The explanatory and predictive power of different specifications of the Ohlson (1995) valuation models
Accounting-based valuation studies of US firms tend to support Ohlson's proposition that residual income and book value numbers have information content in explaining observed market values. But European evidence also suggests that the conservative/liberal orientation of accounting tradition can produce significant national differences in associations between accounting performance measures and stock prices - in earnings behaviour, coefficient values and parameter sensitivity. We address these issues from an equity valuation perspective using Swedish data to assess the additional information content of Ohlson's information dynamics and analysts' forecasts in relation to market valuations in a more conservative accounting environment than the US. The study compares the explanatory and predictive power of Ohlson's (1995) residual income model (RIV) with a linear information dynamics version (LIM) that specifies both residual income and non-accounting information as autoregressive processes. Both versions are applied with, and without, future performance expectations from non-accounting sources (analysts' forecasts). As with US evidence, we find that the inclusion of analysts' forecasts improves both (i) cross-sectional correlations with current prices for both RIV and LIM models and (ii) the predictive power of RIV models in relation to future annual cross-sectional stock returns. The contribution of linear information dynamics is significant but varies across approaches. We also find significant differences between Swedish and US firms in earnings behaviour and associations between accounting numbers and market equity prices.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 10 (2001)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAR20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REAR20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dechow, Patricia M. & Hutton, Amy P. & Sloan, Richard G., 1999. "An empirical assessment of the residual income valuation model1," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1-3), pages 1-34, January.
- Niclas Hellman, 1993. "A comparative analysis of the impact of accounting differences on profits and return on equity," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 495-530.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:euract:v:10:y:2001:i:2:p:315-341. 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: (Michael McNulty)
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.