A necessary criterion for a performance measure in corporate governance is the degree to which it mirrors how well the management succeeds in maximizing firm value. Such a performance measure is marginal q which links changes in firm value to the investments undertaken by the management. Empirical studies of investment and performance based on marginal q have demonstrated the usefulness of this measure. Most research however, has mainly focused on long-term performance. This paper takes a short-term perspective and, based on the marginal q-theory, considers how firms’ market values change in the extreme stock price cycle of a stock market bubble. Using a data set of listed Swedish corporations we find an anomaly in form of a new industry specific effect that, in addition to investment, explains changes in firm value.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
A theoretical proof of the advantages of using a marginal q was first presented by Hayashi (1982).
The term “new” industry will be used in the paper, as an analogy to high-tech and knowledge intensive industries, formally defined as firms belonging to the Biotechnology, IT and Telecommunication industries.
Multiplied by degrees of freedom these correlations give us chi-squared distributed test statistics of 10.12 respectively 2.38 (see Griffith et al. 1993, p. 552). Hence, a null hypothesis of no correlation between the residuals at the 5-per cent level can only be rejected for the first time period.
Brealey RA, Myers SC (1991) Principles of corporate finance, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York
Evans LL (2003) Why the bubble burst: US stock market performance since 1982. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Griffiths WE, Hill CR, Judge GG (1993) Learning and practicing econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
Gugler K, Yurtoglu BB (2003) Average q, marginal q, and the relationship between ownership and performance. Econ Lett 78:379–384
Gugler K, Mueller DC, Yurtoglu BB (2002a) Marginal q, Tobins q, cash flow and investment. Mimeo, University of Vienna
Gugler K, Mueller DC, Yurtoglu BB (2002b) Corporate governance and the return on investment. Mimeo, University of Vienna
Gugler K, Mueller DC, Yurtoglu BB (2004) Marginal q, Tobin’s q, cash flow, and investment. South Econ J 70:512–531
Hayashi F (1982) Tobin´s marginal q and average q. A neoclassical interpretation. Econometrica 50:213–224
Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) The theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 3:305–360
Mueller DC, Reardon E (1993) Rates of return on investment. South Econ J 60:430–453
Sheeran P, Amber S (2004) The international political economy of investment bubbles. Ashgate, Aldershot
Shiller RJ (1981) Do stock prices move too much to be justified by subsequent changes in dividends? Am Econ Rev 71:421–436
Shiller RJ (2000) Irrational exuberance. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Shiller RJ (2002) Bubbles, human judgement and expert opinion. Financ Anal J 53:589–610
Shleifer A (2000) Inefficient markets: an introduction to behavioral finance. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Tobin J (1969) A general-equilibrium approach to monetary theory. J Money Credit Bank 1:15–29
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bjuggren, PO., Wiberg, D. Industry specific effects in investment performance and valuation of firms. Empirica 35, 279–291 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-008-9064-5
- Marginal q
- Stock bubbles
- Different industries