MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409436350 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18040210

Green Bond Yield Determinants in Indonesia: The Moderating Role of Bond Ratings

2025· article· en· W4409436350 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mutia Wahyuningsih, Wiwik Utami, Augustina Kurniasih, Endri Endri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSustainable Finance and Green Bonds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBondYield (engineering)Bond credit ratingPsychologyEconomicsBusinessActuarial scienceMaterials scienceCredit riskFinanceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the relationship between bond-specific factors, macroeconomic variables, and green bond (GB) yields issued in the Indonesian bond market. The study sample includes 468 GBs issued by 30 issuers from both corporate and government entities from 2018 to 2023. This research method uses panel regression techniques with the random effects models to test hypotheses on two estimation model specifications. The study results reveal that interest, inflation, and exchange rates are significantly and positively related to GB yields. Bond-specific factors have different impacts, where coupons and maturity have a positive relationship with GB yields, while bond issuers have an adverse effect. Bond rating and issuance size as specific factors are shown to have no impact on GB yields. In the model with the moderating role of rating, the study’s results show that coupons still directly impact GB yields positively, while the influence of maturity is negative. The interaction of maturity and rating positively impacts GB yield. Different findings suggest that interactions with coupons weaken the impact of ratings on GB yields. The results of this study contribute to the financial literature on the determinants of the GB market and the role of bond ratings as a moderator. The study also provides new insights into Indonesia’s GB market, which includes developing countries. The findings can also help companies, investors, regulators, and researchers better understand the GB market.

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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicSustainable Finance and Green BondsFrench-language works237,207