Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 311–329 | Cite as

Recognized intangibles and the present value of growth options

Original Research


We investigate the relation of recognized intangibles, defined as acquired intangibles net of goodwill, and the market’s perception of firm growth options (PVGO). We find that: (a) on average recognized intangibles are positively associated with PVGO after controlling for intangible expenditures immediately expensed, firm specific characteristics, industry membership and systematic risk (b) the said relation is highly non-linear (negatively skewed) and more strongly pronounced in companies with lower accumulation of R&D Capital; recognized intangibles are not that significant at higher levels of PVGO and whereas firms have committed to in-house technological development, and (c) while adjusted levels of recognized intangibles increase approximately tenfold over the last 35 years their explanatory power to PVGO over the period generally wanes. Our results are informative for the interpretation of recognized intangibles as a summary balance sheet item and therefore useful to users of financial statements forming investment and credit decisions, to policy makers aiming at stimulating firm growth and to standard setters aiming at improving value relevance.


Recognized-intangibles Firm-growth Growth-options 

JEL Classification

M41 M48 M49 



I am grateful to an anonymous referee for critical comments and suggestions. I thank Nicos Koussis for useful discussions. This paper has evolved from an unpublished manuscript initially co-authored by Koussis and Makrominas.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.


  1. Barth ME, Clinch G (1998) Revalued financial, tangible, and intangible assets: associations with share prices and non-market-based value estimates. J Account Res 36:199–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berk JB, Green RC, Naik V (1999) Optimal investment, growth options, and security returns. J Financ 54:1553–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardo AE, Chowdhry B, Goyal A (2007) Growth options, beta, and the cost of capital. Financ Manage 36:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Board, Financial Accounting Standard (2001) Statement of financial accounting standards no. 142. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets Norwalk, CT: FASBGoogle Scholar
  5. Board, Financial Accounting Standard (2007) Statement of financial accounting standards no. 141 (R). Business combinations Norwalk, CT: FASBGoogle Scholar
  6. Brealey R, Myers S (2000) Principles of corporate finance. Irwin: McGraw-Hill, BostonGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown NC, Kimbrough MD (2011) Intangible investment and the importance of firm-specific factors in the determination of earnings. Rev Account Stud 16:539–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cao C, Simin T, Zhao J (2008) Can growth options explain the trend in idiosyncratic risk? Rev Financ Stud 21:2599–2633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlson M, Fisher A, Giammarino R (2004) Corporate Investment and asset price dynamics: implications for the cross-section of returns. J Financ 59:2577–2603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chan LKC, Lakonishok J, Sougiannis T (2001) The stock market valuation of research and development expenditures. J Financ 56:2431–2456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ciftci M, Darrough M (2015) What explains the valuation difference between intangible-intensive profit and loss firms? J Bus Financ Account 42:138–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corrado CA, Hulten CR (2010) How do you measure a “technological revolution”? Am Econ Rev 100(2):99–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coval JD, Shumway T (2001) Expected option returns. J Financ 56:983–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dichev ID, Tang VW (2008) Matching and the changing properties of accounting earnings over the last 40 years. Account Rev 83:1425–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eberhart AC, Maxwell WF, Siddique AR (2004) An examination of long-term abnormal stock returns and operating performance following R&D increases. J Financ 59(2):623–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fama EF, French KR (1992) The cross-section of expected stock returns. J Financ 47(2):427–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gomes J, Kogan L, Zhang L (2003) Equilibrium cross-section of returns. J Polit Econ 111:693–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graham JR, Harvey CR (2001) The theory and practice of corporate finance: evidence from the field. J Financ Econ 60:187–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gu F, Wang W (2005) Intangible assets, information complexity, and analysts’ earnings forecasts. J Bus Financ Account 32:1673–1702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koenker R, Bassett Jr G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46:33–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koussis N, Makrominas M (2015) Growth options, option exercise and firms’ systematic risk. Rev Quant Financ Account 44.2:243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lev B (2008) A rejoinder to Douglas Skinners’ accounting for intangibles-a critical review of policy recommendations’. Account Bus Res 38:209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lev B, Sougiannis T (1996) The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D. J Account Econ 21(1):107–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Z, Shroff PK, Venkataraman R, Zhang IX (2011) Causes and consequences of goodwill impairment losses. Rev Account Stud 16:745–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Long MS, Wald J, Zhang J (2005) A cross-sectional analysis of firm growth options. Innovation, Organization and Strategy: New Developments and Applications in Real Options. Oxford University Press, New York Google Scholar
  26. Myers SC (1977) Determinants of corporate borrowing. J Financ Econ 5:147–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Penman SH, Richardson SA, Tuna I (2007) The book-to-price effect in stock returns: accounting for leverage. J Account Res 45:427–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Robin A, Wu Q (2015) Firm growth and the pricing of discretionary accruals. Rev Quant Financ Account 45.3:561–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Srivastava A (2014) Why have measures of earnings quality changed over time? J Account Econ 57:196–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tong TW, Reuer JJ (2006) Firm and industry influences on the value of growth options. Strat Org 4:71–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tong TW, Alessandri TM, Reuer JJ, Chintakananda A (2008) How much does country matter? An analysis of firms’ growth options. J Int Bus Stud 39:387–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Trigeorgis L, Lambertides N (2014) The role of growth options in explaining stock returns. J Financ Quant Anal 49:749–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wyatt A (2008) What financial and non-financial information on intangibles is value-relevant? A review of the evidence. Account Bus Res 38:217–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yen G, Lee CF (2008) Efficient market hypothesis (EMH): past, present and future. Rev Pac Basin Financ Mark Polic 11(02):305–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang L (2005) The value premium. J Financ 60:67–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Maritime StudiesFrederick University CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations