Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://buratest.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/12661
Title: Analyst coverage: Does the listing location really matter?
Authors: Hassan, OAG
Skinner, FS
Keywords: Analyst coverage;Analysts following;Security analyst;FTSE350;AIM;Alternative trading systems
Issue Date: 2016
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: International Review of Financial Analysis, 46: pp. 227–236, (2016)
Abstract: Using a count panel regression method, we find that the listing location really does matter as stocks listed on the main board (FTSE350) rather than the junior market (AIM) attract more analyst coverage than can be explained by existing factors, even when we control for listing requirements and the type of cross-listing. We also find that listing requirements have a significantly greater impact on the number of analysts following AIM companies rather than their FTSE350 counterparts. Moreover, pooling stocks from different listing locations can conceal additional differences in the determinates of analyst services for the main board and junior markets. For example, cross-listing on a stock exchange increases analysts coverage for FTSE350 stocks but not AIM stocks and listing on less transparent trading venues such as over the counter and alternative trading systems (dark pools) decreases analyst coverage, especially for AIM stocks.
URI: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-review-of-financial-analysis
http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/12661
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2016.05.008
ISSN: 1057-5219
Appears in Collections:Publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf383 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.