Stock Price Response to News of Securities Fraud Litigation: Market Efficiency and the Slow Diffusion of Costly Information

P. Griffin, J. Grundfest, Michael Perino
{"title":"Stock Price Response to News of Securities Fraud Litigation: Market Efficiency and the Slow Diffusion of Costly Information","authors":"P. Griffin, J. Grundfest, Michael Perino","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.251766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study distinguishes between announcements that precipitate federal class action securities fraud litigation, such as earnings surprises and restatements, and the later announcement that an issuer has been named as a defendant in such a lawsuit. The study documents a statistically significant negative short-term price response to the litigation announcement as well as a negative response that persists for several weeks subsequent to the litigation announcement. The response over shorter and longer horizons is more pronounced for smaller firms and for firms with less analyst coverage. Also, passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 reduced the cost of obtaining information about the initiation of these lawsuits and is correlated with a more rapid price response, particularly among smaller issuers and those with less analyst coverage. Although these findings are hardly dispositive of the debate, they present a case study of a price pattern that is far more consistent with a costly-information explanation of stock market price formation than with any behavioral model of which we are aware. These findings also suggest that careful examination of market microstructure and information cost considerations can usefully explain patterns that might otherwise seem inconsistent with the efficient market hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":289542,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"41","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.251766","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41

Abstract

This study distinguishes between announcements that precipitate federal class action securities fraud litigation, such as earnings surprises and restatements, and the later announcement that an issuer has been named as a defendant in such a lawsuit. The study documents a statistically significant negative short-term price response to the litigation announcement as well as a negative response that persists for several weeks subsequent to the litigation announcement. The response over shorter and longer horizons is more pronounced for smaller firms and for firms with less analyst coverage. Also, passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 reduced the cost of obtaining information about the initiation of these lawsuits and is correlated with a more rapid price response, particularly among smaller issuers and those with less analyst coverage. Although these findings are hardly dispositive of the debate, they present a case study of a price pattern that is far more consistent with a costly-information explanation of stock market price formation than with any behavioral model of which we are aware. These findings also suggest that careful examination of market microstructure and information cost considerations can usefully explain patterns that might otherwise seem inconsistent with the efficient market hypothesis.
股票价格对证券欺诈诉讼新闻的反应:市场效率和昂贵信息的缓慢扩散
本研究区分了促成联邦集体诉讼证券欺诈诉讼的公告,如盈余意外和重述,以及后来发行人被指定为此类诉讼被告的公告。该研究记录了统计上显著的对诉讼公告的短期负面价格反应,以及在诉讼公告后持续数周的负面反应。对于规模较小的公司和分析师较少的公司,短期和长期的反应更为明显。此外,1995年《私人证券诉讼改革法案》的通过降低了获取这些诉讼启动信息的成本,并与更快的价格反应相关,尤其是在规模较小的发行人和分析师关注较少的发行人中。尽管这些发现很难决定这场争论,但它们提供了一个价格模式的案例研究,该模式与股票市场价格形成的成本信息解释比我们所知道的任何行为模型都要一致得多。这些发现还表明,对市场微观结构和信息成本考虑的仔细检查可以有效地解释可能与有效市场假说不一致的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信