MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380482046 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.320

Shareholder Value of the Company and Financial Statements: Econometric Estimation of Value Creation Drivers

2022· article· en· W4380482046 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ekaterina Kadochnikova, Diana Shamilevna Usanova, Liliya F. Zulfakarova, Darja Alekseevna Drozdova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsShareholder valueBusinessShareholderLeverage (statistics)FinanceEconomic Value AddedDividendValue (mathematics)Financial ratioReturn on assetsAccountingEconomicsCorporate governanceStock exchange

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work to evaluate the relationship between financial reporting indicators and shareholder value on the example of the Russian companies from seven sectors of the economy linear multiple regression model and classical least squares methods has been used. The results depict that it is expected that financial reporting indicators are one of the dominant determinants of evaluating the effectiveness of financial investment decisions. Also, it is shown that the financial drivers-financial leverage, return on assets, dividend payments, and the EVA driver – invested capital-are positively correlated with the company's shareholder value. The results represent that the size of a company has a positive impact on its shareholder value. It was found that the level of disclosure is negatively correlated with the company's shareholder value. Due to the fact that the article uses data from the financial statements of the 85 Russian companies for 2018 to measure the relationship between three groups of drivers and the company's shareholder value is an innovative work that can be used in scientific and practical activities by owners and investors of companies in order to improve the financial reporting of companies and make investment decisions.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207