The Role of Financial Analysis in Assessing the Prices of Shares of Jordanian Industrial Joint Stock Companies Listed on the Amman Stock Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to highlight the role of financial ratios in evaluating the prices of shares of Jordanian industrial joint stock companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange; it also aimed to show which of these ratios has a more influential impact on these prices. The researcher conducted a test study survey to analyze the published data of (73) Jordanian industrial joint stock companies. The study sample (n= 18) formed about (25%) of the total population of the companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange during the period 2010-2017. The researcher used the multiple regression method to identify the correlations between the financial ratios and the market share prices of the Jordanian industrial joint-stock companies. The results of the study showed a statistically significant effect for the Ratio of Circulation (CR), the Quick Ratio (QR), the Profit Per Share (EPS), the Return on Equity (ROE), the Debt Ratio (DR), the Total Assets Turnover (TAT), the Price- to- Earnings Ratio (PER), and the Price- to- Book Value Ratio (PBVR) on the market share price of the Jordanian industrial joint stock companies. However, the study showed no statistically significant effect of the Degree of Financial Leverage (DOL) and the rate of Working Capital Turnover (WCT) on the prices of these companies. In light of the study findings, the researcher recommended that all investors in the Amman Stock Exchange must have the know-how of the financial analysis, and to benefit from the expertise and knowledge of specialists in the financial analysis in order to rationalize their investment decisions and eventually take the best, decisive investment decisions. Companies should also consider the importance of financial leverage ratios and working capital turnover that may be reflected on the value/prices of their shares.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".