The Case Against Quarterly Reporting By Public Companies– Part 1, The Fundamentals

Core Argument - U.S. financial regulators are considering modifying or rescinding the 55-year-old rule that mandates public companies to issue formal financial reports every 90 days, potentially shifting to semiannual reporting [1][9]. Group 1: Arguments for Eliminating Quarterly Reporting - Business leaders express concerns about the costs and distractions associated with the short-cycle reporting process, which may lead to a short-term bias in corporate decision-making [2][11]. - Academic and industry studies suggest that semiannual reporting does not impair and may even enhance company performance and the quality of financial information available to investors [3][24]. - The current quarterly reporting regime has been linked to significant market distortions, including abnormal volatility and mispricing, particularly disadvantaging small investors [4][44]. Group 2: Evidence Supporting Semiannual Reporting - Studies indicate no significant differences in corporate performance metrics such as return on equity, net profit margins, and earnings per share growth between quarterly and semiannual reporters [25][28]. - Research from the UK shows that the removal of mandatory quarterly reporting did not materially impact corporate investment decisions, suggesting that the frequency of reporting may not significantly influence long-term investment strategies [27][42]. - Evidence from the UK indicates that semiannual reporting is associated with higher quality financial information, including reduced accruals manipulation and improved earnings persistence [28][29]. Group 3: Arguments for Maintaining Quarterly Reporting - Traditionalists argue that the current quarterly reporting cycle is essential for maintaining market discipline and efficient price discovery, asserting that more frequent updates provide better information for investors [16][18]. - Critics of the proposed change highlight that U.S. corporate profits are at near all-time highs, suggesting that the current system does not hinder long-term investment [17][41]. - Concerns exist that less frequent reporting could lead to increased market volatility and misallocation of capital, potentially harming overall economic stability [19][23]. Group 4: The "Earnings Game" - The quarterly reporting cycle has created a phenomenon known as the "Earnings Game," where market participants engage in strategies that can distort trading patterns and compromise the quality of financial information [4][44]. - This environment encourages short-termism among executives, who may prioritize meeting quarterly earnings targets over long-term value creation [12][40]. - The pressure to meet quarterly expectations can lead to practices that undermine the integrity of financial reporting, including earnings management and manipulation [39][44].