Disclosure Policies for the Issuer Estimated Value — Facts and Fiction
SSRN, ISSN: 1556-5068
2019
- 1Citations
- 1,415Usage
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In 2014, the German Derivatives Association introduced the policy of disclosing an Issuer Estimated Value (IEV) for structured retail investment products. The IEV is supposed to reflect the fair value of the product. As an act of self-regulation, issuers intended this measure to meet criticism regarding their intransparent profit margins. We analyze the objectivity of the IEV for a large sample of discount certificates on the German major stock market index DAX. We find that margins based on issuerdisclosed IEVs are substantially lower than fair value margins. While deviations might be explained to some degree by a lack of precision in the definition of the IEV, most issuers seem to ignore their own bankruptcy risk in their IEV estimations.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85113941340&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3317499; https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3317499; https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3317499; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3317499; https://ssrn.com/abstract=3317499
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know