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

Market vs. analysts reaction: the effect of aggregate and firm-specific news

Listed author(s):
  • Michele Bagella
  • Leonardo Becchetti
  • Rocco Ciciretti

Firm-specific and aggregate shocks generate reassessment of investors and analysts expectations on earnings forecasts and on the fundamental value of equities. In this article, we evaluate the effects of this combined reaction on the implied equity risk premium extracted from a standard two-stage dividend discount (DD) model. If investors and analysts revisions coincide, and in absence of measurement errors in the DD formula, the observed shocks should not have any significant impact on prices and Implied Equity Risk Premium (IEPR). On the contrary, in an analysis based on data for all S&P 500 COMPOSITE INDEX constituents from 1990 to 2003, we observe substantial overreaction of investors to both downward and upward firm-specific forecast revisions, plus overreaction to changes in GDP and to the announcements of the Consumer and Business Confidence indicator. We also observe that positive overreaction to upward earning forecast revisions and GDP changes falls after the stock bubble burst, while overreaction to upward forecast revision and to announcements of the Consumer Confidence Index looses significance after the 9/11 terrorist attack. These findings are broadly consistent with the hypothesis of reduced participation of uninformed (noise) traders to financial markets after these two shocks.

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: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Financial Economics.

Volume (Year): 17 (2007)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Pages: 299-312

in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:apfiec:v:17:y:2007:i:4:p:299-312
DOI: 10.1080/09603100600690051
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

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:taf:apfiec:v:17:y:2007:i:4:p:299-312. 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: (Chris Longhurst)

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.