Article

An Examination of the Naive-Investor Hypothesis in Accruals Mispricing in Tunisian Firms

Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting (Impact Factor: 0.33). 05/2011; DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-646X.2011.01048.x

ABSTRACT This study extends previous studies on accrual anomaly to investigate the emerging market's mispricing of accruals. Using Mishkin (1983) test, hedge portfolio test and Fama and MacBeth (1973) regression, we test whether the Tunisian Stock Exchange price rationally reflects the 1-year ahead earnings implications of its earnings components. We find that earnings and their cash flow and accrual components are not rationally priced by the market. Additionally, this paper examines the role of sophistication investors in the pricing of earnings and their components. Our results show that accruals for firms with higher level of institutional ownership are not mispriced, while accruals for firms with lower institutional ownership are overpriced significantly by the market.

Full-text

Available from: Imen Khanchel El Mehdi, Feb 28, 2014
3 Followers
 · 
255 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study uses factor models to explain stock market returns in the Eastern European (EE) countries that joined the European Union (EU) in 2004. In line with other studies, we find that the market value of equity component in the Fama French (1993) three‐factor model performs poorly when applied to our emerging markets dataset. We propose a significant amendment to the standard three‐factor model by replacing the market value of equity factor with a term that proxies for accounting manipulation. We show that our three‐factor model is able to explain returns in the EE EU nations significantly better than the Fama French (1993) three‐factor model, hereby offering an alternative model for use in the numerous markets in which previous studies have found little correlation between market value of equity and equity returns.
    Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting 03/2013; 24(1). DOI:10.1111/jifm.12005 · 0.33 Impact Factor