Abstract

AbstractThis paper investigates the issue of whether financial reports appear to convey information on risk on a consistent basis across international capital markets. Data collected from a sample of Japanese financial analysts are compared to previously reported data from U.S. analysts. The results indicate that traditional accounting measures of risk explain substantial variation in the average risk perceptions of financial analysts in both the U.S. and Japan; however, while accounting risk measures were found to explain significant variation in ex post beta for the U.S. sample, this was not found to be the case for the Japanese sample. The implications of these cross‐national differences and similarities are discussed.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call