MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372239016 · doi:10.2308/jfr-2021-024

Alignment between Compensation-Contracting and Value-Relevance Roles of Revenues

2023· article· en· W4372239016 on OpenAlexaff
Hanni Liu, Anup Srivastava, Jennifer Yin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Financial Reporting · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueEarningsValuation (finance)BusinessRevenue recognitionRevenue modelEquity (law)FinanceRevenue assuranceIndustrial organizationAccountingAccounting information system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Revenue is the closest proxy in financial statements for market size and dominance, factors that determine the survival and future profits of modern corporations. Hence, revenue may contain value-relevant information, incremental to information contained in earnings. We find that revenue is used as a performance metric in executive compensation contracts when it provides information on equity valuation beyond the information provided by earnings. We call this occurrence an alignment between revenues’ contracting and the valuation roles. The alignment is higher for firms in newer industries, with investors who focus on revenue targets, with managers who provide revenue guidance, and with analysts who issue revenue forecasts. This alignment seems efficient because revenue is more informative of future profits when it carries higher weight in executive compensation contracts. We conclude that modern corporations increasingly incentivize managers to create new markets and defend existing market shares, in addition to maximizing current profits. JEL Classifications: J3; L2; M41.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Financial ReportingSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207