entity · derived
Event study
Derived node: assembled mechanically from the claims carrying event-study. A roster, not an adjudicated definition.
Every claim under this term
- 2629451-001 : Stock prices respond significantly and predictably in a positive direction to the DOJ press release announcing execution of a non- or deferred prosecution agreement and to the start of the N/DPA term.
- 2629451-002 : The market does not price the three defining N/DPA events in isolation; it treats the announcement, the start of the term, and the end of the term as sequential and conditional events.
- 2629451-004 : There is no systematic price momentum beyond the three core N/DPA event dates, which the authors read as evidence that the market is reasonably efficient with respect to N/DPA information.
- 2629451-005 : Investors react negatively to impending N/DPA driven changes in the period before the agreement is executed, but once the N/DPA is executed they generally treat it as a positive event for the firm.
- 2629451-007 : The combination of a positive market reaction at the start of the N/DPA term and a negative reaction at its end is evidence that the governance changes N/DPAs mandate actually matter to firm value.
- 2629451-011 : This is the first study to examine stock price reactions to non- and deferred prosecution agreements, using all publicly available N/DPAs across several industries from 1993 to 2015 (N=330).
- 2629451-012 : The event study design is appropriate for N/DPAs because the wrongdoing event is identifiable through the execution of a reasonably standardized agreement and because information about the firm's wron
- 2629451-013 : The date of the DOJ press release announcing execution is the only reliable announcement date for an N/DPA, so it is the defensible event date for measuring market reaction.
- 2629451-015 : Pre-announcement leaks about a pending N/DPA, including leaks by prosecutors, should not move markets significantly because leaked details carry no certainty or finality as to final terms or fine amou
- 2629451-016 : Unlike legislative mandates, N/DPA governance changes are preceded by no public debate or publicity, so their effect on firm value is not gradually incorporated into prices and is therefore testable b
- 2629451-017 : Around the DOJ announcement, N/DPA firms show a significant positive cumulative abnormal return trend before day minus five, a significant drop at day minus five, and negative CARs relative to matched
- 2629451-018 : After the DOJ announcement, competitor firms' cumulative abnormal returns trend negative from day zero to day twenty five while N/DPA firms' CARs continue on a neutral to positive trend.
- 2629451-021 : Immediately before the N/DPA term becomes effective, from day minus three to day minus one, the market prices the onset of the term as a negative event.
- 2629451-022 : From the first day of the N/DPA term through day twenty five, the period in which mandated governance improvements are in force, the market prices the N/DPA as a positive event for the firm.
- 2629451-023 : The sign of the market reaction reverses at the end of the N/DPA term: where the announcement and the start of the term produce positive CARs, the end of the term produces negative CARs at day zero an
- 2629451-026 : The data support Hypothesis 2: the market reacts positively at the DOJ announcement and at the start of the N/DPA term and negatively at the end of the term.
- 2629451-029 : The data support Hypothesis 3: the market reacts positively when N/DPA governance changes become mandatory at the start of the term and negatively when they cease to be mandatory at its end.
- 2629451-034 : The study's results may be biased toward low impact N/DPAs, because firms that were acquired, merged, or went bankrupt as a result of an N/DPA had to be dropped for lack of public trading data, and th