Does insider trading affect auditors’ risk assessments and effort? Evidence from audit pricing

Farzana Afrin et al.

Managerial Auditing Journal2026https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-01-2025-4667article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Purpose Audit regulations suggest that auditors consider insider trading as part of their assessment of and response to the risk of material misstatement as insider trading provides information about audit-relevant outcomes such as weak internal controls and fraud. The authors investigate whether audit fees reflect the increased risk revealed and more audit effort induced by insider selling. Design/methodology/approach This study uses empirical analysis with OLS. Findings The authors find that relative to companies with net insider buying, audit fees are higher among companies with net insider selling, especially when the insiders are officers. In addition, the authors find more audit effort is needed when a large, accelerated filer changes to a net insider seller. We further find that the value of total insider purchase is negatively related to audit fees among companies of net insider buying. Originality/value Collectively, the findings suggest that auditors’ risk assessments and effort are sensitive to information reflected in insider trading, consistent with regulatory recommendations for auditors to consider nontraditional risk characteristics.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-01-2025-4667

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{farzana2026,
  title        = {{Does insider trading affect auditors’ risk assessments and effort? Evidence from audit pricing}},
  author       = {Farzana Afrin et al.},
  journal      = {Managerial Auditing Journal},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-01-2025-4667},
}

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

Flag this paper

Does insider trading affect auditors’ risk assessments and effort? Evidence from audit pricing

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


Evidence weight

0.50

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

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
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.