金融工具市场指令和投资者投资组合配置对分析师建议的敏感性

Falko Fecht, P. Weber, Hui Xu
{"title":"金融工具市场指令和投资者投资组合配置对分析师建议的敏感性","authors":"Falko Fecht, P. Weber, Hui Xu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3949532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The update of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (henceforth MiFID II) regulation unbundles research cost from the commission fees since January 2018 in Europe. Using a unique data set, we answer three important policy questions: First, has the information content of the analyst research improved after MiFID II? Second, if recommendations are more informative, did MiFID II change the effects of analyst recommendations on investors’ portfolio decisions? Third, did banks use the potentially stronger responsiveness of investors to recommendations after MiFID II to steer their customers tighter to stocks they sell? Our key findings are that after the implementation of MiFID II, 1) the information context in particular with respect to the earnings per share predictions of analysts became more precise, 2) while the propensity to buy stocks did on average not change for households as a whole, we find that customers will buy more of a stock if their affiliated bank issued a buy recommendation on a stock and 3) banks can more strongly steer their affiliated customers to buy into stocks the bank intends to sell.","PeriodicalId":443031,"journal":{"name":"Political Economy - Development: Political Institutions eJournal","volume":"130 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive and Sensitivity of Investors’ Portfolio Allocation to Analyst Recommendations\",\"authors\":\"Falko Fecht, P. Weber, Hui Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3949532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The update of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (henceforth MiFID II) regulation unbundles research cost from the commission fees since January 2018 in Europe. Using a unique data set, we answer three important policy questions: First, has the information content of the analyst research improved after MiFID II? Second, if recommendations are more informative, did MiFID II change the effects of analyst recommendations on investors’ portfolio decisions? Third, did banks use the potentially stronger responsiveness of investors to recommendations after MiFID II to steer their customers tighter to stocks they sell? Our key findings are that after the implementation of MiFID II, 1) the information context in particular with respect to the earnings per share predictions of analysts became more precise, 2) while the propensity to buy stocks did on average not change for households as a whole, we find that customers will buy more of a stock if their affiliated bank issued a buy recommendation on a stock and 3) banks can more strongly steer their affiliated customers to buy into stocks the bank intends to sell.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Economy - Development: Political Institutions eJournal\",\"volume\":\"130 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Economy - Development: Political Institutions eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3949532\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Economy - Development: Political Institutions eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3949532","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自2018年1月以来,欧洲金融工具市场指令(以下简称MiFID II)法规的更新将研究成本从佣金中分离出来。使用一个独特的数据集,我们回答了三个重要的政策问题:首先,在MiFID II之后,分析师研究的信息内容是否有所改善?第二,如果推荐信息更丰富,MiFID II是否改变了分析师推荐对投资者投资组合决策的影响?第三,在MiFID II之后,银行是否利用投资者对建议的潜在更强的反应来引导客户更紧地购买他们出售的股票?我们主要的发现是:执行MiFID二世后,1)上下文的信息特别是对每股收益的分析师预测更加精确,2),而倾向于购买股票平均不改变家庭作为一个整体,我们发现客户会购买更多的股票如果他们的附属银行发布了一份建议买股票和3)银行可以更强烈引导下属客户买入股票银行打算出售。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive and Sensitivity of Investors’ Portfolio Allocation to Analyst Recommendations
The update of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (henceforth MiFID II) regulation unbundles research cost from the commission fees since January 2018 in Europe. Using a unique data set, we answer three important policy questions: First, has the information content of the analyst research improved after MiFID II? Second, if recommendations are more informative, did MiFID II change the effects of analyst recommendations on investors’ portfolio decisions? Third, did banks use the potentially stronger responsiveness of investors to recommendations after MiFID II to steer their customers tighter to stocks they sell? Our key findings are that after the implementation of MiFID II, 1) the information context in particular with respect to the earnings per share predictions of analysts became more precise, 2) while the propensity to buy stocks did on average not change for households as a whole, we find that customers will buy more of a stock if their affiliated bank issued a buy recommendation on a stock and 3) banks can more strongly steer their affiliated customers to buy into stocks the bank intends to sell.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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