MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946785324 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v10n3p63

Financial Distress Prediction Through Cash Flow Ratios Analysis

2019· article· en· W2946785324 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amrizah Kamaluddin, Norhafizah Ishak, Nor Farizal Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial ratioCash flowSolvencyBankruptcyProfitability indexBusinessMarket liquidityOperating cash flowSolvency ratioFinancial analysisFinanceActuarial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study to examine the relationship of cash flow ratios in predicting financial distress companies, with industrial and consumer product companies in Bursa Malaysia as the sample. The study on financial distress is critical as it can lead to bankruptcy, which may adversely affect the economy of the country. Therefore it is worth exploring any indicators that can identify the possibility of financial distress in the company. The tools enable to address the potential problems that can mitigate from distressed financial position. Most prior studies in Malaysia focus on traditional financial ratios, while this study exploits the strength of cash flow ratios. The liquidity ratio, solvency ratio, efficiency ratio and profitability ratio utilized in this study are derived from the statement of cash flows. The Altman Z-score is used to measure the level of the financial distress. The findings show mixed relationships between solvency ratio and financial distress and a negative significant relationship between profitability ratio and financial distress, whilst efficiency ratio has no relationship with the financial distress. These results suggest that cash flow ratios are reliable tools to predict financial distress for Malaysian context. The study is useful in giving insights to the stakeholders in their decision making.

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)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations69
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207