A survey conducted by PondelWilkinson, an investor relations and strategic public relations consultancy, found that 77% of investors believe public companies should continue reporting quarterly results. Only 18% of investors support semi-annual reporting, and 5% favor semi-annual reporting supplemented by select key metrics in non-reporting quarters. The findings come as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeks public comment by July 6, 2026, on its proposed rule that would allow public companies to report results twice a year instead of four times.
The online survey, conducted from May to June 2026, included institutional investors, buy-side analysts, sell-side analysts, wealth managers, family office investors, individual investors, and investment bankers. Institutional investors made up the largest share of respondents. A smaller group of public company management respondents was more divided, with a slight majority expressing support for either less frequent reporting or reporting only key metrics in alternating quarters.
“Our survey results highlight investors’ strong demand for timely, transparent information,” said Roger Pondel, CEO at PondelWilkinson. “At the same time, issuers pointed to reduced regulatory burdens and lower compliance costs as key reasons why shifting to semi-annual reporting could be beneficial.” A video commentary by Roger Pondel on the survey findings is available at https://youtu.be/NRuRilrigEo.
Participants provided commentary on the potential benefits, drawbacks, and alternative reporting frameworks. Feedback centered around three core themes: investors strongly favor transparency and frequent disclosure; issuers seek relief from reporting burdens; and there is support for a hybrid or compromise approach.
Investors emphasized the importance of timely financial information for valuation and market efficiency, expressing concern that reduced reporting frequency could increase uncertainty, risk, and volatility. One investor stated, “Efficient markets require more information, not less.” Another noted, “Six months is an eternity in business these days and is too long to be dealing with stale financials.” A third commented, “Less information ⇒ more risk. More risk ⇒ lower valuation.”
Company executives, particularly at smaller issuers, highlighted the operational and cost burden of quarterly reporting. One executive said, “Quarterly encourages short-sighted decisions to ensure quarters look good.” Another added, “As long as corporations have to report quarterly, they will want to show profit each quarter, which will reduce incentive to invest in R&D.” Some issuers proposed a middle ground: “Earnings releases should be quarterly, but full 10-Q's and disclosures should be semiannually.”
Some investor respondents supported middle-ground solutions. One suggested, “If it were semi-annual, I think at least revenue should be reported quarterly.” Another proposed, “Why twice or quarterly? Three times a year is a good compromise.” A third noted, “For some industries, semi-annual reporting would be adequate; industries containing more volatile metrics should report quarterly.”
The SEC officially proposed the amendment on May 5, 2026, marking the first time in 55 years that firms may have the flexibility to switch from Form 10-Q reporting. Under the proposed framework, public companies that want to report on a half-year cadence would file their results on a new Form 10-S, while annual filings on Form 10-K would remain unchanged. The survey results underscore the divide between investor demand for transparency and issuer desire for reduced reporting burdens, a tension the SEC must weigh as it considers the rule change.
More information on PondelWilkinson can be found at https://www.pondel.com/.
