Financial Performance and Characteristics: A Comparison of Born Global and Gradual Internationalization Firms in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the financial performance and characteristics of born global firms (BGs) in China. While the literature on BGs is growing, few systematic studies have investigated their financial performance, especially for BGs from developing economies like China. This study compares the financial ratios and rates of BGs with those of gradual internationalization firms (GIs) using analysis of variance and data on 1,069 listed companies in China’s manufacturing industry. The results show that BGs are inferior to GIs in profitability, debt paying ability, growth potential, and asset quality but are similar to GIs in terms of asset management capabilities. Born global firms’ ROA, operating profit margin ratio, gross profit margin ratio, current ratio, quick ratio, P/BV, Tobin’s q, and growth ratios are lower than those of GIs; their debt ratio is higher than that of GIs, but their operating activity ratios are not statistically significantly different. The study also finds that ownership and size differences exert significantly impacts on the financial performance of BGs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".