Fair value accounting: information or confusion for financial markets?
Fair value accounting: information or confusion for financial markets?
复制标题
公允价值会计：金融市场的信息还是混乱？
DOI：
10.2139/ssrn.1923841
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
A. Parbonetti
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Magnan;Andrea Menini;A. Parbonetti
本文考察了美国银行控股公司的公允价值计量和披露是否以及如何影响金融分析师预测收益的能力。公允价值计量涉及更分散的预测。SFAS 157颁布的计量基础披露（第1、2和3级）转化为更准确的预测，但对拥有相当大比例公允价值资产的银行没有任何影响。此外，第2级计量与提高预报精度有关，而第3级计量与增加预报离散度有关。这些对比结果反映了分析师的潜在信息环境，第2级测量转化为更高质量的私人和公共信息，第3级测量转化为私人和公共信息质量的降低。在控制了资产的潜在风险后，结果没有变化。总体而言，分析师似乎认为管理者通过第2级数字传达了有用的信息，但在衡量第3级公允价值数字时却表现得投机。
This paper examines whether and how fair value measurement and disclosure by US bank holding companies influences financial analysts’ ability to forecast earnings. Fair value measurement relates to more dispersed forecasts. Measurement basis disclosure (levels 1, 2 and 3) enacted by SFAS 157 translates into more accurate forecasts but has neutral effects for banks with a sizable proportion of assets at fair value. Furthermore, level 2 measurement relates to enhanced forecast accuracy, while level 3 measurement relates to increased forecast dispersion. These contrasting results reflect analysts’ underlying information environment, with level 2 measurement translating into higher quality private and public information and level 3 into reductions in the quality of private and public information. Results do not change after controlling for assets’ underlying riskiness. Overall, it appears that analysts perceive that managers convey useful information through level 2 figures but act opportunistically in measuring level 3 fair value figures.