Houston research on asset valuation reveals importance of 'opinion shopping'

Houston voices

New research reveals that companies often “opinion shop” to shape their financial reality. Photo via rice.edu

Firms often have to estimate the “fair value” of their investments, meaning they have to declare what an asset is worth on the market. To avoid the potential for bias and manipulation, companies will use third-party services to provide an objective estimate of their assets’ fair value.

But nothing prevents a company from seeking multiple third-party estimates and choosing whichever one suits their purpose.

In a recent study, Shiva Sivaramakrishnan (Rice Business) and co-authors Minjae Koo (The Chinese University of Hong Kong) and Yuping Zhao (University of Houston) examine two motives for switching third-party evaluators: “opinion shopping” and “objective valuation.”

Firms that opinion shop are looking for a third-party source to make their investments look better on paper. For example, if Service A says an asset is worth $80 — and that means the company would have to take an accounting loss — the company might switch to Service B, which says the asset is worth $90. By using the higher estimate from Service B, the company avoids a loss.

Opinion shopping can be a dangerous practice, both on a macro level and for the specific firms that engage in it. Not only does it reduce the quality of fair value estimates for everyone, it means some company assets are potentially overvalued. And if those assets ever decline in value for real, the company will eventually take a loss.

Moreover, opinion shopping opens the door to managerial opportunism. If assets are valued more highly, managers are likely to receive credit and potentially use that perceived accomplishment to advance their careers.

There are reasons for companies to go the other way. In the hypothetical scenario above, our company might switch from Service B ($90) to Service A ($80) to receive a more accurate and objective estimate. The “objective valuation” motive helps companies meet regulatory requirements and ensure estimates reflect true market value. What’s more, the objective valuation motive helps curb managerial buccaneering.

The study looks at when and why life insurance companies will switch their third-party review service. The team finds that both motives — opinion shopping and objective valuation — are common. Sometimes companies want to better align their fair value estimates with what similar assets are trading for in the market. Other times, they want assets to look better on paper.

Of the two motives, opinion shopping is the more dominant, particularly when they are in conflict with each other. On the whole, evidence suggests that companies switch price sources strategically to inflate estimates and avoid losses, rather than to get more accurate estimates.

The study has implications for investors, regulators and researchers. “Opinion shopping” could be prevalent in non-financial industries, as well — especially public firms with capital market incentives. More disclosure around price sources could improve estimate reliability.

Future research could examine asset valuation practices and motives in other sectors such as banking, real estate and equity investments. Are some industries more prone to opinion shopping than others? What factors make opinion shopping or objective valuation more likely? Are there certain signals or patterns that indicate when a company is opinion shopping versus seeking objectivity?

Answers to these questions could help discern acceptable from unacceptable third-party source switching. And understanding if certain types of companies are more at risk could help regulators and auditors focus their efforts.

The bottom line:

Accurate accounting matters. While external sources are better for measuring the fair value of any given asset, companies can distort the very concept of fair value estimates by changing their source. More rigor, transparency and auditing around price sources could curb manipulation and improve estimate reliability.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Shiva Sivaramakrishnan, the Henry Gardiner Symonds Professor of Accounting at Rice Business.

Research shows that some corporate executives skew earnings to influence the market and inflate share price. Photo via Pexels

Rice University research finds market outliers at risk of misreporting

houston voices

Say a company called CoolConsumerGoodsCo has just released its quarterly earnings report, revealing significantly higher profits than its consumer goods industry counterparts.

That result might spur analysts to slap a buy rating on the stock and investors to snap up shares. In an ideal world, the market wouldn't have to consider the possibility that the numbers aren't legit — but then again, it's not an ideal world. (Enron, anyone?)

Rice Business professors Brian R. Rountree and Shiva Sivaramakrishnan, along with Andrew B. Jackson at UNSW in Australia, studied what makes business leaders more likely to engage in fraudulent earnings reporting. Specifically, they focused on the relationship between this kind of misrepresentation and the degree to which a company's earnings are in line with the rest of its industry — a variable the researchers term "co-movements."

Many people are familiar with a similar variable, calculated using stock returns often referred to as a company's beta. The authors adapted the stock return beta to corporate earnings to see how a company's earnings move with earnings at the industry level.

The researchers hypothesized that the less in sync a company's earnings are with its industry, the higher the chance a company's leaders will manipulate earnings reports. They started with the well-accepted premise that corporations try to skew earnings reports to influence the market. The primary motive is typically to raise the company's stock price, as when an executive tries to "choose a level of bias" that balances potential fallout of getting caught against the benefits of a higher stock price.

To test their prediction, the professors analyzed a sample of enforcement actions taken by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission against companies for problematic financial reporting from 1970 to 2011 — although they noted that given the SEC's limited resources, the number of enforcement actions probably underestimates the actual amount of earnings manipulation in the market.

Their analysis revealed that firms with low earnings co-movements (meaning their earnings were out of sync with industry peers) were more likely to be accused by the SEC of reporting misdeeds. They concluded that the degree of earnings co-movement determines the probability of earnings manipulation. Put another way, earnings co-movements are a "causal factor" in the chances of earnings manipulations — and to a significant degree. The researchers found that firms who don't co-move with the market are more than 50 percent more likely to face an SEC enforcement action, compared with firms who are perfectly aligned with the market.

The researchers drilled deeper into the data to study whether the odds changed depending on the industry, since past research has indicated that the amount of competition in an industry works to constrain misreporting. That premise seems to hold true, the researchers concluded. In industries with more competitive markets, the impact of low co-movement on earnings manipulation is moderated.

They also studied whether the age of a firm played a part in the likelihood of earnings manipulation. Newer firms often rely more on stock compensation, which could be a motive for manipulating earnings reporting to drive up share price. Indeed, younger firms were more susceptible to misreporting when their earnings were out of whack with the rest of the marketplace.

Every firm faces some risk of misreporting, however. Even for public companies under analyst scrutiny, low co-movement proved to be a driver of earnings manipulation. But companies known for conservative reporting tend to be less likely to exaggerate their earnings, in general; these firms typically recognize losses in a more timely manner, the professors found.

These findings suggest a number of future lines of research. For example: When do executives underreport earnings? And can analyzing patterns related to cash flow reporting help better isolate earnings manipulation?

In the meantime, if you come across a company like CoolConsumerGoodsCo with an earnings report that's widely out of sync with the rest of its industry, you might think twice before rushing to buy in.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and is based on research from Brian R. Rountree, an associate professor of accounting at the Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University, and Shiva Sivaramakrishnan is the Henry Gardiner Symonds Professor of Accounting at Rice Business.

In a recent study, a Rice Business professor found that board members actually need incentives — both short- and long-term — to act in stakeholders' best interests. Getty Images

Rice University research finds executive board members are driven by incentives

Houston voices

If you're a stockholder, you may envision your investment helmed by a benevolent, all-knowing board of directors, sitting around a long finely-grained wooden table, drinking coffee, their heads buried in PowerPoint charts as they labor to plot the best course for the company. Too often, however, you can't take for granted that a company's board will steer it wisely.

Companies choose directors because they offer rich and varied experience in the business world. Many who serve on boards, moreover, are CEOs of other corporations, or have headed big companies in the past. As of October 2018, for example, six of the 11 directors on Walmart's board and eight of 13 on AT&T's board hold CEO or CFO positions in other firms. So it's easy to assume that board members will act in the best interests of stockholders.

But in a recent study, Rice Business professor Shiva Sivaramakrishnan found that board members actually need incentives — both short- and long-term — to act in stakeholders' best interests.

Corporations usually compensate board members with stock options, grants, equity stakes, meeting fees, and cash retainers. How important is such compensation, and what sort of incentives do board members need to perform in the very best interests of a company? Sivaramakrishnan joined co-author George Drymiotes to trace how compensation impacts various aspects of board performance.

Recent literature in corporate governance has already stressed the need to give boards of directors explicit incentives in order to safeguard shareholder welfare. Some observers have even proposed requiring outside board members to hold substantial equity interests. The National Association of Corporate Directors, for example, recommended that boards pay their directors solely with cash or stock, with equity representing a substantial portion of the total, up to 100 percent.

To the extent that directors hold stock in a company, their actions are likely influenced by a variety of long-and short-term incentives. And while the literature has focused mainly on the useful long-term impact of equity awards, the consequences of short-term incentives haven't been as clear. Moreover, according to surveys, most directors view advising as their primary role. But this role also has received little attention.

To scrutinize these issues, the scholars used a simple model, which assumes the board of directors perform three roles: contracting, monitoring and consulting. The board contracts with management to provide productive input that improves a firm's performance. By monitoring management, the board improves the quality of the information conveyed to managers. By serving in a consulting role, the board makes managers more productive, which, in turn, means higher expected firm output.

This model allowed the scholars to better understand the relationship between the board of directors and the company's managers, as well as with shareholders. The former was particularly important to take into account, because conflict between a board and managers is typically unobservable and can be costly.

The results were surprising. Without short-term incentives, the researchers found, boards did not effectively fulfill their multiple roles. Long-term inducements could make a difference, they found, but only in some aspects of board performance.

While board members were better advisors when given long-term motivations, short-term incentives were better motivators for performing well in their other corporate governance roles, according to the research, which tied specific aspects of board compensation to particular board functions.

Restricted equity awards provided the necessary long-term incentives to improve the efficacy of the board's advisory role, the scholars found, but only the short-term incentives, awarding an unrestricted share or a bonus based on short-term performance, motivated conscientious monitoring.

The scholars also examined managerial misconduct. Board monitoring, they concluded, lowered the cost of preventing such wrongdoing — but only if the board had strong short-term incentives in place.

Even at the highest rungs of the corporate ladder, in other words, short-term self-interest is the greatest motivator. Maybe it's not surprising. In the corporate world, acting for one's own benefit is a given — so stockholders need to look more closely at those at the very top. Like everyone else, board directors need occasional brass rings within easy reach to do their best.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Shiva Sivaramakrishnan is the Henry Gardiner Symonds Professor in Accounting at the Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston climbs to top 10 spot on North American tech hubs index

tech report

Houston already is the Energy Capital of the World, and now it’s gaining ground as a tech hub.

On Site Selection magazine’s 2026 North American Tech Hub Index, Houston jumped to No. 10 from No. 16 last year. The index relies on data from Site Selection as well as data from CBRE, CompTIA and TeleGeography to rank the continent’s tech hotspots. The index incorporates factors such as internet connectivity, tech talent and facility projects for tech companies.

In 2023, the Greater Houston Partnership noted the region had “begun to receive its due as a prominent emerging tech hub, joining the likes of San Francisco and Austin as a major player in the sector, and as a center of activity for the next generation of innovators and entrepreneurs.”

The Houston-area tech sector employs more than 230,000 people, according to the partnership, and generates an economic impact of $21.2 billion.

Elsewhere in Texas, two other metros fared well on the Site Selection index:

  • Dallas-Fort Worth nabbed the No. 1 spot, up from No. 2 last year.
  • Austin rose from No. 8 last year to No. 7 this year.

San Antonio slid from No. 18 in 2025 to No. 22 in 2026, however.

Two economic development officials in DFW chimed in about the region’s No. 1 ranking on the index:

  • “This ranking affirms what we’ve long seen on the ground — Dallas-Fort Worth is a top-tier technology and innovation center,” said Duane Dankesreiter, senior vice president of research and innovation at the Dallas Regional Chamber. “Our region’s scale, talent base, and diverse strengths … continue to set DFW apart as a national leader.”
  • “Being recognized as the top North American tech hub underscores the strength of the entire Dallas-Fort Worth region as a center of innovation and next-generation technology,” said Robert Allen, president and CEO of the Fort Worth Economic Development Partnership.

While not directly addressing Austin’s Site Selection ranking, Thom Singer, CEO of the Austin Technology Council, recently pondered whether Silicon Hills will grow “into the kind of community that other cities study for the right reasons.”

“Austin tech is not a club. It is not a scene. It is not a hashtag, a happy hour, or any one place or person,” Singer wrote on the council’s blog. “Austin tech is an economic engine and a global brand, built by thousands of people who decided to take a risk, build something, hire others, and be part of a community that is still young enough to reinvent itself.”

South of Austin, Port San Antonio is driving much of that region’s tech activity. Occupied by more than 80 employers, the 1,900-acre tech and innovation campus was home to 18,400 workers in 2024 and created a local economic impact of $7.9 billion, according to a study by Zenith Economics.

“Port San Antonio is a prime example of how innovation and infrastructure come together to strengthen [Texas’] economy, support thousands of good jobs, and keep Texas competitive on the global stage,” said Kelly Hancock, the acting state comptroller.

14 Houston startups starting 2026 with fresh funding

cha-ching

Houston startups closed out the last half of 2025 with major funding news.

Here are 14 Houston companies—from groundbreaking energy leaders to growing space startups—that secured funding in the last six months of the year, according to reporting by InnovationMap and our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

Did we miss a funding round? Let us know by emailing innoeditor@innovationmap.com.

Fervo Energy

Fervo Energy has closed an oversubscribed Series E. Photo via Fervo Energy

Houston-based geothermal energy company Fervo Energy closed an oversubscribed $462 million series E funding round, led by new investor B Capital, in December.

The company also secured $205.6 million from three sources in June.

“Fervo is setting the pace for the next era of clean, affordable, and reliable power in the U.S.,” Jeff Johnson, general partner at B Capital, said in a news release.

The funding will support the continued buildout of Fervo’s Utah-based Cape Station development, which is slated to start delivering 100 MW of clean power to the grid beginning in 2026. Cape Station is expected to be the world's largest next-generation geothermal development, according to Fervo. The development of several other projects will also be included in the new round of funding. Continue reading.

Square Robot

Houston robotics co. unveils new robot that can handle extreme temperatures

Square Robot's technology eliminates the need for humans to enter dangerous and toxic environments. Photo courtesy of Square Robot

Houston- and Boston-based Square Robot Inc. announced a partnership with downstream and midstream energy giant Marathon Petroleum Corp. (NYSE: MPC) last month.

The partnership came with an undisclosed amount of funding from Marathon, which Square Robot says will help "shape the design and development" of its submersible robotics platform and scale its fleet for nationwide tank inspections. Continue reading.

Eclipse Energy

Eclipse Energy and Weatherford International are expected to launch joint projects early this year. Photo courtesy of Eclipse Energy.

Oil and gas giant Weatherford International (NASDAQ: WFRD) made a capital investment for an undisclosed amount in Eclipse Energy in December as part of a collaborative partnership aimed at scaling and commercializing Eclipse's clean fuel technology.

According to a release, joint projects from the two Houston-based companies are expected to launch as soon as this month. The partnership aims to leverage Weatherford's global operations with Eclipse Energy's pioneering subsurface biotechnology that converts end-of-life oil fields into low-cost, sustainable hydrogen sources. Continue reading.

Venus Aerospace 

Lockheed Martin Ventures says it's committed to helping Houston-based Venus Aerospace scale its technology. Photo courtesy Venus Aerospace

Venus Aerospace, a Houston-based startup specializing in next-generation rocket engine propulsion, has received funding from Lockheed Martin Ventures, the investment arm of aerospace and defense contractor Lockheed Martin, for an undisclosed amount, the company announced in November. The product lineup at Lockheed Martin includes rockets.

The investment follows Venus’ successful high-thrust test flight of its rotating detonation rocket engine (RDRE) in May. Venus says it’s the only company in the world that makes a flight-proven, high-thrust RDRE with a “clear path to scaled production.”

Venus says the Lockheed Martin Ventures investment reflects the potential of Venus’ dual-use technology for defense and commercial uses. Continue reading.

Koda Health

Tatiana Fofanova and Dr. Desh Mohan, founders of Koda Health, which recently closed a $7 million series A. Photo courtesy Koda Health.

Houston-based digital advance care planning company Koda Health closed an oversubscribed $7 million series A funding round in October.

The round, led by Evidenced, with participation from Mudita Venture Partners, Techstars and Texas Medical Center, will allow the company to scale operations and expand engineering, clinical strategy and customer success, according to a news release.

The company shared that the series A "marks a pivotal moment," as it has secured investments from influential leaders in the healthcare and venture capital space. Continue reading.

Hertha Metals

U.S. Rep. Morgan Luttrell, a Magnolia Republican, and Hertha Metals founder and CEO Laureen Meroueh toured Hertha’s Conroe plant in August. Photo courtesy Hertha Metals/Business Wire.

Conroe-based Hertha Metals, a producer of substantial steel, hauled in more than $17 million in venture capital from Khosla Ventures, Breakthrough Energy Fellows, Pear VC, Clean Energy Ventures and other investors.

The money was put toward the construction and the launch of its 1-metric-ton-per-day pilot plant in Conroe, where its breakthrough in steelmaking has been undergoing tests. The company uses a single-step process that it claims is cheaper, more energy-efficient and equally as scalable as conventional steelmaking methods. The plant is fueled by natural gas or hydrogen.

The company, founded in 2022, plans to break ground early this year on a new plant. The facility will be able to produce more than 9,000 metric tons of steel per year. Continue reading.

Helix Earth Technologies, Resilitix Intelligence and Fluxworks Inc.

Helix Earth's technology is estimated to save up to half of the net energy used in commercial air conditioning, reducing both emissions and costs for operators. Photo via Getty Images

Houston-based Helix Earth Technologies, Resilitix Intelligence and Fluxworks Inc. each secured $1.2 million in federal funding through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase II grant program this fall.

The three grants from the National Scienve foundation officially rolled out in early September 2025 and are expected to run through August 2027, according to the NSF. The SBIR Phase II grants support in-depth research and development of ideas that showed potential for commercialization after receiving Phase I grants from government agencies.

However, congressional authority for the program, often called "America's seed fund," expired on Sept. 30, 2025, and has stalled since the recent government shutdown. Continue reading.

Solidec Inc. (pre-seed)

7 innovative startups that are leading the energy transition in Houston

Houston-based Solidec was founded around innovations developed by Rice University associate professor Haotian Wang (far left). Photo courtesy Greentown Labs.

Solidec, a Houston startup that specializes in manufacturing “clean” chemicals, raised more than $2 million in pre-seed funding in August.

Houston-based New Climate Ventures led the oversubscribed pre-seed round, with participation from Plug and Play Ventures, Ecosphere Ventures, the Collaborative Fund, Safar Partners, Echo River Capital and Semilla Climate Capital, among other investors. Continue reading.

Molecule

Sameer Soleja is the founder and CEO of Molecule, which just closed its series B round. Photo courtesy of Molecule Software.

Houston-based energy trading risk management (ETRM) software company Molecule completed a successful series B round for an undisclosed amount, according to a July 16 release from the company.

The raise was led by Sundance Growth, a California-based software growth equity firm. Sameer Soleja, founder and CEO of Molecule, said in the release that the funding will allow the company to "double down on product innovation, grow our team, and reach even more markets." Continue reading.

Rarefied Studios, Solidec Inc. and Affekta

Houston startups were named among the nearly 300 recipients that received a portion of $44.85 million from NASA to develop space technology this fall. Photo via NASA/Ben Smegelsky

Houston-based Rarefied Studios, Solidec Inc. and Affekta were granted awards from NASA this summer to develop new technologies for the space agency.

The companies are among nearly 300 recipients that received a total agency investment of $44.85 million through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase I grant programs, according to NASA.

Each selected company received $150,000 and, based on their progress, will be eligible to submit proposals for up to $850,000 in Phase II funding to develop prototypes. The SBIR program lasts for six months and contracts small businesses. Continue reading.

Intuitive Machines 

Intuitive Machines expects to begin manufacturing and flight integration on its orbital transfer vehicle as soon as 2026. Photo courtesy Intuitive Machines.

Houston-based Intuitive Machines secured a $9.8 million Phase II government contract for its orbital transfer vehicle in July.

The contract was expected to push the project through its Critical Design Review phase, which is the final engineering milestone before manufacturing can begin, according to a news release from the company. Intuitive Machines reported that it expected to begin manufacturing and flight integration for its orbital transfer vehicle as soon as this year, once the design review is completed.

The non-NASA contract is for an undisclosed government customer, which Intuitive Machines says reinforces its "strategic move to diversify its customer base and deliver orbital capabilities that span commercial, civil, and national security space operations." Continue reading.

NRG inks new virtual power plant partnership to meet surging energy demands

Powering Up

Houston-based NRG Energy recently announced a new long-term partnership with San Francisco-based Sunrun that aims to meet Texas’ surging energy demands and accelerate the adoption of home battery storage in Texas. The partnership also aligns with NRG’s goal of developing a 1-gigawatt virtual power plant by connecting thousands of decentralized energy sources by 2035.

Through the partnership, the companies will offer Texas residents home energy solutions that pair Sunrun’s solar-plus-storage systems with optimized rate plans and smart battery programming through Reliant, NRG’s retail electricity provider. As new customers enroll, their stored energy can be aggregated and dispatched to the ERCOT grid, according to a news release.

Additionally, Sunrun and NRG will work to create customer plans that aggregate and dispatch distributed power and provide electricity to Texas’ grid during peak periods.

“Texas is growing fast, and our electricity supply must keep pace,” Brad Bentley, executive vice president and president of NRG Consumer, said in the release. “By teaming up with Sunrun, we’re unlocking a new source of dispatchable, flexible energy while giving customers the opportunity to unlock value from their homes and contribute to a more resilient grid

Participating Reliant customers will be paid for sharing their stored solar energy through the partnership. Sunrun will be compensated for aggregating the stored capacity.

“This partnership demonstrates the scale and strength of Sunrun’s storage and solar distributed power plant assets,” Sunrun CEO Mary Powell added in the release. “We are delivering critical energy infrastructure that gives Texas families affordable, resilient power and builds a reliable, flexible power plant for the grid.”

In December, Reliant also teamed up with San Francisco tech company GoodLeap to bolster residential battery participation and accelerate the growth of NRG’s virtual power plant network in Texas.

In 2024, NRG partnered with California-based Renew Home to distribute hundreds of thousands of VPP-enabled smart thermostats by 2035 to help households manage and lower their energy costs. At the time, the company reported that its 1-gigawatt VPP would be able to provide energy to 200,000 homes during peak demand.

---

This article originally appeared on EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

View All Listings