Do Institutional Investors Prefer Near-Term Earnings over Long-Run Value?

By Brian J. Bushee. 2001

1,506 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dc116f9e43f07e1d736533b47844945de759cc88

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Finance

Citations in the corpus

Institutional versus Individual Investment in IPOs: The Importance of Firm Fundamentals (2009, neutral): “Prior literature suggests that certain types of institutions are more likely to actively monitor, for example, pension funds, dedicated investors (see, e.g., Bushee (2001)), and 5% blockholders.”
Taste, information, and asset prices: implications for the valuation of CSR (2016, positive): “Bushee (2001) finds that institutional investors with shorter horizons display a preference for near-term earnings relative to long-term value.”
Institutional Investment Horizon and Investment-Cash Flow Sensitivity (2012, methodology): “Institutional heterogeneity As noted earlier, a handful of studies (e.g., Brickley et al., 1988; Duggal and Millar, 1994; Bushee, 2001; Baik et al., 2010; Elyasiani and Jia, 2010) stress the need to examine the”
Corporate social responsibility, firm value, and influential institutional ownership (2018, methodology): “According to Bushee (1998, 2001), by definition, dedicated investors hold stable and focused holdings, while quasi-indexers tend to passively track indexes.”
Minding the Gap (2016, background): ““Transient” investors, on the other hand, acquire stakes in a wider range of firms and generate substantial turnover of shares in their portfolios (Bushee, 2001).”
Investor Relations, Firm Visibility, and Investor Following (2012, neutral): “We did not attempt to match based on company size because market values are often unreliable for firms traded on the OTCBB and Pink Sheets (Bushee and Leuz [2005]). However, the institutional investor following variable should serve as a good proxy for company size (Gompers and Metrick [2001]).”
The Effect of Institutional Ownership on Firm Transparency and Information Production (2015, positive): “…expect greater transparency and information production for firms at the top of the Russell 2000, we hypothesize that they might exhibit preferences for stocks at the top of the Russell 2000 due to lower search costs and enhanced liquidity (Falkenstein, 1996; Bushee and Noe, 2000; Bushee, 2001).”
Passive Investors, Not Passive Owners (2016, methodology): “Defining passive investors as institutions classified as quasi-indexers by Bushee (2001), the two largest of which are Vanguard and State Street, we find that ownership by passive investors is, on average, about 2 to 4 percentage points higher for stocks at the top of the Russell 2000 index…”
Investmentless Growth: An Empirical Investigation (2016, positive): “…and size (Compustat and Census BDS) 7- 8 Governance/short-termism Firm-level share of institutional ownership Firm-level QIX, DED and TRA ownership (Bushee (2001), through 2013) Appendix: Time Effects Time Effects from Total Regressions year==1980 year==1981 year==1982 year==1983 year==1984…”
Institutional ownership, product market competition, and earnings management: Some evidence from international data (2018, background): “…views, namely hands-off passivity and active monitoring, regarding the manner in1 We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer for this insight. which institutional investors may influence earnings management activities of companies (Bhide, 1993; Bushee, 2001; Majumdar & Nagarajan, 1997; Porter, 1992).”