A Decision Support Model for Financial Performance Evaluation of Listed Companies in The Vietnamese Retailing Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to propose a Comprehensive Decision Support Model to evaluate retail companies' financial performance traded on the Vietnam Stock Exchange Market. The financial performance has been examined in terms of the valuations ratios, profitability ratios, growth rates, liquidity ratios, efficiency ratios, and leverage ratios. The data of twelve companies from the first quarter to the fourth quarter of 2019 and the first quarter of 2020 were employed. The weights of 18 chosen financial ratios are calculated by using the Standard Deviation method (SD). Grey Relational Analysis technique was applied to obtain the final ranking of each company in each quarter. The results showed that leverage ratios have the most significant impact on the retail companies' financial performance and gives some long-term investment recommendations for stakeholders and indicated that the Taseco Air Services Joint Stock Company (AST), Mobile World Investment Corporation (MWG), and Cam Ranh International Airport Services Joint Stock Company (CIA) are three of the top efficient companies. The three of the worst companies are Viglacera Corporation (VGC), Saigon General Service Corporation (SVC), and HocMon Trade Joint Stock Company (HTC). Furthermore, this study suggests that the GRA model could be implemented effectively to ranking companies of other industries in the future research.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".