Kyonghee Kim

On the Anomalous Stock Price Response to Management Earnings Forecasts

This paper examines stock price formation subsequent to management forecasts of quarterly earnings. In the post-announcement period, we find a significant upward price drift for both good news forecasts and bad news forecasts. Combined with the asymmetry in the initial market response, the upward post-guidance drift in stock prices is consistent with a reversal of an initial overreaction to managers’ bad news forecasts and a continuation of an initial under-reaction to managers’ good news forecasts. This interpretation is supported by a negative (positive) relationship between the initial market response and the post-guidance drift in the bad news (good news) group. The drift pattern is robust to issues arising from measurement. Trading strategies exploiting the post-announcement drift suggest the existence of economically significant trading profits, net of estimated trading costs.

The Effect of SEC Reviewers on Comment Letters and Financial Reporting Quality

We examine whether the idiosyncrasy of individual employees of U.S. financial regulators contributes to inconsistent regulatory outcomes. Using a sample of SEC comment letters, we show that SEC reviewers’ idiosyncratic style plays an economically and statistically significant role in explaining the cross-sectional variation in filing review outcomes, even after holding firm and disclosure attributes constant. We also show that the reviewer style is persistent across firms and time. Finally, we find that reviewers with a stricter style are associated with improved financial reporting quality. These findings suggest that individual SEC reviewers have significant influence on the SEC filing review process.

An Empirical Examination of the Divergence between Managers’ and Analysts’ Earnings Forecasts

We study circumstances when analysts’ forecasts diverge from managers’ forecasts after management guidance, and the consequences of this divergence for investors and analysts. Our results show that investors’ return response to earnings surprises based on analyst forecasts is significantly weaker when analyst and management forecasts diverge, and that this attenuating effect is stronger when the management forecast is more credible. When the divergent management forecast is more accurate than the analyst consensus forecast, the subsequent-quarter analyst consensus forecast is significantly more accurate than that of the current quarter, and exhibits less serial correlation. Overall, our findings suggest that, when analyst and management forecasts diverge, investors find the two sources to contain complementary information, and analysts learn to improve their subsequent forecasts. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.