Large Shareholders Impact Companies' Profitability, Policies

Sep 05, 2006

Corporations can't choose their shareholders, but some might wish they could. A new study found that some large shareholders are associated with lower-than-average returns for the companies in which they invest, while other shareholders are linked to higher-than-average returns in their companies.

“Large shareholders come with different sets of skills and preferences when they invest in a company. And with the power these shareholders wield, their skills and preferences can have significant effects on corporate profitability,” said Henrik Cronqvist, co-author of the study and assistant professor of finance at Ohio State University's Fisher College of Business.

“This is the first study that has been able to show that individual shareholders matter, not only for corporate policies, but for firm performance as well,” Cronqvist said.

Cronqvist conducted the study with Rudiger Fahlenbrach, assistant professor of finance at Ohio State . Their results are available as a working paper at the Social Science Research Newtwork.

The researchers constructed a data set in which they were able to track all large shareholders – those that hold more than 5 percent of a company's stock – for large U.S. public corporations (essentially the Standard & Poor 1,500) from 1996 to 2001. In all, they identified and followed 1,642 large shareholders.

This is not the first study to examine the impact of large shareholders on corporations, Fahlenbrach said.

“But other studies have assumed, at least implicitly, that all large shareholders affect corporations in the same way, and to the same magnitude,” he said.

“But we show that individual shareholders make unique impacts, probably because of their different views and preferences concerning corporate policies.”

The results showed that some types of shareholders had more impact on corporate policies than others. As would be expected, activist shareholders, such as financier Warren Buffet, had strong effects on companies.

In addition, pension funds, corporations and private equity firms mattered a lot in shaping corporate policies and their bottom lines. But some large shareholders – including banks and trusts – seemed to have little impact on firm policies. Mutual funds, insurance companies, and money managers fell in the middle in terms of influence.

The results also showed that large shareholders had a wide range of effects on corporate profitability, as measured by return on assets (ROA).

The researchers ranked shareholder effects on ROA from worst (at the 0 percentile) to best (100 th percentile). The shareholder at the 25 th percentile was associated with 3 percentage points lower-than-average return in the companies in which it invested. The shareholder at the 75 th percentile was associated with 7 percentage points higher-than-average return for its companies. “That's a range of 10 percentage points, which is quite large,” Fahlenbrach said.

The study was also able to link specific policies pushed by shareholders with profitability in the companies they invested in.

For example, return on assets was higher in companies with shareholders associated with higher pay for CEOs, suggesting that, in general, higher CEO compensation was a good deal for corporations in this sample, Cronqvist said.

But ROA was lower in firms with shareholders linked to diversifying acquisitions.

Results also showed how large shareholders pushed different corporate policies depending on the goals they had for the companies they invested in.

For example, firms with shareholders who were associated with growth strategies – such as pursuing mergers and acquisitions – also seemed to pay their CEOs higher compensation.

“This result supports the idea that some shareholders play a role in shaping pay schemes to spur growth in the company,” Cronqvist said.

One question may be whether large shareholders really do shape policies in the companies they invest in, or if they simply invest in companies in which they share similar values and policy preferences. With their multi-year data set, the researchers were able to examine company policies before individual shareholders invested in them, to determine whether these shareholders had an impact.

“We found that changes in policies we noted happened after the shareholder comes in, and not in the years before,” Cronqvist said. “That indicates the shareholders had something to do with the policy changes.”

Overall, the results show that large shareholders don't all think and act alike, according to Fahlenbrach. And these differences have real-world effects on companies' bottom lines.

“We found that the differences in shareholders' opinions, skills and preferences play a significant role in explaining corporate policies and even performance measures,” Fahlenbrach said.

Source: Ohio State University

Explore further: Bribery 'hits 1.6 billion people a year'

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Driverless shuttle will be on the move in UK

Feb 22, 2015

(Phys.org) —"Autonomous public transport" is on the minds of planners who envision self-driving vehicles that would cross over short distances, suited for airport transport, industrial sites, theme parks ...

Korean tech start-ups offer life beyond Samsung

Feb 23, 2015

As an engineering major at Seoul's Yonsei University, Yoon Ja-Young was perfectly poised to follow the secure, lucrative and socially prized career path long-favoured by South Korea's elite graduates.

Recommended for you

Bribery 'hits 1.6 billion people a year'

Feb 27, 2015

A total of 1.6 billion people worldwide – nearly a quarter of the global population – are forced to pay bribes to gain access to everyday public services, according to a new book by academics at the Universities of Birmingham ...

How music listening programmes can be easily fooled

Feb 26, 2015

For well over two decades, researchers have sought to build music listening software that can address the deluge of music growing faster than our Spotify-spoilt appetites. From software that can tell you ...

Nature journal to begin offering double-blind peer review

Feb 23, 2015

Well known and respected journal, Nature, will begin next month offering researchers who submit their work for peer review, the option of having it done via the double-blind method—whereby both submitters and re ...

User comments : 0

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.