This report is based upon a survey of 2,500 CFA Institute members around the world working as investment analysts and portfolio managers – found strong investor support for retaining mandatory quarterly reporting, as well as significant concerns regarding the implications of reducing reporting frequency.
The report also highlights that the debate regarding quarterly reporting is about disclosures more broadly and the information investors need to allocate capital effectively, as well as the implications of changing disclosure requirements for capital formation and investor protection.
Errata
The 31 July 2026 draft corrects several inconsistencies in the Executive Summary, certain summary pages within Section IV, and Conclusion text that incorrectly referred to or summarized findings in exhibits.
In addition, this draft corrects instances in the text where (1) “investors” (broadly) was imprecisely used to refer to investors that responded to our survey by replacing those instances with “respondents” or similar language; (2) references to survey results differed by 1 percentage point from the figure in the exhibit, as a result of rounding differences in an earlier draft; and (3) readers were referred to the incorrect exhibit.
The exhibits of survey findings were not changed and continue to show the correct figures.
Analysis and insight from CFA Institute Research and Policy Center, delivered to your inbox.
Abstract
Why the Quarterly Reporting Debate Has Returned
The debate regarding quarterly versus semiannual reporting in the United States has once again returned to the policy agenda. Prompted by a 2025 social media post by President Trump, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) is again considering whether public companies should continue to provide quarterly reports or whether reporting frequency should be reduced to semiannual reporting.
At a glance:
- Investors broadly support maintaining mandatory quarterly reporting, viewing it as essential to market transparency, comparability, liquidity, and investor confidence.
- Reducing reporting frequency is seen as a solution in search of a problem, with limited evidence that semiannual reporting would improve capital formation or public market participation.
- Investors expect less useful information under a voluntary quarterly reporting regime, including fewer Form 10-Q filings and less comparable, less structured disclosures.
- Earnings releases are not viewed as substitutes for Form 10-Q filings, because investors value the structure, financial statement detail, auditor involvement, certifications, and legal accountability of quarterly reports.
- Long-termism is viewed as driven more by management incentives than reporting frequency, with investors expressing concern that semiannual reporting could increase information asymmetry, volatility, and cost of capital.