MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127517523 · doi:10.5430/rwe.v12n1p340

Firm Size and Financial Performance Among Listed Banks of Emerging Economies in Africa

2021· article· en· W3127517523 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olaoluwa Umukoro, Imoleayo F Obigbemi, Balogun Sheriff Babajide, Damilola Felix Eluyela, Inua Ofe

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in World Economy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCash flowOperating cash flowBusinessFinanceEmerging marketsCashCash flow forecastingValue (mathematics)Regression analysisVariablesMonetary economicsFinancial systemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continuous increase in the size of various firms and listed banks, has necessitated the need to empirically examine the effect firm size has on the financial performance of listed banks in Africa. This is because some organisations and institutions have in time past failed to fulfill their going concern objective despite their large firm size balance. This study examined the effect firm size has on the three levels of cash flow of emerging economies in listed banks in Africa. The study employed the use of multiple regression analysis with the aid of the STATA statistical software tool. The result obtained revealed that for the operating level of cash flow, all countries used in this paper, with the exception of Kenya should continue to employ the independent variable as a corporate strategy method as it increases operating cash inflow. The financing level of cash flow results recommended that all countries except Nigeria should continue to utilize firm size as a significant value was obtained from the regression. The investing level of cash flow results produced a significant P-value for all countries with the exception of Botswana. The study, therefore, recommended that listed banks in Kenya, Nigeria and Botswana should apply caution in employing the firm-size corporate strategy method. This is because it doesn’t guarantee cash inflow in all three levels of cash flows.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in World EconomySame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207