant studies focus too narrowly on statistical properties of the forecasting or market reaction to the analyst reports. However, this paper examines the association between corporate diversification and analysts following by looking at the economic incentives that affect analysts' decisions. Moreover, this paper contributes to the literature on security analysts in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Weixing Cai & Cheng Zeng, 2011. "Do security analysts follow diversified firms?," Nankai Business Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 2(1), pages 64-78, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:nbripp:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:64-78
    DOI: 10.1108/20408741111113501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/20408741111113501/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/20408741111113501/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/20408741111113501?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 search for a different version of it.

    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:eme:nbripp:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:64-78. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.