MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Institutional Investment Horizons and the Cost of Equity Capital

2012· article· en· W3121857641 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Management · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutional investorEquity (law)Agency costInvestment (military)Cost of capitalEquity capital marketsCost of equityEconomicsClub dealEquity riskPrivate equity fundBusinessNew horizonsPrivate equity firmMonetary economicsFinanceFinancial economicsPrivate equityMicroeconomicsCorporate governanceShareholder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the influence of institutional investors’ investment horizons on a firm's cost of equity. We argue that the cost of equity will decrease in the presence of institutional investors with longer‐term investment horizons due to improved monitoring and information quality. Our empirical results demonstrate that the cost of equity declines in the presence of institutional investors with long‐term investment horizons, all else remaining equal. Our results indicate also that the monitoring role of long‐term institutional investors is more pronounced for firms with higher agency problems (poorly governed firms). Overall, our evidence suggests that when considering the influence of institutional investors, it is critical to account for institutional heterogeneity, which leads to new directions for future research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it