IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/ijfiec/v30y2025i4p3744-3760.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

ESG Rating Disagreement and the Quality of Analysts' Forecasts: Information or Noise

Author

Listed:
  • Menghan Li
  • Qi Chen

Abstract

The rise of ESG investment has stimulated the development of ESG ratings, while there is substantial ESG rating disagreement among different rating agencies, which creates a major obstacle to sustainable investment. This study empirically examines the impact of ESG rating disagreement on the quality of analysts' forecasts based on the data of Chinese listed companies from 2015 to 2021. It is found that the ESG rating disagreement significantly improves the quality of analysts' forecasts. Mechanism analysis demonstrates that ESG rating disagreement can enhance the quality of analysts' forecasts by increasing analysts' attention. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that the observed effect is more pronounced in companies with low information quality and those with star analysts. These findings not only objectively assess the impact of ESG rating disagreement, but also emphasise the crucial role of analysts in improving the capital market information environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Menghan Li & Qi Chen, 2025. "ESG Rating Disagreement and the Quality of Analysts' Forecasts: Information or Noise," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 3744-3760, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:ijfiec:v:30:y:2025:i:4:p:3744-3760
    DOI: 10.1002/ijfe.3089
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.3089
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ijfe.3089?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:wly:ijfiec:v:30:y:2025:i:4:p:3744-3760. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/1076-9307/ .

    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.