Search results

I seek to identify whether cash flow management can affect the performance and risk of the Greek listed companies.

This study examines the relationship of cash flow management with performance and risk, using a sample of 80 non-financial companies listed in the Athens Exchange. The study covers the period 2018–2022, and panel data analysis is applied. Both financial performance and stock return are taken into consideration, while risk concerns the volatility of the companies’ share prices. The various explanatory variables used include the net cash flow, free cash flow, cash conversion cycle days, cash flow from operating activities, cash flow from investing activities, cash flow from financing activities, inventory days, customer days and supplier days.

The empirical results provide evidence of a positive relationship between financial performance and net cash flow and free cash flow. In addition, operating cash flow is positively related to financial performance. The opposite is the case for investing and financing cash flow. Finally, some evidence of a negative relationship between financial performance and inventory and customer days is provided too. On the other hand, stock return and risk are not related to the cash flow management variables at all.

To the best of my knowledge, this is one of the few studies to examine the relationship of cash flow management with performance and risk, using data from the Greek stock market. The results can form an effective selection tool for investors seeking Greek companies with the highest financial performance potential, which may reward them with higher dividends.

We investigate the impact of the creation of a new incentive structure for CEOs resulting from firms introducing equity-based compensation (EBC) as a means of paying top executives on policy decisions. Contrasting a firm’s stock and operating performance in the period the CEO is compensated with EBC (EBC period) and the period when EBC is not a component of the same executive’s pay (No EBC period) leads us to conclude that awarding stock options and restricted shares to executives is not associated with improved firm performance. However, firms initiate EBC after superior performance suggesting that CEOs are awarded compensation in this form as a reward for past performance. Firms have higher unsystematic and total risk levels in the EBC period suggesting EBC influences CEOs’ risk-taking behavior and reduces agency costs arising from managerial risk aversion. While there is no change in R&D expenses and cash ratios there is a decrease in capital expenditures in the EBC period, which is consistent with reduced overinvestment agency costs. Finally, leverage and payout ratios are similar in both periods implying that firms’ financing policy is not influenced by changes in CEOs’ compensation structure.

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of firm environmental, social and governance (ESG) rating scores on market perception and stock behavior from 2017 to 2021 while controlling for COVID-19 severity score.

The authors used panel regression models with robust standard errors based on cross-country and cross-industry sample of 1,324 ESG firms from 25 emerging countries across four regions. Four separate regression analyses are used. Hausman test is used to determine whether fixed-effect (FE) or random-effect approaches should be used in regression models. Lagrange multiplier test is used to test for time FEs, and F-test for individual effects to choose between pooled ordinary least squares model and FE. Two-unit root tests are conducted to check stationarity. Heteroskedasticity and serial correlation were controlled through a robust covariance matrix estimation.

The authors provide evidence that the stakeholder theory persists in emerging countries. Overall, the results suggest that firms’ stock behavior is positively associated with the level of environmental and social performance in the region. However, the results do not provide empirical evidence to support the link between ESG performance and stock market perception proxied by the price-to-sales ratio. The results suggest that Refinitiv and Bloomberg ESG rating scores have a positive impact on stock performance in emerging markets, albeit the Bloomberg rating score is insignificant.

Favorable impact of environmental and social performance on stock performance suggests that policymakers should take initiatives to raise awareness toward investments in ESG projects. Evidence shows that ESG stock performance in emerging markets does not insulate firms from the COVID-19 severity. Furthermore, this study highlights the inconsistency in calculating the ESG ratings, therefore, a more standardized approach is recommended to support investors seeking sustainable investments.

The findings have social implications for investors with proenvironmental preferences and nonpecuniary motives for ethical investments. Asset fund managers should develop ESG investment strategies to promote investor preferences that are linked to the proenvironmental and prosocial attitudes by increasing their investments in stocks of firms that behave ethically and support the environment. Furthermore, the findings show that investors pay a price for ethical and socially responsible investments as they are evaluating the environmental and social activities, hence, the firm ESG profile influences equity valuation and risk assessment.

The study extends the literature and provides evidence from the unique setting of emerging markets by analyzing the relationship between ESG rating scores and the COVID-19 severity scores on one hand, and stock behavior and market perception on the other.

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the economic determinants of the compensation for chief executive officers (CEOs) between the pre- and post-financial crisis periods. To conduct the comparative analysis, the authors consider five years before and five years after the financial crisis of 2008. The authors use the data from the US financial service institutions and run separate regressions for the pre- and post-crisis periods to check if there is any significant difference in the economic determinants of executive compensation before and after the financial crisis. The authors find that total compensation and its incentive components decreased significantly in the post-crisis period. In the pre-crisis period, total compensation was determined by stock performance, accounting profit, growth, and leverage, whereas in the post-crisis period stock returns and leverage are the major factors influencing total compensation. The authors also find that firms’ leverage negatively influences the sensitivity of the pay for performance, but the influence of leverage on pay for performance is weaker in the post-crisis period. Our research is significant in the context of the US economy, the regulatory reforms of financial institutions, and the perspectives of the executive compensations. This is the first study that compares the relationship between compensation and firm performance over the pre- and post-crisis periods. It is an explicit attempt to develop a theoretical understanding of the compensation/performance relationship for the financial industry, which is blamed for the financial crisis and is affected by the Dodd–Frank regulation after the crisis.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of brand equity (BE) on stock performance (i.e. stock return, volatility and beta), and compare the performance of a high brand equity stocks (HBES) portfolio with that of the overall market during market downturn, market upturn and total disturbance periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Stock performance data and brand valuation estimates are obtained from various sources to assemble a portfolio of HBES and conduct the analyses. Econometric models are estimated to examine the impact of BE on stock performance and compare the HBES portfolio performance versus the overall market.

BE was positively associated with stock return and negatively associated with both types of risk (volatility and beta) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, during the market downturn period, BE was positively related to stock return and negatively related to stock volatility; during the market upturn period, BE was negatively associated with both types of risk; and during the total disturbance period, BE was positively associated with stock return and negatively associated with both types of risk. Finally, the HBES portfolio outperformed the market (S&P 500 index).

The findings advance the extant research by providing evidence pertaining to brands' role in mitigating the impact of unpredictable market shocks and crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, on stock performance. While brands are mostly viewed as drivers of sustained competitive advantage and profitability, their protective role in crisis times is noteworthy.

The research findings potentially help marketing and brand managers to justify marketing spending and craft their strategies to enhance firm performance during crises similar to COVID-19.

The marketing–finance interface can benefit from insights offered by the COVID-19 pandemic, as such crises are becoming prevalent and are capable of damaging various stakeholders' outcomes (firms, investors and customers). The empirical examination is separately conducted on the market downturn, market upturn and total disturbance period attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the determinants of bank performance in China. In particular, the paper examines the effects of stock market volatility, competition and ownership on bank performance in China.

The sample comprises a total of 11 banks (four state‐owned and seven joint‐stock commercial banks) listed in the Chinese Stock Exchanges. The period under consideration extends from 2003‐2009. The generalized methods of moments (GMM) difference and system estimators are applied.

Empirical results show that high level of stock market volatility can translate into higher return on equity (ROE) and excess return on equity (EROE). Rather than leading to improved profitability, the labour productivity has a negative impact on economic value added (EVA). Ownership does not have any effect on the profitability of Chinese banking industry. The bank profitability in terms of ROE and EROE is lower in the banking industry with higher competition. When using the GMM with ROE‐COC and ROE, the paper finds that high taxation has a negative impact on both state‐owned and joint‐stock banks, while the capital level is negatively related to joint‐stock commercial banks. With regards to the other two performance indicators (EVA and NIM), the result suggests that higher cost efficiency and labour productivity improve the performance of both state‐owned and joint‐stock commercial banks. Large volume of non‐traditional activity is the explanation of poor performance of state‐owned commercial banks, while higher credit risk, lower taxation and the mature banking industry are helpful in improving the performance of joint‐stock commercial banks.

Further research should examine other methods (e.g. the Rosse‐Panzar H statistic) to calculate the bank competition in China, and other determinants of bank performance in Asian countries and compare them with these results.

The current study has relevant policy implications. First, in order to increase the profit earned from the traditional loan‐deposit services, the Chinese banks should make loans to the high risk projects or companies, and control the expenses including both the operating and personnel expenses. Furthermore, the government and bank regulatory authority should make policy such as inject capital to SOCBs and write‐off NPLs for them to reduce the degree of competition in order to make banks have better performance.

Particular emphasis is given on the investigation into the effects of stock market volatility, competition and ownership on bank performance in China while controlling for the most comprehensive bank‐specific, industry specific and macroeconomic variables.

The purpose of this study is to determine and compare the performance of small and medium enterprises (SME) and manufacturing company stock portfolios in the Indonesian, Chinese and Indian capital markets by the Sharpe Index and the significance of differences in average performance in the capital market.

This is comparative research that compared the performances of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesian, Chinese and Indian capital markets. The hypothesis examination of comparative test used one-way ANOVA technique on the performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesian, Chinese and Indian capital markets. One-way ANOVA test was used in the analysis to test the average difference of performance indices of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios is in Indonesian, Chinese and Indian capital markets.

The performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesian capital market was not better than the performances of IHSG and LQ45 Index, the performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Chinese capital market (SZSE) was better than the performance of Shenzhen Composite Index and the performance of Shenzhen A-Share Stock Price Index. The comparison of the performances of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesian, Chinese and Indian capital markets showed that the performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Chinese capital market was the best and the performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesian capital market was the lowest.

The implication of this study was that SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios had relatively better performances in China and India, so investors should consider investing in SME and manufacturing company stocks. The performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolios in Indonesia was not able to exceed market and LQ45 portfolios, so the authority in Indonesia financial market should consider developing a special market for SME and manufacturing company to support the development of SME and manufacturing company in Indonesia and solve the problem of lack of funding source for SME and manufacturing company.

The originality of the present study is in the measurement of the performance of SME and manufacturing company stock portfolio by risk-adjusted return which returns per risk unit measured by Sharpe Index as a more beneficial measurement in measuring stock portfolio performance than average return. Comparative study of the stock portfolio performances of small medium enterprises and manufacturing company In Indonesian, Chinese and Indian stock markets, and object studies conducted in Indonesia, China and India.

This paper aims to examine the influence of good governance on corporate value, in which the stock returns and financial performance act as the mediator of the relationship among them.

This research was conducted on companies go public listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange and was included in 2011 to 2017 LQ45 index list, with samples taking a purposive sampling approach through four criteria. Data analysis using WarpPLS with indicator approaches are formative (mutually exclusive between indicators).

The findings are as follows: good corporate governance has a significant influence on stock returns in a negative direction; good corporate governance has no significant influence on financial performance; good corporate governance has no significant influence on company value; stock returns have a significant influence on financial performance in a positive direction; financial performance has a significant influence on stock returns with a positive direction; stock returns significantly influence the value of the company in a positive direction; financial performance has a significant influence on the company value in a positive direction.

The novelty in this study is that the relationship between stock returns and financial performance is reciprocal, which is the relationship among variables that affect each other (back and forth causality), in which in the previous study, the relationship between variables is only one direction; besides, the previous study conducted an analysis to find out the influence of good corporate on stock returns, company value and financial performance separately, with mixed results.

The aim of this paper is to study whether adoption of sustainability policies by firms makes their stock market performance resilient to the downside risk during the crisis period.

The paper empirically examines the relationship between environmental, social and governance (ESG) and stock market performance for Indian companies that have consistently been a part of Refinitiv Eikon ESG database. Further, the study examines whether there exist significant differences in stock market performance of high ESG and low ESG-compliant firms during crisis period. The sample was made up of 70 Indian firms studied over the period 2016–2019 defined as “normal period” as well as for the declared COVID-19 crisis period, i.e. January–March 2020, and full year 2020. The authors used multivariate panel data regression, robust least square multivariate regression, pooled OLS model and two-stage least square regression method.

The study extends the existing literature by investigating the impact of ESG performance on market value of firms during the crisis period. Based on the stakeholder and “flight to safety” theory, the authors hypothesized that ESG would have significant positive effect on the stock market performance during crisis period; however, the results provide robust evidence that in a well-specified model capturing the effect of accounting-based measures of performance, Size, Growth, Risk and Dividend yield, ESG had no explanatory power over the stock market performance of ESG-compliant firms during crisis period. Furthermore, no significant difference in stock market performance indicators between high and low ESG-compliant firms was observed during the crisis period of 1Q2020 as well as for full year 2020. On contrary, the study finds dividend yield to be statistically significant in determining stock market performance of Indian firms during crisis period. The study extends the existing literature by coining the term, “ESG irrelevance” during crisis period.

The main limitation of this study is its limited sample size because there are very few Indian firms that have secured consistent ESG rating. The study focuses on consistently rated firms to avoid the impact of “greenwashing”. Further, the study is focused on India, which limits the generalizability of our findings to other emerging countries.

To the best of our knowledge, this is among the first few studies that examines sustainability and stock market performance of Indian firms during COVID-19-led crisis period. Our findings highlight no significant difference between stock market performance of high ESG firms and low ESG firms indicating that investors who wish to create wealth by investing in ESG-compliant stocks in India can do so without worrying about the companies’ ESG rating scores.

Motivated by the findings of Bhabra and Hossain (2017) that highlight an improvement in US market performance in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) period, this paper aims to investigate how this change varies with the methods of payment used for the deals.

Deductive in nature and using an event study approach, this paper uses a sample of 675 deals between 1999 and 2006 to test three research hypotheses in a pre-post setting.

Results show that at the aggregate level, there is a significant improvement in the market performance of US acquirers around the announcement day in the aftermath of the passage of SOX 2002. Considered separately, both US stock acquirers and cash acquirers did not experience any significant improvement in market performance in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley period. These results are robust to controlling for governance, firm and deal variables, as well as industry and year fixed effects.

Exploratory in nature, the results are to be interpreted in light of the sample size and the period under investigation.

The results provide evidence for regulators and legislators on the contribution of SOX 2002 to curbing managerial misconduct. Significant improvement in the market performance also signals more confidence in managerial decisions and a reduction in agency problems. The insignificant change in stock acquirers’ market performance can be an indication that policymakers should exert more efforts to improve shareholders' confidence in the quality of disclosure.

This investigation provides unique insights on whether SOX has been effective in mitigating mispricing concerns associated with stock-financed acquisitions and whether it was effective in moderating the governance mechanism associated with cash-financed acquisitions.