What Is Accounting Theory?

Accounting theory is a set of assumptions, frameworks, and methodologies used in the study and application of financial reporting principles. The study of accounting theory involves a review of both the historical foundations of accounting practices, as well as the way in which accounting practices are changed and added to the regulatory framework that governs financial statements and financial reporting.

Understanding Accounting Theory

All theories of accounting are bound by the conceptual framework of accounting. This framework is provided by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), an independent entity that works to outline and establish the key objectives of financial reporting by businesses, both public and private. Further, accounting theory can be thought of as the logical reasoning that helps evaluate and guide accounting practices. Accounting theory, as regulatory standards evolve, also helps develop new accounting practices and procedures.

The most important aspect of accounting theory is usefulness. In the corporate finance world, this means that all financial statements should provide important information that can be used by financial statement readers to make informed business decisions. This also means that accounting theory is intentionally flexible so that it can produce effective financial information, even when the legal environment changes.

In addition to usefulness, accounting theory states that all accounting information should be relevant, reliable, comparable, and consistent. What this essentially means is that all financial statements need to be accurate and adhere to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Adherence to GAAP allows the preparation of financial statements to be both consistent to a company’s past financials and comparable to the financials of other companies.

Finally, accounting theory requires that all accounting and financial professionals operate under four assumptions. The first assumption states that a business is a separate entity from its owners or creditors. The second affirms the belief that a company will continue to exist and not go bankrupt. The third assumes that all financial statements are prepared with dollar amounts and not with other numbers like units of production. Finally, all financial statements must be prepared on a monthly or annual basis.

Special Considerations

Accounting as a discipline has existed since the 15th century. Since then, both businesses and economies have greatly evolved. Accounting theory is a continuously evolving subject, and it must adapt to new ways of doing business, new technological standards, and gaps that are discovered in reporting mechanisms.

For example, organizations such as the International Accounting Standards Board help create and revise practical applications of accounting theory through modifications to their International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Professionals such as Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) help companies navigate new and established accounting standards.

What Are Animal Spirits?

“Animal spirits” is a term coined by the famous British economist, John Maynard Keynes, to describe how people arrive at financial decisions, including buying and selling securities, in times of economic stress or uncertainty. In Keynes’s 1936 publication, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, he speaks of animal spirits as the human emotions that affect consumer confidence.

Today, animal spirits describe the psychological and emotional factors that drive investors to take action when faced with high levels of volatility in the capital markets. The term comes from the Latin spiritus animalis, which means “the breath that awakens the human mind.” In some ways, Keynes’ insights into human behavior predicted the rise of behavioral economics.

Understanding Animal Spirits

The technical concept of spiritus animalis can be traced as far back as 300 B.C., in the fields of human anatomy and medical physiology. There, animal spirits applied to the fluid or spirit present in sensory activities and nerve endings in the brain that resulting in mass psychological phenomena like manias or hysterias.

Animal spirits also appeared in literary culture, where they referred to states of physical courage, gaiety, and exuberance. The literary meaning implies that animal spirits can be high or low depending on an individual’s degree of health and energy.

Animal Spirits in Finance and Economics

Today in finance, the term animal spirits arise in market psychology and behavioral economics. Animal spirits represent the emotions of confidence, hope, fear, and pessimism that can affect financial decision-making, which in turn can fuel or hamper economic growth. If spirits are low, then confidence levels will be low, which will drive down a promising market—even if the market or economy fundamentals are strong. Likewise, if spirits are high, confidence among participants in the economy will be high, and market prices will soar.

The Role of Emotion in Business Decisions

According to the theory behind animal spirits, the decisions of business leaders are based on intuition and the behavior of their competitors rather than on solid analysis. Keynes understood that in times of economic upheaval, irrational thoughts might influence people as they pursue their financial self-interests.

Keynes further posited in The General Theory that trying to estimate the future yield of various industries, companies, or activities using general knowledge and available insight “amounts to little and sometimes to nothing.” He proposed that the only way people can make decisions in an uncertain environment is if animal spirits guide them.

Animal Spirits Enter the 21st Century

In 2009, the term animal spirits returned to popularity when two economists—George A. Akerlof (Nobel laureate and professor of economics at University of California) and Robert J. Shiller (professor of economics at Yale University)—published their book, Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why it Matters for Global Capitalism.

Here, the authors argue that although animal spirits are important, it is equally important that the government actively intervene to control them—via economic policymaking—when necessary. Otherwise, the authors postulate, the spirits might follow their own devices—that is, capitalism could get out of hand, and result in the kind of overindulgence that we saw in the 2008 financial crisis.

Examples of Animal Spirits

The Dotcom Bubble

Animal spirits often manifest as market psychology defined by either fear or greed. For the latter, the term “irrational exuberance” has been used to describe investor enthusiasm that drives asset prices far higher than those assets’ fundamentals justify. Simply tacking on “dotcom” to the name of a company increased its market value to extraordinary levels, with startups showing zero earnings commanding ever-higher share prices.

The crash that followed saw the Nasdaq index, which had risen five-fold between 1995 and 2000, tumble from a peak of 5,048.62 on March 10, 2000, to 1,139.90 on Oct 4, 2002, a 76.81% fall. By the end of 2001, most dot-com stocks had gone bust.

The Great Recession

Another example was the lead-up to the 2008-09 financial crisis and the Great Recession, when the markets were rife with financial innovations. Creative use of both new and existing financial products—like collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)—abounded, particularly in the housing market. Initially, this trend was thought to be positive, that is until the new financial instruments were found to be deceptive and fraudulent. At this point, investor confidence plummeted, a sell-off ensued, and the markets plunged. A clear case of animal spirits run amok.

Critiques of Animal Spirits

“Animal spirits” refers to the tendency for investment prices to rise and fall based on human emotion rather than intrinsic value. This theory, however, has been critiqued by some economists who argue that markets are nonetheless efficient and that individual irrationality washes out in the aggregate. The animal spirits thesis, like behavioral economics, essentially throws a monkey wrench into the assumptions of efficiency and rationality.

Other critics argue that bubbles are not the result of mass psychology, but are due to the over-involvement of central banks and too much regulation, which stymie economic growth and throw markets out of equilibrium. These arguments often stem from Austrian economic theory or libertarianism that asserts that large increases in the money supply (“printed” by governments) are the cause of bubbles and their ultimate demise by encouraging malinvestment.

What Is the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT)?

Arbitrage pricing theory (APT) is a multi-factor asset pricing model based on the idea that an asset’s returns can be predicted using the linear relationship between the asset’s expected return and a number of macroeconomic variables that capture systematic risk. It is a useful tool for analyzing portfolios from a value investing perspective, in order to identify securities that may be temporarily mispriced.

The Formula for the Arbitrage Pricing Theory Model Is


$\begin{aligned} &\text{E(R)}_\text{i} = E(R)_z + (E(I) – E(R)_z) \times \beta_n\\ &\textbf{where:}\\ &\text{E(R)}_\text{i} = \text{Expected return on the asset}\\ &R_z = \text{Risk-free rate of return}\\ &\beta_n = \text{Sensitivity of the asset price to macroeconomic} \\ &\text{factor}\textit{ n}\\ &Ei = \text{Risk premium associated with factor}\textit{ i}\\ \end{aligned}$​E(R)i​=E(R)z​+(E(I)−E(R)z​)×βn​where:E(R)i​=Expected return on the assetRz​=Risk-free rate of returnβn​=Sensitivity of the asset price to macroeconomicfactor nEi=Risk premium associated with factor i​

The beta coefficients in the APT model are estimated by using linear regression. In general, historical securities returns are regressed on the factor to estimate its beta.

How the Arbitrage Pricing Theory Works

The arbitrage pricing theory was developed by the economist Stephen Ross in 1976, as an alternative to the capital asset pricing model (CAPM). Unlike the CAPM, which assume markets are perfectly efficient, APT assumes markets sometimes misprice securities, before the market eventually corrects and securities move back to fair value. Using APT, arbitrageurs hope to take advantage of any deviations from fair market value.

However, this is not a risk-free operation in the classic sense of arbitrage, because investors are assuming that the model is correct and making directional trades—rather than locking in risk-free profits.

Mathematical Model for the APT

While APT is more flexible than the CAPM, it is more complex. The CAPM only takes into account one factor—market risk—while the APT formula has multiple factors. And it takes a considerable amount of research to determine how sensitive a security is to various macroeconomic risks.

The factors as well as how many of them are used are subjective choices, which means investors will have varying results depending on their choice. However, four or five factors will usually explain most of a security’s return. (For more on the differences between the CAPM and APT, read more about how CAPM and arbitrage pricing theory differ.)

APT factors are the systematic risk that cannot be reduced by the diversification of an investment portfolio. The macroeconomic factors that have proven most reliable as price predictors include unexpected changes in inflation, gross national product (GNP), corporate bond spreads and shifts in the yield curve. Other commonly used factors are gross domestic product (GDP), commodities prices, market indices, and exchange rates.

Example of How Arbitrage Pricing Theory Is Used

For example, the following four factors have been identified as explaining a stock’s return and its sensitivity to each factor and the risk premium associated with each factor have been calculated:

• Gross domestic product (GDP) growth: ß = 0.6, RP = 4%
• Inflation rate: ß = 0.8, RP = 2%
• Gold prices: ß = -0.7, RP = 5%
• Standard and Poor’s 500 index return: ß = 1.3, RP = 9%
• The risk-free rate is 3%

Using the APT formula, the expected return is calculated as:

• Expected return = 3% + (0.6 x 4%) + (0.8 x 2%) + (-0.7 x 5%) + (1.3 x 9%) = 15.2%

What Is Agency Theory?

Agency theory is a principle that is used to explain and resolve issues in the relationship between business principals and their agents. Most commonly, that relationship is the one between shareholders, as principals, and company executives, as agents.

Understanding Agency Theory

An agency, in broad terms, is any relationship between two parties in which one, the agent, represents the other, the principal, in day-to-day transactions. The principal or principals have hired the agent to perform a service on their behalf.

Principals delegate decision-making authority to agents. Because many decisions that affect the principal financially are made by the agent, differences of opinion, and even differences in priorities and interests, can arise. Agency theory assumes that the interests of a principal and an agent are not always in alignment. This is sometimes referred to as the principal-agent problem.

By definition, an agent is using the resources of a principal. The principal has entrusted money but has little or no day-to-day input. The agent is the decision-maker but is incurring little or no risk because any losses will be borne by the principal.

Financial planners and portfolio managers are agents on behalf of their principals and are given responsibility for the principals’ assets. A lessee may be in charge of protecting and safeguarding assets that do not belong to them. Even though the lessee is tasked with the job of taking care of the assets, the lessee has less interest in protecting the goods than the actual owners.

Areas of Dispute in Agency Theory

Agency theory addresses disputes that arise primarily in two key areas: A difference in goals or a difference in risk aversion.

For example, company executives, with an eye toward short-term profitability and elevated compensation, may desire to expand a business into new, high-risk markets. However, this could pose an unjustified risk to shareholders, who are most concerned with the long-term growth of earnings and share price appreciation.

Another central issue often addressed by agency theory involves incompatible levels of risk tolerance between a principal and an agent. For example, shareholders in a bank may object that management has set the bar too low on loan approvals, thus taking on too great a risk of defaults.

Reducing Agency Loss

Various proponents of agency theory have proposed ways to resolve disputes between agents and principals. This is termed “reducing agency loss.” Agency loss is the amount that the principal contends was lost due to the agent acting contrary to the principal’s interests.

Chief among these strategies is the offering of incentives to corporate managers to maximize the profits of their principals. The stock options awarded to company executives have their origin in agency theory. These incentives seek a way to optimize the relationship between principals and agents. Other practices include tying executive compensation in part to shareholder returns. These are examples of how agency theory is used in corporate governance.

These practices have led to concerns that management will endanger long-term company growth in order to boost short-term profits and their own pay. This can often be seen in budget planning, where management reduces estimates in annual budgets so that they are guaranteed to meet performance goals. These concerns have led to yet another compensation scheme in which executive pay is partially deferred and to be determined according to long-term goals.

These solutions have their parallels in other agency relationships. Performance-based compensation is one example. Another is requiring that a bond is posted to guarantee delivery of the desired result. And then there is the last resort, which is simply firing the agent.