KEYWORDS Cost of equity; CAPM; IFRS; Quality of accounting information; Brazil

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors that may explain the attribution of credit ratings to firms, focusing especially on the impact of derivatives. The gap explored by this research lies in the novelty of analyzing how rating agencies perceive the effects caused by information related to derivatives use by Brazilian publicly-traded companies. In addition, this study shifts the previous findings from stock analysts to rating agencies, reinforcing the discussion about the complexity of derivatives in the credit risk assessment process. This research topic is currently of interest due to the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 (Accounting Pronouncements Committee - CPC - 48), which came into effect in January of 2018. Based on these rules, the main novelty presented in this article was its verification of the effect of the derivatives used by companies in order to hedge their credit ratings, thus helping to fill the empirical gap that exists in the literature from the area. The results found challenge the theory that the use of hedge derivatives is viewed positively by investors. However, although no significant statistical impact was found on the ratings of companies that use derivatives, it was observed that the companies that use derivatives and have the highest notional values were those that received the best ratings from Moody’s. With this we broadened the debate about the complexity of the information linked to derivatives use. In the study, 2,090 ratings attributed to non-financial companies with stocks traded on the Brasil, Bolsa, Balcão [B]³ exchange were examined between 2010 and 2016 by using panel data analysis, which lends robustness to the analysis and findings. Contrary to the central hypothesis of this research, the results presented here show that, in Brazil, companies that use derivative financial instruments for hedging do not receive the best credit ratings from rating agencies. One of the main contributions of this study is the evidence that Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s were unable to consistently incorporate information related to derivatives use, thus broadening the discussion about the complexity of these financial instruments.

Purpose: This study aims to analyze the relationship between the abnormal return and R&D expenses in Brazilian public firms. Originality/value: The determinants of firms' abnormal return provide information relevant to investors' decision-making. In this context, we verified whether the innovation, measured by R&D expenses, could be a key factor for the abnormal returns in Brazilian firms. Design/methodology/approach: We analyzed Brazilian public firms, from 2009 to 2016, by panel data regressions, in a sample composed by 1,597 firm-year observations. We collected information about R&D expenses in the footnotes. When a firm only mentioned about R&D expenses but did not disclose spent value in the Income Statement, we consider that the firm did not invest in the period and we attribute zero as a value. We highlighted that few firms mentioned R&D expenses in their footnotes and/or declared that they invested in R&D, only 44 firms in all sample, pointing the importance of better disclosure practices of these investments. Findings: The results demonstrate a negative and statistically significant relationship between innovation and the abnormal return. That is, current R&D expenses lead to a lower current abnormal return. It could be linked with the fact that R&D expenses tend to produce returns just in longer periods, demanding more time to recover these investments, due to their complex characteristics related to accounting measurement of R&D expenses. Consequently, an abnormal return could be perceived only in subsequent periods.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to verify the financing decisions by Brazilian companies in the financial crises of 2002, 2008 and 2015, and to identify the impacts of these crises, as well as the influence of the funding sources - banking, subsidized sources and capital markets - on the leverage and maturity of companies' debts in these periods. Originality/value: Crises establish opportunities for the study of determining factors and their impacts on companies. There is no empirical evidence on the impacts of crises on the capital structure of Brazilian companies taking into account the comparison between the crises of 2002, 2008 and 2015, which motivated the present study. Design/methodology/approach: We performed descriptive analyzes and estimated regressions by panel data. Findings: The results showed a statistically positive relationship between financial crises and corporate leverage, as well as short and long-term debt. With regard to leverage, banking resources, resources from capital and subsidized markets showed a statistically positive relationship with the level of leverage of companies only in the 2008 crisis. Considering the maturity of debts, the 2002 crisis was an important determinant for companies' short-term debt decisions, in view of the predominant participation of banking resources at that time. Financing sources were important in determining companies' long-term indebtedness in the 2008 crisis.

O mercado de capitais é importante para o desenvolvimento do país, remunerando aplicadores e possibilitando aplicação dos valores em atividades produtivas. Contudo, quebras estruturais, sejam estas locais em âmbito internacional, levam à alteração das relações dos fatores de risco relacionados ao retorno das ações ao longo do tempo, inviabilizando a utilização de técnicas de precificação de ativos. Desta maneira, este estudo tem o objetivo de identificar como instabilidades econômicas influenciam no comportamento dos Cinco Fatores de Fama & French em relação ao retorno das ações negociadas no mercado de capitais brasileiro, aplicando regressões com dados em painel utilizando os Cinco Fatores de Fama & French, considerando diferentes períodos macroeconômicos. Os resultados demonstram que os fatores são aplicáveis ao mercado brasileiro, sendo que todos apresentaram relações estatisticamente significantes. Além disto, foi possível observar que períodos de crise, afetam as relações verificadas, indicando maior sensibilidade ao risco por parte dos investidores, principalmente ao analisar as variáveis tamanho e nível de investimento.

This article aimed to determine how rational and irrational investor sentiments impact the return and volatility of the Brazilian market. The role of sentiment in financial markets is still a recent, controversial and limited subject, and this study explores this relationship in the Brazilian market. The evidence from this research adds to the limited number of studies on investor sentiment in emerging markets and extends the evidence already documented in Brazil. Our results are expected to have an impact on investors, policymakers and monetary authorities. Investors must be aware of economic fundamentals when formulating their investment strategies and also when choosing the stocks that will make up their portfolios. Policymakers and monetary authorities should take sentiment into account when formulating political, economic and monetary strategies, as economic changes can affect investor psychology and be reflected in their stock market trading. Consumer and business confidence indexes were used as proxies for investor sentiment and were regressed against a set of economic fundamentals to isolate their rational and irrational components. Then, autoregressive vector models were estimated and impulse response functions and variance decompositions were generated to verify the impact of sentiment on the return and volatility of the Ibovespa. There are three main results. First, investor sentiment impacts both returns and volatility in the Brazilian market. Second, economic fundamentals were important determinants of returns and volatility in the Brazilian market, indicating that fundamental trading induced by rational sentiment had a greater effect than trading induced by irrational sentiment. Third, in terms of magnitude, consumer-based sentiment had a greater impact than business-based sentiment.