The informativeness of U.S. banks’ statements of cash flows

IF 1.1 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Zhan Gao, Weijia Li, John O’Hanlon
{"title":"The informativeness of U.S. banks’ statements of cash flows","authors":"Zhan Gao,&nbsp;Weijia Li,&nbsp;John O’Hanlon","doi":"10.1016/j.acclit.2019.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Banks, financial statement users, and accounting standard setters have long disagreed on the informativeness of banks’ statements of cash flows (SCFs) and there is a lack of relevant evidence in the literature. This paper examines the informativeness of the SCFs of U.S. commercial banks in two settings where SCFs are purported to be useful. The first analysis tests the incremental value relevance of banks’ SCFs beyond income statements and balance sheets and compares bank's SCFs with those of industrial firms. We find that banks’ SCFs have limited incremental value relevance, and are much less value relevant than industrial firms’ SCFs. The second analysis examines and finds no distress-predictive power of banks’ SCFs, especially in the presence of standard distress predictors. Overall, our results are consistent with the view that banks’ SCFs have limited informativeness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45666,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Literature","volume":"43 ","pages":"Pages 1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.acclit.2019.03.001","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0737460718300624","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Banks, financial statement users, and accounting standard setters have long disagreed on the informativeness of banks’ statements of cash flows (SCFs) and there is a lack of relevant evidence in the literature. This paper examines the informativeness of the SCFs of U.S. commercial banks in two settings where SCFs are purported to be useful. The first analysis tests the incremental value relevance of banks’ SCFs beyond income statements and balance sheets and compares bank's SCFs with those of industrial firms. We find that banks’ SCFs have limited incremental value relevance, and are much less value relevant than industrial firms’ SCFs. The second analysis examines and finds no distress-predictive power of banks’ SCFs, especially in the presence of standard distress predictors. Overall, our results are consistent with the view that banks’ SCFs have limited informativeness.

美国银行现金流量表的信息量
长期以来,银行、财务报表使用者和会计准则制定者对银行现金流量表(scf)的信息量存在分歧,而且文献中缺乏相关证据。本文考察了在两种情况下美国商业银行scf的信息量,其中scf被认为是有用的。第一个分析测试了收益表和资产负债表之外银行SCFs的增量价值相关性,并将银行SCFs与工业企业的SCFs进行了比较。我们发现,银行的SCFs具有有限的增量价值相关性,其价值相关性远低于工业企业的SCFs。第二个分析检查并发现银行的scf没有预测危机的能力,特别是在标准的危机预测指标存在的情况下。总体而言,我们的结果与银行scf的信息量有限的观点是一致的。
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The objective of the Journal is to publish papers that make a fundamental and substantial contribution to the understanding of accounting phenomena. To this end, the Journal intends to publish papers that (1) synthesize an area of research in a concise and rigorous manner to assist academics and others to gain knowledge and appreciation of diverse research areas or (2) present high quality, multi-method, original research on a broad range of topics relevant to accounting, auditing and taxation. Topical coverage is broad and inclusive covering virtually all aspects of accounting. Consistent with the historical mission of the Journal, it is expected that the lead article of each issue will be a synthesis article on an important research topic. Other manuscripts to be included in a given issue will be a mix of synthesis and original research papers. In addition to traditional research topics and methods, we actively solicit manuscripts of the including, but not limited to, the following: • meta-analyses • field studies • critiques of papers published in other journals • emerging developments in accounting theory • commentaries on current issues • innovative experimental research with strong grounding in cognitive, social or anthropological sciences • creative archival analyses using non-standard methodologies or data sources with strong grounding in various social sciences • book reviews • "idea" papers that don''t fit into other established categories.
×
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