Review of Accounting Studies

, Volume 8, Issue 2–3, pp 251–276 | Cite as

Investor Sophistication and the Mispricing of Accruals

  • Daniel W. Collins
  • Guojin Gong
  • Paul Hribar


This paper examines the role of institutional investors in the pricing of accruals. Using Bushee;s (1998) classification of institutional investors, we show that firms with a high level of institutional ownership and a minimum threshold level of active institutional traders have stock prices that more accurately reflect the persistence of accruals. This result holds after controlling for differences in the persistence of accruals between firms with high and low institutional ownership, and after controlling for other characteristics that are correlated with institutional ownership and future returns. Additionally, firms with low institutional ownership are smaller, less profitable, and have lower share turnover, suggesting that limits to arbitrage impede institutional investors from exploiting the seemingly large abnormal returns for these firms.

accruals mispricing institutional investors 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ali, A., L. Hwang and M. Trombley. (2000). “Accruals and Future Stock Returns: Tests of Naïve Investor Hypothesis.” Journal of Accounting, Auditing, and Finance 15, 161-181.Google Scholar
  2. Ali, A., L. Hwang and M. Trombley. (2003). “Arbitrage Risk and the Book-To-Market Anomaly.” Journal of Financial Economics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  3. Alzman, A., K. Brown, M. Carlson and D. Chapman. (2002). “Why Constrain Your Mutual Fund Manager?” Working Paper, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  4. Balsam, S., E. Bartov and C. Marquardt. (2002). “Accruals Management, Investor Sophistication, and Equity Valuation: Evidence from 10-Q Filings.” Journal of Accounting Research 40, 987-1012.Google Scholar
  5. Barth, M. and A. Hutton. (2001). “Financial Analysts and the Pricing of Accruals.” Working Paper, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  6. Bartov, E., S. Radhakrishnan and I. Krinsky. (2000). “Investor Sophistication and Patterns in Stock Returns after Earnings Announcements.” The Accounting Review 75, 43-63.Google Scholar
  7. Bradshaw, M., S. Richardson and R. Sloan. (2001). “Do Analysts and Auditors Use Information in Accruals?” Journal of Accounting Research 39, 45-74.Google Scholar
  8. Bushee, B. (1998). “The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior.” The Accounting Review 73, 305-333.Google Scholar
  9. Bushee, B. and C. Noe. (2000). “Corporate Disclosure Practices, Institutional Investors, and Stock Return Volatility.” Journal of Accounting Research 38, 171-207.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, J., H. Hong and J. Stein. (2002). “Breadth of Ownership and Stock Returns.” Journal of Financial Economics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, R., P. Gompers and T. Vuolteenaho. (2002). “Who Underreacts to Cash-Flow News? Evidence from Trading Between Individuals and Institutions.” Working Paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  12. Collins, D. and P. Hribar. (2000). “Earnings-Based and Accrual-Based Market Anomalies: One Effect or Two?” Journal of Accounting and Economics 29, 101-123.Google Scholar
  13. Dennis, P. and J. Weston. (2001). “Who's Informed? An Analysis of Stock Ownership and Informed Trading.” Working paper, University of Virginia.Google Scholar
  14. Fama, E. and K. French. (1992). “The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns.” Journal of Finance 47, 427-465.Google Scholar
  15. Fama E. and J. MacBeth. (1973). “Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests.” Journal of Political Economy 81, 607-636.Google Scholar
  16. Gompers, P. and A. Metrick. (2001). “Institutional Investors and Equity Prices.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 116, 229-259.Google Scholar
  17. Hand, J. (1990). “A Test of the Extended Functional Fixation Hypothesis.” The Accounting Review 65, 740-763.Google Scholar
  18. Hribar, P. and D. Collins. (2002). “Errors in Estimating Accruals: Implications for Empirical Research.” Journal of Accounting Research 40, 105-134.Google Scholar
  19. Jegadeesh N., J. Kim, S. Krische and C. Lee. (2002). “Analyzing the Analysts: When Do Recommendations Add Value?” Working Paper, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  20. Jegadeesh N. and S. Titman. (1993). “Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency.” Journal of Finance 48, 65-91.Google Scholar
  21. Mendenhall, R. (2002). “Arbitrage Risk and Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift.” Working Paper, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  22. Mishkin, F. (1983). A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconomics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Porter, M. (1992). Capital Choices: Change in the Way America Invests in Industry. Boston, MA: Council on Competitiveness/Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  24. Rajgopal, S., M. Venkatachalam and J. Jiambalvo. (2002). “Is Institutional Ownership Associated with Earnings Management and the Extent to Which Stock Prices Reflect Future Earnings?” Contemporary Accounting Research 19, 117-145.Google Scholar
  25. Richardson, S. (2002). “Accruals and Short Selling. An Opportunity Forgone?” Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  26. Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny. (1997). “The Limits of Arbitrage.” Journal of Finance 52, 35-55.Google Scholar
  27. Sloan, R. (1996). “Do Stock Prices Fully Reflect Informaiton in Accruals and Cash Flows about Future Earnings?” The Accounting Review 71, 289-315.Google Scholar
  28. Walther, B. (1997). “Investor Sophistication and Market Earnings Expectations.” Journal of Accounting Research 35, 157-192.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel W. Collins
    • 1
  • Guojin Gong
    • 1
  • Paul Hribar
    • 2
  1. 1.Tippie College of BusinessUniversity of IowaIowa City
  2. 2.Johnson School of ManagementCornell UniversityIthaca

Personalised recommendations