Intangible capital and the investment-q relation

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Penn collection
Finance Papers
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Finance and Financial Management
Organizational Behavior and Theory
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Author
Peters, Ryan Heath
Taylor, Lucian A
Contributor
Abstract

The neoclassical theory of investment has mainly been tested with physical investment, but we show that it also helps explain intangible investment. At the firm level, Tobin’s q explains physical and intangible investment roughly equally well, and it explains total investment even better. Compared with physical capital, intangible capital adjusts more slowly to changes in investment opportunities. The classic q theory performs better in firms and years with more intangible capital: Total and even physical investment are better explained by Tobin’s q and are less sensitive to cash flow. At the macro level, Tobin’s q explains intangible investment many times better than physical investment. We propose a simple, new Tobin’s q proxy that accounts for intangible capital, and we show that it is a superior proxy for both physical and intangible investment opportunities.

Advisor
Date Range for Data Collection (Start Date)
Date Range for Data Collection (End Date)
Digital Object Identifier
Series name and number
Publication date
2017-02-01
Journal title
Journal of Financial Economics
Volume number
Issue number
Publisher
Publisher DOI
Journal Issue
Comments
Recommended citation
Collection