Estimated reading time: 4 minutes
The SEC is reportedly preparing a proposal that would make quarterly earnings reports optional – allowing US public companies to disclose results twice a year rather than four times. The rationale is familiar: reduce compliance costs, encourage longer-term thinking, ease the burden on management teams. A public comment period is expected as soon as April.
The proposal will generate debate. Investors want transparency; companies want breathing room. But the argument consuming most of the attention is the wrong one.
Whether companies report four times a year or two, the more pressing question is what they’re doing in between.
For most listed companies, the honest answer is: not enough.
Key takeaways
- Formal disclosure cycles are designed for compliance, not for building investor understanding or trust
- The gap between filings is where investor confidence is won or lost – not in the filings themselves
- Monthly between-cycle communication is emerging as a practical standard, borrowed from the private equity and venture capital world
- Audio is the format best suited to this kind of regular, context-building communication – accessible on the move, and measurable in ways email and PDFs are not
- Selective disclosure risk is manageable – but only if you communicate consistently, not opportunistically
Why the disclosure calendar was never a communications strategy
There is a structural tension at the heart of investor relations that quarterly reporting papers over rather than solves.
Formal filings – 10-Qs, earnings releases, results presentations – are built around compliance. They are dense, legally precise, and deliberately conservative. They tell investors what happened. They are rarely designed to help investors understand why it matters or where the company is heading.
From PDFs to podcasts – why investor communications need a modern makeover – Campfire Academy 1
That gap between disclosure and comprehension is where investor confidence is actually formed. Analysts update their models, portfolio managers reassess their thesis, and retail investors absorb sentiment from whatever context happens to reach them – often third-party commentary, not leadership voice.
Companies that leave that space empty don’t protect themselves. They cede it.
The monthly standard – and where it came from
So how often should companies communicate outside of formal reporting cycles? Andrew Craissati, CEO and Co-founder of Auddy, is direct on the point:
“The most common answer is monthly – and that really has its origins in the world of private companies, particularly those backed by private equity or venture capital investors who are used to the idea of reporting monthly to their major shareholders.”
The logic extends naturally to public markets. Monthly cadence builds the kind of consistency that audiences return to.
As Craissati puts it:
“Knowing that the first Monday of every month is when a public company publishes its latest audio content through Auddy Campfire is an important moment for your audience – so that they can consistently come back and remain loyal to that flow of content.”
That loyalty isn’t incidental. In competitive markets for capital, the companies that investors understand best are the ones they hold longest.
What belongs in between the numbers
Between-cycle communication is not a second earnings call. Craissati is clear that the content serves a different purpose:
“What you talk about in between your formal disclosures is not repetitive of your formal disclosures. It is supplemental – it is building context or colour to what then follows up to four times a year.”
In practice, that means customer stories, product developments, leadership perspective on macro shifts, industry commentary. Content that humanises the strategy and gives investors a richer picture than any PDF can.
As Craissati notes:
“Imagine a world where we could experience an interview with a happy customer, hearing firsthand why they love your product – that is relevant to an investor and will help them think about whether to buy your stock, hold it, or sell it.”
Why investor podcasts are taking off
The format question matters here as much as the frequency question. Earnings webcasts run 60 to 90 minutes and assume a stationary, desk-bound audience. PDFs require focused reading. Neither maps onto how investors actually move through their days.
The FT ran a story about the London Stock Exchange endorsing investor podcasts, partnering with Auddy to provide investor podcasting services to LSE issuers.
Auddy’s Campfire – an end-to-end podcast solution with full-service creative and editorial support built on a proprietary private distribution platform – gives IR teams a way to publish short, chaptered audio briefings that investors can consume between meetings, on a commute, or at the gym.
Crucially, it does so within a secure, access-controlled environment: named-user analytics show who listened and how far they got, SOC 2-grade processes protect sensitive content, and audit trails satisfy compliance requirements without adding workload to already-stretched IR teams.
For teams worried about selective disclosure, the discipline Campfire enforces is also its protection. Craissati’s point is worth taking seriously:
“You have to be consistent in your approach. Selective disclosure is your enemy – you want to be talking about stories throughout the whole year, providing a high-level, objective view that gives full colour to who you are and what your business is.”
In summary
The SEC’s proposal may or may not pass. The public comment period will be contested, and there is no guarantee the rule changes at all. But companies waiting to see how the regulatory landscape settles before rethinking their investor communications are already behind.
The companies building investor confidence are the ones communicating regularly, in formats investors will actually engage with, on a cadence investors come to expect. That discipline doesn’t require regulatory permission – just a decision to treat communication as a strategic function rather than a compliance obligation.
FAQ
Won’t more frequent communication increase selective disclosure risk?
Not if it’s consistent and planned. The risk in selective disclosure comes from sharing material information with a subset of investors. Content focused on context – customer stories, market commentary, product developments – is supplemental by design. The key is treating your calendar as a programme, not a series of one-offs.
How long should between-cycle updates be?
Short. A 10 to 15 minute audio briefing outperforms a 60-minute webcast on completion rates, and it fits the way investors actually consume information on the move. The goal is regular and accessible, not comprehensive.
What if we don’t have enough to say every month?
That’s usually a framing issue rather than a content issue. Most companies have customers, product developments, hiring milestones, market observations, or leadership perspectives worth sharing. The discipline of a monthly cadence surfaces those stories – it doesn’t create demand for content that doesn’t exist.
Is this only relevant for large-cap companies with big IR teams?
No – arguably it matters more for smaller and mid-cap issuers, where analyst coverage is thinner and the company has to work harder to ensure its story reaches investors. Regular communication is one of the few tools available to companies that can’t rely on coverage to carry the narrative.
