Are Good Financial Advisors Really Good? The Performance of Investment Banks in the M&A Market

19 Pages Posted: 4 Jul 2008 Last revised: 9 Jan 2015

See all articles by Ahmad Ismail

Ahmad Ismail

American University of Beirut

Date Written: January 1, 2010

Abstract

The study examines whether prestigious investment banks deliver quality gains to their clients in a sample of 6,379 US M&A deals. It finds that acquirers advised by tier-one advisors lost more than $42 billion, whereas those advised by tier-two advisors gained $13.5 billion at the merger announcement. The results were mainly driven by the large loss deals advised by tier-one advisors. The evidence indicates that investment banks might have different incentives when they advise on large deals vs. small deals. The findings were consistent with the superior deal hypothesis as tier-one target advisors outperformed tier-two advisors and the existence of a prestigious advisor on at least one side of an M&A transaction resulted in higher wealth gains to the combined entity. Target advisors were able to extract more wealth gains for their clients, which led to higher combined gains at the expense of the acquirer.

Keywords: Investment banks, Prestigious, Gains, Mergers and acquisitions

JEL Classification: G34

Suggested Citation

Ismail, Ahmad, Are Good Financial Advisors Really Good? The Performance of Investment Banks in the M&A Market (January 1, 2010). Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, (2010) 35:411–429, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1154532 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1154532

Ahmad Ismail (Contact Author)

American University of Beirut ( email )

Bliss Street
Olayan School of Business
Beirut, POB 11236
Lebanon

HOME PAGE: http://www.aub.edu.lb/osb/publicprofile/Pages/profile.aspx?memberID=ai05

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
376
Abstract Views
2,081
rank
96,324
PlumX Metrics