MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407868831 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v27i1.7527

REIT Price-to-Net Asset Value, Performance, and Managerial Entrenchment

2025· article· en· W4407868831 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olgun Fuat Sahin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReal estate investment trustNet asset valueAsset (computer security)Value (mathematics)BusinessFinancial economicsEconomicsEnterprise valueMonetary economicsFinanceReal estateMathematicsComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines P/NAV dynamics in the REIT industry, utilizing NAV estimates from SNL Financial and stock returns and distributions from CRSP. The findings reveal that REITs typically trade at a premium to their NAVs around IPOs, transitioning to a discount approximately 30 months later. The analysis also shows a positive association between P/NAV and future excess NAV returns, consistent with Chay and Trzcinka (1999). Furthermore, the results suggest high past excess stock returns indicate managerial ability, creating market expectations reflected in premiums. However, when controlling cross-sectional correlation, this relationship loses statistical significance. Additional findings indicate that REITs with positive excess NAV returns, longer public trading histories, or CEO replacements are likelier to trade at a premium to NAV. In contrast, those led by older CEOs, CEOs with longer tenures, or recent outside appointments tend to trade at a discount. Although the negative relationship between CEO tenure and P/NAV is not statistically significant, it supports Berk and Stanton’s (2007) assertion that entrenched CEOs contribute to NAV discounts.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207