Stock Valuation and Learning about Profitability
By Ľuboš Pástor, Pietro Veronesi. 2002
948 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Finance, Strategy and Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c90f72088b6e19197a4766a2a6d656eee8f96c7f
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Finance
- Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh
- Bryan T. Kelly
- Pietro Veronesi
- Hanno Lustig
- Miguel A. Ferreira
- Ralph S. J. Koijen
- Alok Kumar
- Lu Zhang
In Strategy and Management
- Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh
- Miguel A. Ferreira
- Alok Kumar
- René M. Stulz
- Pietro Veronesi
- Ralph S. J. Koijen
- Douglas J. Skinner
- Ian Martin
Citations in the corpus
- Why Did Individual Stocks Become More Volatile (2003, background): “The question often centers on whether the variation in stock prices is fully Pástor and Veronesi (2002) also address the related issues.”
- Firm age and performance (2010, background): “Moreover, it is distinct from such phenomena as sample selection, concave investment opportunity sets, financial frictions (Cooley and Quadrini, 2001; Clementi, 2002), declining investor uncertainty (Pástor and Veronesi, 2003), increasing diversification (Campa and Kedia, 2002; Villalonga, 2004), po”
- Can Growth Options Explain the Trend in Idiosyncratic Risk (2008, background): “In a model of investor learning, Pastor and Veronesi (2003) show that idiosyncratic volatility is higher for younger firms with more uncertainty about future profitability (ROE) and more volatile profitability, which they suggest partially explains increasing idiosyncratic volatility since more firm”
- Momentum Profits, Factor Pricing, and Macroeconomic Risk (2008, positive): “Pastor and Veronesi (2003, 2006) use the same logic to explain the high stock valuation levels in the late 1990s.”
- Corporate Social Performance and Firm Performance: Comparative Study among Developed and Emerging Market Firms (2019, background): “Xit represents the control variables, such as advertisement intensity [88], size [89], R&D [90], beta [91], age [92], capex intensity [93], debt equity ratio [94], debt to total assets [95], dividend yield [96], sales growth [97] and management efficiency ratio [98].”
- Rational IPO Waves (2005, methodology): “This fact is shown more explicitly in Pástor and Veronesi (2003b).”
- Market Expectations in the Cross Section of Present Values (2012, background): “Vuolteenaho (2002), Hansen, Heaton, and Li (2008), Pástor and Veronesi (2003, 2006), Kiku (2006), and Kelly (2011) also model valuation ratios for individual assets, though we are the first to exploit a factor structure in value ratios to form market return and cash flow forecasts.”
- Target’s earnings quality and bidders’ takeover decisions (2013, neutral): “17 The intuition in the models of Pastor and Veronesi (2003, 2006) is that greater uncertainty about average profitability increases the likelihood that the future growth rate of book equity will be persistently high or low.”
- Information Immobility and the Home Bias Puzzle (2009, positive): “Second, Pastor and Veronesi (2003) find that firms with more abundant historical data offer lower returns.”
- Does International Cross-Listing Improve the Information Environment? (2008, positive): “Pastor and Veronesi (2003) use a variety of firm characteristics to explain the cross-section of individual firm idiosyncratic volatility, including firm size, leverage, book-to-market equity ratio, and return on equity.”
- Idiosyncratic Return Volatility and the Information Quality Underlying Managerial Discretion (2012, background): “Pastor and Veronesi (2003) model the relation between information asymmetry and return volatility in an environment where investors learn about the uncertainty in a firm’s profitability, and they show that higher uncertainty induces larger return volatility.”
- Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches (2005, positive): “Many authors have acknowledged the bias and have suggested adjusting the standard errors for the estimated first-order autocorrelation of the estimated slope coefficients (Christopherson, Ferson, and Glassman, 1998; Graham, Lemmon, and Schallheim, 1998; Chen, Hong, and Stein, 2001; Cochrane, 2001; L”