arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

The Usefulness of Financial Statements under Chinese-GAAP vs. IAS : Evidence from the Shanghai Stock Exchange in PRC. (The Kanematsu Fellowship Award Article)

Dan Hu

Kobe Economic and Business Review2003article
ABDC C
Weight
0.26

What the paper says

Using a sample from the Shanghai Stock Exchange, this paper ana1yzes the information content of earnings and book value under two sets of accounting practice: IAS (International Acounting Standards) and Chinese-GAAP (Chinese General Accepted Accounting Principles). The rapid development of the Chinese economy, its accounting system and the requirement that two sets of accounting information are to be prepared to list B-Shares are the background of this study. This paper adopted the Ohlson (1995) model and used the Davidson-MacKinon J-test to test which one of these two competing sets of accounting information is more relatively with the stock fs prices. The results show that Chinese-GAAP amounts are more highly associated with the stocks prices than IAS amounts. The results of yearly regression analyses generally suggested that the exp1anatory power of these earnings for stock's prices decreased over time.

1 citation

Cite this paper

@article{dan2003,
  title        = {{The Usefulness of Financial Statements under Chinese-GAAP vs. IAS : Evidence from the Shanghai Stock Exchange in PRC. (The Kanematsu Fellowship Award Article)}},
  author       = {Dan Hu},
  journal      = {Kobe Economic and Business Review},
  year         = {2003},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Usefulness of Financial Statements under Chinese-GAAP vs. IAS : Evidence from the Shanghai Stock Exchange in PRC. (The Kanematsu Fellowship Award Article)

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.26

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00
M · momentum0.20 × 0.15 = 0.03
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.