Do Analysts’ Earnings and Cash Flow Forecasts Enhance the Accuracy of Auditors’ Going-Concern Opinions?

SUMMARY This study examines whether analysts’ earnings and cash flow forecasts improve the accuracy of auditors’ going-concern opinions (GCOs). Using a propensity score matched sample, we compare GCO accuracy for financially distressed firms with earnings forecasts only, those with both earnings and cash flow forecasts, and a control group without forecasts. We find that earnings forecasts significantly reduce Type I errors, whereas cash flow forecasts provide additional accuracy gains. For Type II errors, the results are mixed and vary with model specifications. Accuracy improvements are stronger when forecasts are more frequent or exhibit greater dispersion, highlighting their informativeness. Auditors are also more likely to issue GCOs when analysts predict negative or declining earnings and cash flows for the following year, consistent with analysts’ role in evaluating future financial viability. These findings demonstrate that analysts’ forward-looking forecasts complement firm-specific information, enhancing auditors’ assessment of financial viability and improving the precision of GCOs. Data Availability: Data are available from the sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: G10; G30; M41; M42.