MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013456691 · doi:10.5539/jms.v4n1p84

Capital Structure, Turnover, and Stock Return: The Case of the Firms in the Nikkei 225

2014· article· en· W2013456691 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chikashi Tsuji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsPortfolioSharpe ratioStock (firearms)DebtEconomicsTurnoverDebt ratioInventory turnoverMonetary economicsFinancial economicsEconometricsBusinessFinanceStock exchange

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the risk and return relations of the turnover ratio of trading and capital structure based portfolios, which include the Nikkei 225 firms in Japan. The findings derived from our investigations are summarized as follows. First, portfolio risk is statistically significantly reduced in our lowest debt ratio and lowest turnover portfolio; second, portfolio risk statistically significantly increases in our highest debt ratio and highest turnover portfolio. Third, although risks of portfolios change in accordance with the levels of debt ratios and turnover ratios, these risks are not rewarded with higher returns as Sharpe ratios are not statistically different in our different risk portfolios. Finally, from the viewpoint of time-series analysis, time-varying risk of each portfolio is not clearly priced in stock markets, either.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207