Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

This public program was initiated in collaboration with The Conference Board Task Force on Corporate/Investor Engagement and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies. The Forum is providing continuing reports of the issues that concern this program's participants, as summarized  in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference


Related Projects 2012-2019

For graphed analyses of company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

See also analyses of

Shareholder Support Rankings




Forum distribution:

Survey of global investor receptivity to activists


For a summary, free version of the publisher's survey report referenced in the article below, see


Source:  IR Magazine, June 24, 2020 article

Ben Ashwell


Two thirds of investors open to working with activists

JUN 24, 2020

Almost 50 percent of sell-side analysts say activist campaigns influence their buy/sell ratings, study finds

Almost two thirds of investors say they are open to talking to activist investors about a company they have a position in, according to recent research from IR Magazine.

While many companies continue to experience volatile share prices and balance sheet concerns – with a significant increase in the number of companies adopting poison pills this year – investors are more likely to support an activist campaign now than they were three years ago.

This is according to IR Magazine’s Shareholder Activism research report, which was released last month. Almost two fifths (39 percent) of investor respondents say they are more likely to support an activist campaign than they were three years ago, with almost half of European and Asian respondents agreeing with this statement.

But the number of investors siding with activist investors during the last three years is relatively low. Just 22 percent of buy-side respondents have been involved in an activist campaign since 2017, with 5 percent leading the campaign and a further 17 percent supporting or partnering with an activist investor.

Investors in Europe were those most likely to support an activist campaign during the last three years, according to the study, while Asia-based investors were most likely to lead a campaign.

When asked why they’re likely to support an activist campaign, buy-side respondents firmly identify the investment thesis as the first pick. But investors are also interested in the activist investors’ track record: activists’ conduct during prior campaigns and the quality of board director nominees during prior campaigns are both deemed to be important by a significant number of respondents.

Many buy-siders agree that open communication is crucial for companies’ responses to an activist campaign. ‘[The] company’s response determines only whether we are going to war with it or working together,’ one buy-sider says.

‘If a company is responding and taking appropriate action, there’s no need for the cost of an activist campaign/proxy battle,’ says another respondent.

Activist campaigns can affect sell-side ratings

The study also surveyed sell-side respondents about whether activist campaigns change their perspective on the companies they cover.

Almost half (44 percent) of sell-side analysts say a shareholder activist campaign would affect their buy or sell rating of a company. In Asia, three quarters of respondents say an activist campaign would affect their rating, while in North America almost two thirds say a campaign has no effect on their rating of a company.

‘If we assess that the [campaign] has the potential to be brand-destroying, we take notice,’ one sell-side respondent says. On the other hand, another respondent notes: ‘Once an activist campaign starts, a stock generally has a one-time move, and then not much else happens until the campaign is over. So it’s a fait accompli, and I don’t usually change my rating.’

Sell-siders expect companies to be proactive in their defense against an activist campaign, the study reveals. More than seven in 10 sell-side analysts expect companies to schedule meetings with their investor, while around half expect companies to update their investor-facing materials and brief against the activist campaign.

Analysts in Asia are much more likely to expect a company to host a conference call than their counterparts in North America and Europe.

Sell-side respondents acknowledge that activist investors are more effective than IR teams at building a social media campaign around their thesis. But these respondents also firmly state that activist investors have well-established track records and it’s important to research the firm thoroughly when considering their campaign.

The IR Magazine Shareholder Activism report is based on survey work conducted in Q4 2019. The results are based on responses from 384 IROs and 218 investment community respondents. The report also covers how many companies have been targeted by activist campaigns during the last three years as well as companies’ activism preparedness.

Click here to read the full report.


Copyright IR Media Group Ltd. 1995 - 2020 All rights reserved.



This Forum program was open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the purpose of this public Forum's program was to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant was expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated in 2012 in collaboration with The Conference Board and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices. The website is being maintained to provide continuing reports of the issues addressed in the program, as summarized in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.