MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042230194 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n4p546

Does Financial Performance Matter? Evidence on the Impact of Liquidity and Firm Size on Stock Return in Indonesia

2020· article· en· W3042230194 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mochammad Chabachib, Ike Setyaningrum, Hersugondo Hersugondo, Intan Shaferi, Imang Dapit Pamungkas

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Analysis and Corporate Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReturn on equityStock exchangeBusinessMonetary economicsDebt-to-equity ratioStock (firearms)Stock marketFinancial systemMarket liquidityFinancial economicsEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the modern era, stock investment can attract domestic investors or foreign investors. The objective is to invest their funds at the capital market that expect higher stock returns. The study aims to analyze factors that can affect stock returns and know the mediating effect of return on equity. The object of this research is the property and real estate sector that is listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange from 2013 to 2018. This research used debt to equity ratio, current ratio, total asset turnover, firm size as independent variables and stock returns as dependent variables. Path analysis is used as reseach method tools with SMART PLS.The result says that debt to equity ratio and return on equity has a positive significant relationship with stock return, meanwhile firm size has a significant negative significant relationship with stock returns. Furthermore, return on equity can mediate the relationship between debt and equity ratios to stock returns.

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)0.006
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicFinancial Analysis and Corporate GovernanceFrench-language works237,207