Host: 上海立信会计金融学院

  • ISSN 2096-9554
  • CN 31-2074/F
Volume 39 Issue 1
Feb.  2025
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Accounting and Economic Research  > 2025  >  39(1): 114-135
Li Shuhui, Zhou Ping, Liu Xinyi, Wang Shouhai. 2025. Does the Change of Asset Securitization Accounting Standard Affect Analysts’ Earnings Forecast Accuracy? Empirical Evidence from Non-Financial Listed Companies in China. Accounting and Economic Research, 39(1): 114-135.
Citation: Li Shuhui, Zhou Ping, Liu Xinyi, Wang Shouhai. 2025. Does the Change of Asset Securitization Accounting Standard Affect Analysts’ Earnings Forecast Accuracy? Empirical Evidence from Non-Financial Listed Companies in China. Accounting and Economic Research, 39(1): 114-135.
shu

Does the Change of Asset Securitization Accounting Standard Affect Analysts’ Earnings Forecast Accuracy? Empirical Evidence from Non-Financial Listed Companies in China

  • 1.

    School of Accountancy, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan Shandong 250014, China

  • 2.

    Shandong Sericulture Research Institute, Yantai Shandong 264002, China

  • Received Date: 2023-10-08
    Available Online: 2025-05-27
  • Publish Date: 2025-02-25
    Abstract
  • This study investigates the impact of changes in asset securitization accounting standard on analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy using China’s A-share non-financial listed companies as research subjects and employing a multi-period difference-in-differences (DID) approach. The findings reveal that the revision of asset securitization accounting standard significantly enhances analysts’ earnings forecast accuracy. Mechanism tests demonstrate that this improvement operates through the information disclosure effect and corporate behavior adjustment mechanisms. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that the enhancement effect is more pronounced in companies with higher financing constraints, poorer profitability, superior corporate governance and regulatory penalties. This research not only provides empirical evidence for evaluating the implementation effectiveness of current asset securitization accounting standard, but also offers valuable references and policy recommendations for further refinement of the asset securitization accounting standard.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(41)
  • [1]
    程子健, 陈韵竹, 白雪莲. 2022. 借壳上市还是IPO: 上市方式影响分析师预测行为吗? 会计与经济研究 (3): 111−128. doi: 10.16314/j.cnki.31-2074/f.2022.03.007
    [2]
    褚剑, 秦璇, 方军雄. 2019. 中国式融资融券制度安排与分析师盈利预测乐观偏差. 管理世界 (1): 151−166.
    [3]
    董望, 陈俊, 陈汉文. 2017. 内部控制质量影响了分析师行为吗? 来自中国证券市场的经验证据. 金融研究 (12): 191−206.
    [4]
    方军雄. 2007. 我国上市公司信息披露透明度与证券分析师预测. 金融研究 (6): 136−148.
    [5]
    顾小龙, 辛宇, 滕飞. 2016. 违规监管具有治理效应吗——兼论股价同步性指标的两重性. 南开管理评论 (5): 41−54. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2016.05.005
    [6]
    桂荷发, 任妙子. 2021. 企业资产证券化对经营绩效的影响研究. 当代财经 (12): 53−64.
    [7]
    何熙琼, 尹长萍. 2018. 企业战略差异度能否影响分析师盈余预测——基于中国证券市场的实证研究. 南开管理评论 (2): 149−159.
    [8]
    李刚. 2013. 上市公司年报审计质量与证券分析师盈余预测的实证分析. 上海经济研究 (5): 75−86.
    [9]
    刘永泽, 高嵩. 2014. 信息披露质量、分析师行业专长与预测准确性——来自我国深市A股的经验证据. 会计研究 (12): 60−65. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2014.12.009
    [10]
    丘心颖, 郑小翠, 邓可斌. 2016. 分析师能有效发挥专业解读信息的作用吗? ——基于汉字年报复杂性指标的研究. 经济学(季刊) (4): 1483−1506.
    [11]
    司登奎, 李小林, 赵仲匡. 2021. 非金融企业影子银行化与股价崩盘风险. 中国工业经济 (6): 174−192. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2021.06.010
    [12]
    谭松涛, 崔小勇. 2015. 上市公司调研能否提高分析师预测精度. 世界经济 (4): 126−145.
    [13]
    王美英, 付楠楠, 霍宜君, 曹源. 2021. 国家审计影响分析师盈余预测准确度了吗? 审计研究 (5): 61−71.
    [14]
    王守海, 李淑慧, 徐晓彤. 2022. 资产证券化会计准则修订对银行风险承担的影响研究. 会计研究 (11): 38−52. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2022.11.004
    [15]
    王守海, 李淑慧. 2023. 企业资产证券化与审计师风险决策. 审计研究 (2): 88−98. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-4239.2023.02.009
    [16]
    王雄元, 李岩琼, 肖忞. 2017. 年报风险信息披露能提高分析师预测准确度吗? 会计研究 (10): 35−42.
    [17]
    王艳, 刘小英, 翟秋玲. 2018. 其他综合收益披露会抑制上市公司的盈余管理吗——基于会计准则变迁的视角. 广东财经大学学报 (5): 53−69.
    [18]
    王玉涛, 王彦超. 2012. 业绩预告信息对分析师预测行为有影响吗. 金融研究 (6): 193−206.
    [19]
    杨青, 吉赟, 王亚男. 2019. 高铁能提升分析师盈余预测的准确度吗? ——来自上市公司的证据. 金融研究 (3): 168−188.
    [20]
    张金若. 2010. 关于“发起人金融资产转移会计处理方法”的评判. 证券市场导报 (1): 48−53, 63.
    [21]
    张然, 王会娟, 张路. 2012. 本地优势、信息披露质量和分析师预测准确性. 中国会计评论 (2): 127−138.
    [22]
    赵刚, 江雨佳, 马杨, 吕雅铭. 2019. 新审计准则实施改善了资本市场信息环境吗? ——基于分析师盈余预测准确性的研究. 财经研究 (9): 114−126.
    [23]
    周茜, 许晓芳, 陆正飞. 2020. 去杠杆, 究竟谁更积极与稳妥? 管理世界 (8): 127−148.
    [24]
    周夏飞. 2007. 基于经济后果分析的资产证券化会计问题研究. 会计研究 (4): 41−46. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2007.04.006
    [25]
    周泽将, 汪顺, 张悦. 2023. 税制绿色化的微观政策效应——基于企业环保新闻文本情绪数据的检验. 中国工业经济 (7): 103−121. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2023.07.010
    [26]
    Barniv, R. R., and M. Myring. 2015. How would the differences between IFRS and U.S. GAAP affect U.S. analyst performance? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 34(1): 28−51.
    [27]
    Barth, M. E., G. Ormazabal, and D. J. Taylor. 2012. Asset securitizations and credit risk. The Accounting Review 87(2): 423−448. doi: 10.2308/accr-10194
    [28]
    Bhattacharya, U., H. Daouk, and M. Welker. 2003. The world price of earnings opacity. The Accounting Review 78(3): 641−678. doi: 10.2308/accr.2003.78.3.641
    [29]
    Bradshaw, M. T. 2009. Analyst information processing, financial regulation and academic research. The Accounting Review 84(4): 1073−1083. doi: 10.2308/accr.2009.84.4.1073
    [30]
    Cheng, Q., F. Du, X. Wang, and Y. Wang. 2016. Seeing is believing: Analysts’ corporate site visits. Review of Accounting Studies 21(4): 1245−1286. doi: 10.1007/s11142-016-9368-9
    [31]
    Clement, M. B. 1999. Analyst forecast accuracy: Do ability, resources, and portfolio complexity matter? Journal of Accounting Economics 27(3): 285−303.
    [32]
    Dou, Y., S. Ryan, and B. Xie. 2018. The real effects of FAS 166/167 on banks’ mortgage approval and sale decisions. Journal of Accounting Research 56(3): 843−882. doi: 10.1111/1475-679X.12204
    [33]
    Haw, I., B. Hu, and J. J. Lee. 2015. Product market competition and analyst forecasting activity: International evidence. Journal of Banking and Finance 56: 48−60. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.02.010
    [34]
    Huang, Y., and G. Zhang. 2011. The informativeness of analyst forecast revisions and the valuation of R&D-intensive firms. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 30(1): 1−21. doi: 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2010.09.004
    [35]
    Kaplan, S. N., and L. Zingales. 1997. Do investment-cash flow sensitivities provide useful measures of financing constraints? Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(1): 169−215.
    [36]
    Lang, M., and R. Lundholm. 1993. Cross-sectional determinants of analyst ratings of corporate disclosures. Journal of Accounting Research 31(2): 246−271. doi: 10.2307/2491273
    [37]
    Loutskina, E. 2011. The role of securitization in bank liquidity and funding management. Journal of Financial Economics 100(3): 663−684. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.02.005
    [38]
    Malloy, C. J. 2005. The geography of equity analysis. The Journal of Finance 60(2): 719−755. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00744.x
    [39]
    Oz, S. 2019. Did SFAS 166/167 decrease the information asymmetry of securitizing banks? The Financial Review 10(1): 1−25.
    [40]
    Schipper, K. 1991. Analysts’ forecasts. Accounting Horizons 5(4): 105−121.
    [41]
    Zhao, Q., and D. A. Forgione. 2024. The impact of SFAS 166/167 on bank liquidity and lending. Journal of Financial Management, Markets and Institutions 12(1), 2350014.
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(2)  / Tables(8)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML
    Article views (5) PDF downloads(1) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related
    Link 

    Copyright © 会计与经济研究备案序号: 沪ICP备09005481号-4

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return