Earnings Benchmarks and the Information Content of Quarterly Foreign Earnings of U.S. Multinational Companies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The meeting of earnings benchmarks is considered important for investors. The chief financial officers of U.S. companies state that the three most important earnings thresholds to meet are the earnings in the same quarter last year, the analysts' earnings forecast for the current quarter, and zero earnings. These earnings benchmarks have been defined in terms of total earnings. For U.S. multinational firms, total earnings consist primarily of domestic earnings and foreign earnings. We conduct an event study where we examine (1) the stock market reaction to meeting or beating quarterly domestic and foreign earnings benchmarks and (2) the market reaction to the changes in quarterly domestic and foreign earnings, while we control for meeting or beating the analysts' earnings forecast and the analysts' earnings forecast surprise. We find that the quarterly financial statement disclosure of domestic and foreign earnings under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 131 supplies investors with valuable information that was not previously disseminated through financial analysts or other sources. The stock market reaction to meeting or beating foreign earnings from the same quarter in the prior year is stronger than the market reaction to meeting or beating domestic earnings from the same quarter in the prior year.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".