SUMMARY
Accurate analysts’ reports alleviate information asymmetry between companies and investors by providing accounting information that is useful in investment decision-making for market participants. Investors evaluate the credibility of stock recommendations based on the accuracy of the earnings forecasts of analysts, applying them in the decision-making process. Studies of stock recommendations have focused on their informational content, systematically analyzing the characteristics of recommendations and, to a lesser degree, decision-making factors. For most analysts, when stock recommendations and forecast changes are simultaneously disclosed, a large bias results if analysts fail to consider the magnitude of the market reaction relative to the earnings forecast and stock recommendations. In most previous studies, the informational content of both individual stock recommendations and changes in stock recommendations was investigated. In this study, we examine differences in the informational content depending on the stock recommendations of the report released immediately previous to the current report for the same recommendation. An upgraded (or downgraded) revision within the same recommendation category is associated with a greater (lower) stock price return. Even the same recommendation in the market may cause different reactions depending on both the recommendation itself and on the direction of change of the recommendation. Affiliated analysts have more access to inside information of the companies they analyze. The stock returns after revisions of Chaebol-affiliated analysts are significantly higher than those of non-Chaebol-affiliated analysts.