The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diversification Discount or Premium? New Evidence from the Business Information Tracking Series
Abstract
I use the Business Information Tracking Series (BITS), a new census database that covers the whole U.S. economy at the establishment level, to examine whether the finding of a diversification discount is an artifact of segment data. BITS data allow me to construct business units that are more consistently and objectively defined than segments, and thus more comparable across firms. Using these data on a sample that yields a discount according to segment data, I find a diversification premium. The premium is robust to variations in the sample, business unit definition, and measures of excess value and diversification.
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
A Simple Approximation of Tobin's q
Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994) · Financial Management · doi:10.2307/3665623 · Cited by 2,460
Cited by
Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research
Bascle, G. (2008) · Strategic Organization · doi:10.1177/1476127008094339 · Cited by 1,133
Metadata
- Authors
- Villalonga, B.
- Venue
- The Journal of Finance
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-03-25
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 479-506
- ISSN
- 0022-1082 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-6261
- OpenAlex
- W2092715343
- Cited by
- 814
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 129.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
