IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2107.11133.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reference Class Selection in Similarity-Based Forecasting of Sales Growth

Author

Listed:
  • Etienne Theising
  • Dominik Wied
  • Daniel Ziggel

Abstract

This paper proposes a general method to handle forecasts exposed to behavioural bias by finding appropriate outside views, in our case corporate sales forecasts of analysts. The idea is to find reference classes, i.e. peer groups, for each analyzed company separately that share similarities to the firm of interest with respect to a specific predictor. The classes are regarded to be optimal if the forecasted sales distributions match the actual distributions as closely as possible. The forecast quality is measured by applying goodness-of-fit tests on the estimated probability integral transformations and by comparing the predicted quantiles. The method is out-of-sample backtested on a data set consisting of 21,808 US firms over the time period 1950 - 2019, which is also descriptively analyzed. It appears that in particular the past operating margins are good predictors for the distribution of future sales. A case study compares the outside view of our distributional forecasts with actual analysts' forecasts and emphasizes the relevance of our approach in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Etienne Theising & Dominik Wied & Daniel Ziggel, 2021. "Reference Class Selection in Similarity-Based Forecasting of Sales Growth," Papers 2107.11133, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2107.11133
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.11133
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Lovallo & Carmina Clarke & Colin Camerer, 2012. "Robust analogizing and the outside view: two empirical tests of case‐based decision making," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 496-512, May.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    3. Louis K. C. Chan & Jason Karceski & Josef Lakonishok, 2003. "The Level and Persistence of Growth Rates," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 643-684, April.
    4. Cooper, Arnold C. & Woo, Carolyn Y. & Dunkelberg, William C., 1988. "Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 97-108.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Etienne Theising & Dominik Wied & Daniel Ziggel, 2023. "Reference class selection in similarity‐based forecasting of corporate sales growth," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(5), pages 1069-1085, August.
    2. Michele Dell'Era & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2011. "Entrepreneurial Overconfidence, Self-Financing and Capital Market Efficiency," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 11.06, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie, revised Nov 2012.
    3. T. K. Das & Bing-Sheng Teng, 1998. "Time and Entrepreneurial Risk Behavior," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(2), pages 69-88, January.
    4. P. Köllinger & M. Minniti, 2006. "Not for Lack of Trying: American Entrepreneurship in Black and White," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 59-79, August.
    5. Rodney C. Shrader & Mark Simon & Steven Stanton, 2021. "Financial forecasting and risky decisions: an experimental study grounded in Prospect theory," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1827-1841, December.
    6. Ahmad, Husnain F. & Gibson, Matthew & Nadeem, Fatiq & Nasim, Sanval & Rezaee, Arman, 2022. "Forecasts: Consumption, Production, and Behavioral Responses," IZA Discussion Papers 15831, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Joseph McManus, 2018. "Hubris and Unethical Decision Making: The Tragedy of the Uncommon," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 169-185, April.
    8. Itzhak Ben-David & John R. Graham & Campbell R. Harvey, 2007. "Managerial Overconfidence and Corporate Policies," NBER Working Papers 13711, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    10. Hean Tat Keh & Maw Der Foo & Boon Chong Lim, 2002. "Opportunity Evaluation under Risky Conditions: The Cognitive Processes of Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(2), pages 125-148, April.
    11. Kambiz Talebi & Pouria Nouri & Abdolah Ahmadi Kafeshani, 2014. "What Factors Contribute to Entrepreneurs’ Decision Making Biases? A Comprehensive Study," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 59-68.
    12. Itzhak Ben-David & John R. Graham, 2013. "Managerial Miscalibration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1547-1584.
    13. Rassoul Yazdipour & Richard Constand, 2010. "Predicting Firm Failure: A Behavioral Finance Perspective," Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, Pepperdine University, Graziadio School of Business and Management, vol. 14(3), pages 90-104, Fall.
    14. Simon, Mark & Houghton, Susan M. & Aquino, Karl, 2000. "Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: How individuals decide to start companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 113-134, March.
    15. Donna Marie De Carolis & Patrick Saparito, 2006. "Social Capital, Cognition, and Entrepreneurial Opportunities: A Theoretical Framework," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(1), pages 41-56, January.
    16. Kambiz Talebi & Pouria Nouri & Abdolah Ahmadi Kafeshani, 2014. "Identifying the main Individual Factors Influencing Entrepreneurial Decision making Biases: A Qualitative Content Analysis Approach," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4(8), pages 1-11, August.
    17. Joon Mahn Lee & Byoung‐Hyoun Hwang & Hailiang Chen, 2017. "Are founder CEOs more overconfident than professional CEOs? Evidence from S&P 1500 companies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 751-769, March.
    18. Philipp Koellinger & Theresa Treffers, 2015. "Joy Leads to Overconfidence, and a Simple Countermeasure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Mathew L. A. Hayward & Dean A. Shepherd & Dale Griffin, 2006. "A Hubris Theory of Entrepreneurship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 160-172, February.
    20. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Ansar, Atif & Budzier, Alexander & Buhl, Søren & Cantarelli, Chantal & Garbuio, Massimo & Glenting, Carsten & Holm, Mette Skamris & Lovallo, Dan & Lunn, Daniel & Molin, Eric & Rønnes, 2018. "Five things you should know about cost overrun," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 174-190.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2107.11133. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.