The Causality between Analysts’ Recommendations and Corporate M&As

Ching-Chih Wu, Tung-Hsiao Yang
{"title":"The Causality between Analysts’ Recommendations and Corporate M&As","authors":"Ching-Chih Wu, Tung-Hsiao Yang","doi":"10.47260/jafb/1432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract\n\nThis study examines the role of analysts' recommendations in mergers and acquisitions (M&As), focusing on their impact on payment methods and acquirers' long-term performance. The findings reveal that acquirers with strong buy or buy recommendations are more likely to use 100% stock payment, consistent with the overvaluation hypothesis. Conversely, those with strong sell or sell recommendations tend to prefer cash payment. Notably, acquirers with higher recommendation scores exhibit better long-term market performance. This finding suggests that analysts' recommendations before M&A announcements do not fully incorporate the deal's potential impact on long-term value creation. Moreover, acquirers with buy recommendations experience significantly lower long-term returns, highlighting the disconnect between analysts' recommendations and long-term performance. These findings contribute to understanding the information content and limitations of analysts' recommendations in the M&A context.\n\nJEL classification numbers: G34, G24, G14.\nKeywords: Mergers and acquisitions, Analysts' recommendations, Payment methods, Information quality, Overvaluation hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":330012,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Finance & Banking","volume":"65 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Finance & Banking","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47260/jafb/1432","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This study examines the role of analysts' recommendations in mergers and acquisitions (M&As), focusing on their impact on payment methods and acquirers' long-term performance. The findings reveal that acquirers with strong buy or buy recommendations are more likely to use 100% stock payment, consistent with the overvaluation hypothesis. Conversely, those with strong sell or sell recommendations tend to prefer cash payment. Notably, acquirers with higher recommendation scores exhibit better long-term market performance. This finding suggests that analysts' recommendations before M&A announcements do not fully incorporate the deal's potential impact on long-term value creation. Moreover, acquirers with buy recommendations experience significantly lower long-term returns, highlighting the disconnect between analysts' recommendations and long-term performance. These findings contribute to understanding the information content and limitations of analysts' recommendations in the M&A context. JEL classification numbers: G34, G24, G14. Keywords: Mergers and acquisitions, Analysts' recommendations, Payment methods, Information quality, Overvaluation hypothesis.
分析师建议与企业并购之间的因果关系
摘要 本研究探讨了分析师建议在并购(M&A)中的作用,重点关注其对支付方式和收购方长期业绩的影响。研究结果表明,强烈推荐买入或买入的收购方更倾向于使用 100% 股票支付,这与高估假说一致。相反,那些被强烈推荐卖出或卖出的公司则倾向于现金支付。值得注意的是,推荐得分越高的收购公司长期市场表现越好。这一发现表明,分析师在并购公告发布前的建议并未充分考虑并购交易对长期价值创造的潜在影响。此外,买入建议的并购企业的长期回报率明显较低,这凸显了分析师的建议与长期表现之间的脱节。这些发现有助于理解并购背景下分析师建议的信息内容和局限性:G34, G24, G14.Keywords:并购 分析师建议 支付方式 信息质量 高估假说
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信