Discovering appropriate friends for monetary evaluation is a vexing process that requires cautious consideration of corporations’ underlying economics, accounting decisions, and monetary assertion presentation. However with out comparable monetary assertion data, peer benchmarking could yield much less significant and even deceptive insights that negatively impression earnings forecasts.
In a current research printed in The Accounting Evaluation, we developed a strategy to establish comparable corporations for benchmarking and analyzed its implications for analyst outcomes and valuation with multiples. On this put up, we’ll spotlight the salient particulars, a few of which can shock you.
There are other ways to outline peer corporations, similar to {industry} membership, inventory index membership, closeness in market capitalization, and similarity in worth drivers (e.g., P/E ratio, return-on-invested capital, and development).
As an alternative choice to conventional classifications, researchers have examined new methods to establish peer corporations, similar to buyers’ co-search, depth of corporations’ filings with the SEC’s EDGAR, and inventory data on Yahoo! Finance.
These extensively utilized strategies fail to instantly deal with a vital facet of agency benchmarking: the provision of key monetary assertion data for peer corporations. When a number of monetary assertion line gadgets are lacking for a peer agency, analysts wrestle to derive significant inferences from the comparative to the focal agency’s monetary statements.
Our monetary assertion benchmarking (FSB) measure goals to fill this hole. The info and code are freely accessible on our web site.
Capturing the Diploma of Overlap Between Monetary Assertion Gadgets
Constructed on the Jaccard similarity coefficient, pairwise FSB captures the diploma of overlap in monetary assertion gadgets reported by two corporations, with scores starting from 0 (no overlap) to 1 (full overlap). The upper the FSB rating, the better the benchmarking data accessible to exterior customers.
As an example, if the focal agency has reported 270 gadgets, 200 of which overlap with 220 gadgets reported by the peer agency, the FSB rating is 0.69 (200 / (270 + 220 – 200). To place this into context, the common rating for analyst-chosen friends in our pattern is 0.68.
Assuming that FSB is a useful metric in capturing the similarity of two corporations’ underlying economics and accounting decisions, we count on it to be positively correlated with analysts’ decisions of peer corporations.
Our pattern of analyst-chosen friends comes from a Evaluation of Accounting Research article, “Analysts’ alternative of peer firms.” By manually screening greater than 2,500 sell-side fairness analysts’ experiences, the authors extracted knowledge on comparable peer corporations chosen for the focal agency in every report.
In our research, for every analyst-chosen peer agency, we chosen an identical agency in the identical {industry} that was not chosen however which had the same measurement and valuation a number of. The outcomes present that analysts have a tendency to decide on peer corporations which can be extra similar to a focal agency from a monetary assertion benchmarking perspective.
When FSB is larger by one-standard-deviation, the chance of being chosen as a peer agency by an analyst will increase by 13%.
Increased FSBs Enhance Accuracy of Earnings Forecasts
Does selecting friends with larger FSBs have optimistic implications for analyst efficiency? We discover that when the common FSB of the set of analyst-chosen peer corporations is one-standard-deviation larger, the accuracy of analysts’ earnings forecasts will increase by about 23%.
When choosing peer corporations, search for corporations which have extra related monetary statements to the focal agency, even when which means looking out outdoors the focal agency’s principal {industry}. The truth is, solely 40% of the analyst-chosen peer corporations function in the identical product market because the focal agency.
Which firms do you assume can be good peer corporations to decide on when analyzing Colgate-Palmolive? Morningstar lists Procter & Gamble and Unilever as high friends for the corporate. Regardless of being listed on a US inventory alternate, Unilever has a modest 0.69 FSB rating with Colgate-Palmolive.
That is seemingly as a result of the corporate makes use of Worldwide Monetary Reporting Requirements to arrange its monetary statements. Utilizing completely different accounting requirements reduces comparability as a consequence of variations within the recognition and presentation guidelines. In distinction, P&G and Colgate-Palmolive have a better FSB rating of 0.77, suggesting a better comparability than Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive.
In distinction to Morningstar’s method, Google Finance creates a listing of peer corporations based mostly on buyers’ co-search exercise. Notably, among the many peer corporations Google Finance lists for Colgate-Palmolive is Coca-Cola. Though this remark could seem unintuitive at first blush, our methodology means that, from a monetary assertion benchmarking perspective, Coca-Cola can be a wonderful match on this case as a result of its FSB rating with Colgate-Palmolive is effectively above the common at 0.82. This may increasingly clarify why buyers extensively co-search the monetary data of the 2 firms.
Validation and Testing
After validating and testing the pairwise FSB metric, we aggregated knowledge throughout all {industry} friends of the focal agency to know how simple it’s to benchmark a agency’s monetary statements general. This course of yielded a big panel of firm-level FSB knowledge. Additionally, to counterpoint our methodology, we decomposed FSB on the monetary assertion degree, producing separate FSB scores for the revenue assertion, steadiness sheet, and assertion of money flows.
Whereas analysts’ consensus earnings and internet debt forecasts are extra correct when firm-level FSB is excessive (i.e., it’s simple to benchmark and perceive a agency’s monetary statements), revenue assertion and steadiness sheet benchmarking play completely different roles in these outcomes.
We discover that the Earnings assertion FSB rating predicts the accuracy of earnings forecasts however not internet debt forecasts. In distinction, steadiness sheet FSB rating predicts the accuracy of internet debt forecasts, however not earnings forecasts. In financial phrases, a one-standard-deviation improve in revenue assertion (steadiness sheet) FSB is related to a 17.3% (12.1%) extra correct consensus earnings (internet debt) forecasts. These findings spotlight that benchmarking advantages rely on the context of the evaluation.
For the Investor: Business, Business-Dimension, or FSB Friends
Past optimistic analyst outcomes, a key query for buyers is whether or not selecting peer corporations based mostly on FSB improves valuation with comparables. To this finish, we in contrast the predictive capability of the valuation multiples fashioned utilizing FSB-based friends to these of the fashions using conventional strategies for peer agency choice, similar to industry- and size-based friends. Particularly, we regressed the long run enterprise value-to-sales ratio (EVS) of the focal agency on the common EVS calculated for 3 units of friends: (1) {industry} friends, (2) industry-size friends, and (3) FSB friends.
When predicting one-year, two-year, and three-year-ahead EVS, the fashions utilizing the common valuation a number of of FSB-based friends constantly outperform these using solely industry- and industry-size friends. As an example, the R-squared of the mannequin predicting one-year-ahead EVS will increase from 24.8% to 31.8% when the common EVS of the 4 highest FSB friends is included within the mannequin.
In conclusion, we observe that FSB is a straightforward, simple measure summarizing the overlap in peer corporations’ underlying economics and accounting decisions, that are the important thing elements that form monetary statements. FSB is out there on the pairwise and agency ranges, permitting exterior customers to seek out appropriate peer corporations for numerous functions, together with relative efficiency, compensation, and valuation benchmarking.