IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dar/wpaper/155697.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pay or persuade and the quality of outcome – The choice between paid-for and sell-side analysts research for SME

Author

Listed:
  • Grebe, Leonard
  • Schiereck, D.

Abstract

Financial analysts mainly focus on large companies. To enhance analyst coverage small and medium enterprises (SMEs) have to decide to whether pay for analyst reports or put effort in persuading analyst firms for additional sell-side coverage. While monetarize incentives can affect the quality of analyst reports, this research focuses on the textual quality of paid-for and sell-side analysts’ reports. We analyzed the market perception of over 20,000 analyst reports based on sentiment, complexity, and readability. In contrast with the skepticism regarding the rationality of paid-for research, no differences in sentiment and tone of analyst reports are observed. Furthermore, paid-for reports are more understandable and exhibit higher readability, indicating superior textual quality. While textual attributes are correlated with investor reactions to analysts' publications, the market perception is identical for paid-for and sell-side reports. The results suggest that paying for analyst reports is a valuable tool for SMEs to enhance financial transparency and attract investors.

Suggested Citation

  • Grebe, Leonard & Schiereck, D., 2025. "Pay or persuade and the quality of outcome – The choice between paid-for and sell-side analysts research for SME," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 155697, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
  • Handle: RePEc:dar:wpaper:155697
    Note: for complete metadata visit http://tubiblio.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/155697/
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:dar:wpaper:155697. 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: Dekanatssekretariat (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivthdde.html .

    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.