The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Has New York become less competitive than London in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time☆
Open accessAbstract
We study the determinants and consequences of cross-listings on the New York and London stock exchanges from 1990 to 2005. This investigation enables us to evaluate the relative benefits of New York and London exchange listings and to assess whether these relative benefits have changed over time, perhaps as a result of the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002. We find that cross-listings have been falling on US exchanges as well as on the Main Market in London. This decline in cross-listings is explained by changes in firm characteristics instead of by changes in the benefits of cross-listing. We show that after controlling for firm characteristics there is no deficit in cross-listing counts on US exchanges related to SOX. Investigating the valuation differential between listed and non-listed firms (the cross-listing premium) from 1990 to 2005, we find that there is a significant premium for US exchange listings every year, that the premium has not fallen significantly in recent years, and that it persists when allowing for time-invariant unobservable firm characteristics. In contrast, no premium exists for listings on London's Main Market in any year. Firms increase their capital-raising activities at home and abroad following a cross-listing on a major US exchange but not following a cross-listing in London. Our evidence is consistent with the theory that an exchange listing in New York has unique governance benefits for foreign firms.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error
Heckman, J. J. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912352 · Cited by 28,779
Specification Tests in Econometrics
Hausman, J. A. (1978) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913827 · Cited by 18,820
La Porta, R., Lopez‐de‐Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/250042 · Cited by 18,025
Legal Determinants of External Finance
LA PORTA, R., LOPEZ‐DE‐SILANES, F., SHLEIFER, A., & VISHNY, R. W. (1997) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb02727.x · Cited by 9,783
Cited by
LEUZ, C., & WYSOCKI, P. D. (2016) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1475-679x.12115 · Cited by 1,760
Cost of capital effects and changes in growth expectations around U.S. cross-listings
Hail, L., & Leuz, C. (2009) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.09.006 · Cited by 578
Different approaches to corporate reporting regulation: How jurisdictions differ and why
Leuz, C. (2010) · Accounting and Business Research · doi:10.1080/00014788.2010.9663398 · Cited by 425
Cross-Listing, Investment Sensitivity to Stock Price, and the Learning Hypothesis
Foucault, T., & Frésard, L. (2012) · Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhs093 · Cited by 336
Accounting Standards, Financial Reporting Outcomes, and Enforcement
HOLTHAUSEN, R. W. (2009) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-679x.2009.00330.x · Cited by 306
Metadata
- Authors
- Doidge, C., Andrew Karolyi, G., & Stulz, R. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Financial Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 253-277
- ISSN
- 0304-405X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2034033306
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 83.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Has New York become less competitive than London in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time☆. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.02.010
- The paper
- Doidge, C., Andrew Karolyi, G., & Stulz, R. M. (2009). Has New York become less competitive than London in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time☆. Journal of Financial Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.02.010
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.