Abstract
Using 719,830 analyst recommendations from 1994 to 2017, we construct various portfolios based on levels and changes in analyst recommendations and examine how the value of those recommendations in predicting the abnormal stock returns has changed over time. We find that the predictive value of recommendations has been declining, especially after the implementation of NASD Rule 2711. More importantly, this decline in the predictive value results from the loss of its value in buy- and upgrade-related recommendations while sell- and downgrade-related ones are still associated with the negative abnormal returns. We also find a stronger relation between recommendations and stock returns in the post-Rule period. Our empirical results show that, in terms of stock returns, the Rule 2711 has mitigated the analysts’ conflicts of interest in stock recommendations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
