MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386457518 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16090395

Managing Financial Performance toward Achievements in Sustainability Prospects: Comparative Analysis of the e-Commerce and Hospitality Industries

2023· article· en· W4386457518 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gabrijela Veličković, Jelena Stanojević, Milan Veselinović

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebtBusinessFinanceWorking capitalAsset (computer security)SustainabilityHospitalityCapital structureFinancial systemTourism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent pandemic has been identified as a driver of one of the most severe socio-economic crises over the last few decades. While some sectors have experienced an expansion, others have struggled with a changed business environment. The aim of this research is to simultaneously examine the financial performance and sustainability of the e-commerce and hospitality industries, applying asset and debt ratio analysis to the top five companies in the world from each sector in the time period from 2017 to 2022. The results indicate that the assessed companies demonstrated the ability to successfully manage some of their assets. The debt ratio analysis implies that the assessed companies in the hotel industry have reshaped their capital structure, increasing their reliance on debt in 2020 and 2021 to finance their assets. On the contrary, the selected e-commerce companies were found on average to rely less on debt to finance assets. In accordance with expectations, the differences across the examined sectors and companies that have been observed are mostly in regard to the lower scale of utilization of fixed assets to generate turnover, and in terms of the increased share of debts used to finance assets in the hotel industry, which was among the first and hardest hit by the pandemic. Consequently, the study allows policy makers to identify distinctive strategies for each area of economic activity.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207