About: Industry Classification Benchmark is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5 publications have been published within this topic receiving 52 citations.
TL;DR: An assortment of industry classification schemes used in business research are reviewed to highlight differentiating characteristics, how companies are assigned industry codes, their use by different user groups, and the coverage of industry codes in well-known business databases.
Abstract: This article examines the industry classification schemes used in business research from the Standard Industrial Classification system and the North American Industry Classification System to market-based industry classification schemes like the Global Industry Classification and the Industry Classification Benchmark. The examination answers why there are so many, who developed them, and for what purpose. An assortment of industry classification schemes is reviewed to highlight differentiating characteristics, how companies are assigned industry codes, their use by different user groups, and the coverage of industry codes in well-known business databases. The article also introduces the new Sustainability Industry Classification System from the Sustainable Accounting Standards Board designed to classify companies by sustainability metrics.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors assess three questions concerning these two systems: the homogeneity of the classes, their relation to market returns and the stability of the sectors for variations in the market.
Abstract: A number of different classification systems exist to assist portfolio managers in diversifying exposure to industry- or sector-specific risk. Recently a new system was added, the Industry Classification Benchmark (ICB). Both this framework and the Global Industry Classification System (GICS) are very popular among practicioners. The two frameworks are reported to be similar in methodology and equivalent in use. This article therefore assesses three questions concerning these two systems: the homogeneity of the classes, their relation to market returns and the stability of the sectors for variations in the market. The results indicate that differences do exist between the two systems. These differences, however, are concentrated around individual sectors and are the result of classification decisions inherent in the methodology. For large-cap companies, such as the sample used in this study, the impact of these differences is relatively limited, which does not guarantee the same result for mid- and small-cap stocks. The two methodologies are therefore globally similar and locally different.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors assess the overall impact and by Industries, of Comprehensive Income on Net Income for a sampling of 136 European groups listed on NYSE and NASDAQ from 1999 to 2004.
Abstract: The purpose of this article is to assess the Overall Impact, and by Industries, of Comprehensive Income on Net Income for a sampling of 136 European groups listed on NYSE and NASDAQ from 1999 to 2004. To this end we took as reference the consolidated information disclosed pursuant to SFAS 130 issued by FASB in the reconciliations to the US GAAP when they presented their Annual Reports to the SEC with form 20-F and Industry Classification Benchmark -ICB- (Dow Jones Indexes and FTSE). In order to contrast the corresponding hypotheses, a set of non-parametric tools were used, as the data was far from normality. The results of our paper, which are ground-breaking at an international level, show a statistically significant impact of Comprehensive Income on Net Income for the sample group in most of the years that were analyzed. However, when this impact is itemized by Industries we find that there are hardly any statistically significant differences between them, which allows us to affirm that by adopting Comprehensive Income, within the context that we have studied, we are witness to a phenomenon which, along general lines, affects corporate groups in a similar fashion, independently of the nature of the activities that they carry out.