Skip to main content
Log in

Residual income, value-relevant information and equity valuation: a simultaneous equations approach

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper uses Ohlson (Contemp Account Res 11:661–687, 1995) and compares the relative predictability of the proposed simultaneous model for contemporaneous stock price with a traditional single equation model used by the previous studies. The paper also explores how residual income and value-relevant information affect firms’ equity price. The main results of the paper suggest that the predictive ability and estimation efficiency of the simultaneous models in explaining contemporaneous stock prices are better than those of the traditional single models. Moreover, investors will use the value-relevant information beyond accounting earnings, namely analysts’ earnings forecasts, bankruptcy cost and agency cost, in equity valuation to make decision. Note particularly, the higher the bankruptcy or agency cost is, the more important the role it plays in equity valuation and, on average, the higher the accuracy of price prediction is.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Penman and Sougiannis (1997) suggest that there is no liquidity dividend to provide the valuation of equity under the going concern assumption. Myers (1999) indicate that researchers usually lack a reasonable assumption for dividend policy as the analysis is based on dividend-discounting model.

  2. Ohlson model shows the relevance of residual income as a variable that affects the value of a firm. The term residual income is defined by accounting earnings minus a charge for the use of capital. Myers (1999) indicates that residual income is similar to abnormal earnings. According to the concept of residual income, Stern Stewart & Co. has proposed a variation of residual income, Economic Value Added (EVA®), which has attracted considerable attention by many corporations for purposes of internal performance evaluation and external investment decision.

  3. Francis et al. (2000) suggest that residual income valuation model is better than discounting short-term forecasts by using cash flow and dividend in predicting and explaining stock price. Lee (2006) indicates that residual income model provides a better valuation than dividend discount model. Barth (2000) and Lo and Lys (2000) show that residual income valuation model enables investors to estimate firm value on the basis of observable accounting numbers, and to identify the factors of stock mis-pricing.

  4. Clean surplus accounting requires that all gains and losses affecting book value are included in earnings. The existing GAAP is not completely consistent with clean surplus relation; for instance, the adjustment of foreign currency translation, loss or gain of available for sale investment, and prior period adjustment of the change in accounting policy. Those items are not presented in the current income statement, rather represent in current stockholder’s equity.

  5. Moreover, Ohlson states that to ensure the stationarity of LIM in the limit, the parameters of Eqs. 5 and 6 need to satisfy 0 ≤ ω11 < 1 and 0 ≤ ω22 < 1.

  6. Myers (1999) indicates that the empirical models of Dechow et al. (1999) contain internal inconsistency due to underspecified information dynamics in LIM; their work hence cannot provide a closed-form price function. Specifically, the internal inconsistency problem in Dechow et al. is that their LIM contains an intercept term while the implied valuation function does not.

  7. We estimate beta of each firm by monthly returns of previous 5 years, for example, the beta of firm i in 1987 is estimated by monthly returns from December 1982 to November 1987. In addition, if the missing monthly returns of firm i exceed 20 observations, this paper employ 12% (the long-run average realized return in the US) to proxy for cost of equity capital.

  8. We adopt two measures of earnings to estimate residual income. They induce two corresponding values of other earnings information variables.

  9. The researchers can use methods of ordinary least squares, weighted least squares, (weighted) two-stage least squares (2SLS), three-stage least squares (3SLS), etc to estimate the parameters of systems of equations. Beaver et al. (1997) suggest that a major challenge of using either limited information method (i.e., 2SLS) or full information method (i.e., 3SLS) is the identification of a set of instrumental variables. Misspecification of the set of instruments reduces the potential benefits of the simultaneous equations approach, and in the limit produces poorer estimates than OLS. To satisfy the requirements of LIM of Ohlson (1995), we hence use OLS and WLS to proceed the analysis. Our empirical results show that although the results of OLS method are similar to those of WLS method, the significance of the variables and adjusted R-squared of regression model of OLS method are poor than those in WLS method. In what follows, we only show the results of WLS for ease of exposition.

References

  • Altman EI (1968) Financial ratios, discriminant analysis, and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy. J Financ 23:589–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth ME (2000) Valuation-based accounting research: implications for financial reporting and opportunities for future research. Account Financ 40:7–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver WH, McAnally ML, Stinson CH (1997) The information content of earnings and prices: a simultaneous equations approach. J Account Econ 23:53–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begley J, Feltham GA (2002) The relations between market value, earnings forecasts, and reported earnings. Contemp Account Res 19:1–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callen JL, Segal D (2005) Empirical tests of the Feltham-Ohlson (1995) model. Rev Account Stud 10(4):409–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng Q (2005a) The role of analysts’ forecasts in accounting-based valuation: a critical evaluation. Rev Account Stud 10(1):5–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng Q (2005b) What determines residual income? Account Rev 80(1):85–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornett MM, Travlos NG (1989) Information effects associated with debt-for-equity and equity-for-debt exchange offers. J Financ 44:451–468

    Google Scholar 

  • Dechow PM, Hutton AP, Sloan RG (1999) An empirical assessment of the residual income valuation model. J Account Econ 26:1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenn GW, Liang N (2001) Corporate payout policy and managerial stock incentives. J Financ Econ 60:45–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris SP, Jayaraman N, Makhija AK (1997) The response of competitors to announcements of bankruptcy: an empirical examination of contagion and competitive effects. J Corp Financ 3:367–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francis J, Olsson P, Oswald DR (2000) Comparing the accuracy and explainability of dividend, free cash flow, and abnormal earnings equity value estimates. J Account Res 38:45–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel R, Lee CMC (1998) Accounting valuation, market expectation, and cross-sectional stock returns. J Account Econ 25:285–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory A, Saleh W, Tucker J (2005) A UK test of an inflation-adjusted Ohlson model. J Bus Financ Account 32(3–4):487–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand JRM (2001) Discussion of earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation: an empirical perspective. Contemp Account Res 18:121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC (1986) Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. Am Econ Rev 76:323–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of firm: managerial behavior, agency cost and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 3:305–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang XQ, Lee BS (2005) An empirical test of the accounting-based residual income model and the traditional dividend discount model. J Bus 78(4):1465–1504

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane GD, Richardson FM, Velury U (2006) The relevance of stock and flow-based reporting information in assessing the likelihood of emergence from corporate financial distress. Rev Quant Financ Account 26:5–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim C, Mauer DC, Sherman AE (1998) The determinants of corporate liquidity: theory and evidence. J Financ Quant Anal 33:335–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam SS, Chng BF (2006) Do executive stock option grants have value implications for firm performance? Rev Quant Financ Account 26:249–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee BS (2006) An empirical evaluation of behavioral models based on decompositions of stock prices. J Bus 79(1):393–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee CMC, Myers J, Swaminathan B (1999) What is the intrinsic of the dow? J Financ 54:1693–1741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim CY, Tan PM (2007) Value relevance of value-at-risk disclosure. Rev Quant Financ Account 29:353–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo K, Lys T (2000) The Ohlson model: contribution to valuation theory, limitations, and empirical applications. J Account Audit Financ 15:337–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundholm R (1995) A tutorial on the Ohlson and Feltham/Ohlson models. Contemp Account Res 11:749–761

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKie-Mason JK (1990) Do taxes affect corporate financing decisions? J Financ 45:1471–1493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers JN (1999) Implementing residual income valuation with linear information dynamics. Account Rev 74:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohlson JA (1995) Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemp Account Res 11:661–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohlson JA (2001) Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation: an empirical perspective. Contemp Account Res 18(1):107–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penman SH, Sougiannis T (1997) The dividend displacement property and the substitution of anticipated earnings for dividends in equity valuation. Account Rev 72:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman M, Deshpande S (1997) Convertible bond calls by multinational and domestic firms: an agency cost perspective. J Multinational Financ Manage 7:43–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roosenboom P, Goot T (2005) The effect of ownership and control on market valuation: evidence from initial public offerings in the Netherlands. Int Rev Financ Anal 14:43–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose-Green E, Dawkins MC (2000) The association between bankruptcy outcome and price reactions to bankruptcy filings. J Account Audit Financ 15:425–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruland W, Zhou P (2005) Debt, diversification, and valuation. Rev Quant Financ Account 25:277–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Alam P, Makar S (2005) The value-relevance of derivative disclosures by commerical bank: a comprehensive study of information content under SFAS Nos. 119 and 133. Rev Quant Financ Account 25:413–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48:817–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would especially like to thank Cheng F. Lee (the editor) and an anonymous referee for many helpful comments and suggestions that improved the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yi-Mien Lin.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

1.1 Dynamic LIM under traditional residual income model

We first assume that the simultaneous model of traditional residual income model is

$$ A_0 X_{t+1} =W_0 +A_1 X_t +\Uptheta_{t+1} $$
(A1)

and let \(X_{t+1} =W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast X_t +\Uptheta_{t+1}^\ast,\) where \(W_0^\ast =A_0^{-1} W_0, A_1^\ast =A_0^{-1} A_1,\ \hbox{and}\ \Uptheta_{t+1}^\ast =A_0^{-1} \Uptheta_{t+1}.\) On the other hand, because

$$ \begin{aligned} E_t \left( {X_{t+1}} \right)&=W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast X_t \\ E_t \left( {X_{t+2}} \right)&=W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast E\left( {X_{t+1}} \right)=W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast W_0^\ast +\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}X_t \end{aligned} $$

we have

$$ \begin{aligned} \sum\limits_{i=1}^\infty {\frac{E_t \left( {X_{t+i}} \right)}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{i}}} &=\frac{E_t \left( {X_{t+1}} \right)}{1+r}+\frac{E_t \left( {X_{t+2}} \right)}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot\\ &=\frac{W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast X_t} {1+r}+\frac{W_0^\ast +A_1^\ast W_0^\ast +(A_1^\ast )^{2}X_t} {(1+r)^{2}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot\\ &=\left[ {\frac{I}{1+r}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast +\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{3}}+\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot} \right]W_0^\ast +\left[ {\frac{A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)}+\frac{\left( {A_1^\ast } \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot } \right]X_t \\ &=CW_0^\ast +BX_t, \end{aligned} $$
(A2)

where \(C=\left[ {\frac{I}{1+r}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast +\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{3}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot} \right],\) \(B =\left[ {\frac{A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)}+\frac{\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot} \right].\) From (A2),

$$ \begin{array}{l} \frac{A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)}B=\frac{\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\frac{\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{3}}{(1+r)^{3}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot\\ \left( {I-\frac{A_1^\ast} {1+r}} \right)B=\frac{A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)}\\ (I(1+r)-A_1^\ast )B=A_1^\ast , \end{array} $$

we obtain

$$ \begin{aligned} B&=(I(1+r)-A_1^\ast )^{-1}A_1^\ast\\ &=(I(1+r)-A_0^{-1} A_1 )^{-1}A_0^{-1} A_1 \\ &=\{A_0^{-1} [A_0 (1+r)-A_1 ]\}^{-1}A_0^{-1} A_1 \\ &=(A_0 (1+r)-A_1 )^{-1}A_1. \end{aligned} $$

On the other hand, the constant term C is

$$ \begin{array}{l} C=\frac{I}{\left( {1+r} \right)}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast} {\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\frac{I+A_1^\ast +\left( {A_1^\ast} \right)^{2}}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{3}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot\\ \frac{A_1^\ast} {1+r}C=\frac{A_1^\ast} {(1+r)^{2}}+\frac{A_1^\ast +(A_1^\ast )^{2}}{(1+r)^{3}}+\frac{A_1^\ast +\left(A_1^\ast \right)^{2}+\left(A_1^\ast \right)^{3}}{(1+r)^{4}}+\cdots \cdots\\ \begin{aligned} \left( {I-\frac{A_1^\ast} {1+r}} \right)C&=\frac{I}{1+r}+\frac{I}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{2}}+\frac{I}{\left( {1+r} \right)^{3}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot\\ &=\frac{I}{1+r}\left[1+\frac{1}{1+r}+\frac{1}{(1+r)^{2}}+\cdots \cdot \cdot \right]=\frac{I}{1+r}\cdot \frac{1}{1-\frac{1}{1+r}}=\frac{1}{r}I \end{aligned}\end{array} $$

and

$$ \begin{array}{l} \frac{1}{1+r}[I(1+r)-A_1^\ast ]C=\frac{1}{r}I\\ {[}I(1+r)-A_0^{-1} A_1 ]C=\frac{1+r}{r}I\\ A_0^{-1} [A_0 (1+r)-A_1 ]C=\frac{1+r}{r}I\\ {[}A_0 (1+r)-A_1 ]C=\frac{1+r}{r}A_0 \end{array} $$

Therefore, \(C=[A_0 (1+r)-A_1 ]^{-1}\left(\frac{1+r}{r}\right)A_0 =\frac{1+r}{r}\left[ {A_0 \left( {1+r} \right)-A_1} \right]^{-1}A_0.\) From (A1), \(X_{t+1} =\left[ {{\begin{array}{l} {\omega_{10}} \\ {\omega_{20}} \\ \end{array}}} \right]+\left[ {{\begin{array}{ll} {\omega_{11}} & {\omega_{12}} \\ 0& {\omega_{22}} \\ \end{array}}} \right]X_t +\Uptheta_{t+1},\) and thus the constant term is

$$ \begin{aligned} CW_0 &=\frac{1+r}{r}\left[A_0 (1+r)-A_1 \right]^{-1}A_0 W_0\\ &=\frac{1+r}{r}\left[ {I\left( {1+r} \right)-\left( {{\begin{array}{ll} {\omega_{11}} & {\omega_{12}} \\ 0& {\omega_{22}} \\ \end{array}}} \right)} \right]^{-1}\left[ {{\begin{array}{l} {\omega_{10}} \\ {\omega_{20}} \\ \end{array}}} \right] \\ \\ &=\frac{1+r}{r\left( {1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)\left( {1+r-\omega_{22}} \right)}\left[ {{\begin{array}{ll} {1+r-\omega_{22}} & {\omega_{12}} \\ 0& {1+r-\omega_{11}} \\ \end{array}}} \right]\left[ {{\begin{array}{l} {\omega_{10}} \\ {\omega_{20}} \\ \end{array}}} \right] \\ \end{aligned} $$

Hence, the first element is \(\frac{(1+r)\left[ {\omega_{10} \left({1+r-\omega_{22}} \right)+\omega_{12} \omega_{20}} \right]}{r\left({1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)\left( {1+r-\omega_{22}} \right)}.\) Moreover, from (A2),

$$ BX_t =\frac{1}{\left( {1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)\left( {1+r-\omega _{22}} \right)}\left[ {{\begin{array}{ll} {\omega_{11} \left( {1+r-\omega_{22}} \right)}& {\omega_{11} \omega_{12} +\omega_{12} \left( {1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)} \\ 0& {\omega_{22} \left( {1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)} \\ \end{array}}} \right]\left[ {{\begin{array}{l} {x_t} \\ {\upsilon_t} \\ \end{array}}} \right]. $$

Thus, the first row is \(\frac{\omega_{11}} {1+r-\omega_{11}} x_t +\frac{\left( {1+r} \right)\omega_{12}} {\left( {1+r-\omega_{11}} \right)\left( {1+r-\omega_{22}} \right)}\upsilon_t.\)

This general approach applies to all the linear information models considered in the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tsay, R.S., Lin, YM. & Wang, HW. Residual income, value-relevant information and equity valuation: a simultaneous equations approach. Rev Quant Finan Acc 31, 331–358 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-007-0081-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-007-0081-4

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Navigation