Finance and Credit
 

Interrelation of company capital structure and effectiveness in Russia

Vol. 23, Iss. 48, DECEMBER 2017

Received: 31 October 2017

Received in revised form: 14 November 2017

Accepted: 28 November 2017

Available online: 22 December 2017

Subject Heading: THEORY OF FINANCE

JEL Classification: G32

Pages: 2872–2887

https://doi.org/10.24891/fc.23.48.2872

Fedorova E.A. Financial University under Government of Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation
ecolena@mail.ru

Rybalkin P.I. Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation
rybalkinpavel93@gmail.com

Fedorov F.Yu. OOO RedSys, Moscow, Russian Federation
fedorovfedor92@mail.ru

Subject The article investigates interrelations between capital structure and effectiveness of 451 Russian manufacturing companies from 2008 to 2015.
Objectives The purpose of the study is to explore the interaction between the capital structure of the companies and their effectiveness in the Russian market.
Methods Annual financials of Russian manufacturing companies from Ruslana database serve as input data. We estimate the companies' effectiveness by building non-parametric DEA models (VRS and FDH modifications). To challenge the main hypotheses, we constructed two linear regression equations under three methods, namely, OLS, 2SLS, and quantile regression.
Results Using the obtained estimates of effectiveness, we tested the agency-cost hypothesis to find out whether an additional debt leads to an increase in company performance in the next period (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Also, there have been tested two competing efficiency risk and franchise value hypotheses to understand whether more effective companies raise additional debts to achieve their capital structure optimum or they tend to maintain positive cash flow for equity holders and avoid additional debts. Based on the findings, we rejected the agency-cost hypothesis. The effectiveness of Russian companies is not improved if the debt level grows. For a number of companies, the franchise value hypothesis was confirmed – if the major shareholder possesses from over seventy percent of the total share capital, it results in the biggest decline in the debt level in the next period.
Conclusions Raising new debt by more effective companies has an insignificant impact on their performance in the subsequent period.

Keywords: capital structure, company effectiveness, financing decisions

References:

  1. Modigliani F., Miller M.H. The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment. The American Economic Review, 1958, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 261–297. Stable URL: Link
  2. Myers S.C. The Capital Structure Puzzle. The Journal of Finance, 1984, vol. 39, iss. 3, pp. 575–592. URL: Link
  3. Jensen M.C., Meckling W.H. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 1976, vol. 3, iss. 4, pp. 305–360. URL: Link90026-X
  4. Antoniou A., Guney Y., Paudyal K. The Determinants of Capital Structure: Capital Market-Oriented versus Bank-Oriented Institutions. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 2008, vol. 43, iss. 1, pp. 59–92. URL: Link
  5. Baker M., Wurgler J. Market Timing and Capital Structure. URL: Link
  6. Campello M. Debt Financing: Does It Boost or Hurt Firm Performance in Product Markets? Journal of Financial Economics, 2006, vol. 82, iss. 1, pp. 135–172. URL: Link
  7. Flannery M.J., Rangan K.P. Partial Adjustment toward Target Capital Structures. Journal of Financial Economics, 2006, vol. 79, pp. 469–506. URL: Link
  8. Frank M.Z., Goyal V.K. Capital Structure Decisions: Which Factors are Reliably Important? Financial Management, 2009, vol. 38, iss. 1, pp. 1–37. URL: Link
  9. Frank M.Z., Goyal V.K. Testing the Pecking Order Theory of Capital Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 2003, vol. 67, iss. 2, pp. 217–248. URL: Link00252-0
  10. Hennessy C.A., Whited T.M. Debt Dynamics. Journal of Finance, 2005, vol. 60, iss. 3, pp. 1129–1165. URL: Link
  11. Huang G., Song F.M. The Determinants of Capital Structure: Evidence from China. China Economic Review, 2006, vol. 17, iss. 1, pp. 14–36. URL: Link
  12. Jackling B., Johl S. Board Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from India's Top Companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2009, vol. 17, iss. 4, pp. 492–509. URL: Link
  13. Leland H.E. et al. Can the Trade-off Theory Explain Debt Structure?. The Review of Financial Studies, 2007, vol. 20, iss. 5, pp. 1389–1428. URL: Link
  14. Salim M., Yadav R. Capital Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Malaysian Listed Companies. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2012, vol. 65, pp. 156–166. URL: Link
  15. Shyam-Sunder L., Myers S.C. Testing Static Tradeoff Against Pecking Order Models of Capital Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 1999, vol. 51, pp. 219–244. URL: Link00051-8
  16. Thomsen S., Pedersen T. Ownership Structure and Economic Performance in the Largest European Companies. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 689–705.
  17. Margaritis D., Psillaki M. Capital Structure, Equity Ownership and Firm Performance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2010, vol. 34, iss. 3, pp. 621–632. URL: Link
  18. Wahba H. Capital Structure, Managerial Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from Egypt. Journal of Management & Governance, 2014, vol. 18, iss. 4, pp. 1041–1061. URL: Link
  19. Capobianco H.M.P., Fernandes E. Capital Structure in the World Airline Industry. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2004, vol. 38, iss. 6, pp. 421–434. URL: Link
  20. Dawar V. Agency Theory, Capital Structure and Firm Performance: Some Indian Evidence. Managerial Finance, 2014, vol. 40, iss. 12, pp. 1190–1206. URL: Link
  21. Majumdar S.K., Chhibber P. Capital Structure and Performance: Evidence from a Transition Economy on an Aspect of Corporate Governance. Public Choice, 1999, vol. 98, iss. 3-4, pp. 287–305. URL: Link
  22. Ilyukhin E. The Impact of Financial Leverage on Firm Performance: Evidence from Russia. Korporativnye finansy = Corporate Finance, 2015, no. 2, pp. 24–36. URL: Link
  23. Berger A.N., Bonaccorsi di Patti E. Capital Structure and Firm Performance: A New Approach to Testing Agency Theory and an Application to the Banking Industry. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2006, vol. 30, iss. 4, pp. 1065–1102. URL: Link
  24. Demsetz H. Industry Structure, Market Rivalry, and Public Policy. Journal of Law and Economics, 1973, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–9. URL: Link
  25. Margaritis D., Psillaki M. Capital Structure and Firm Efficiency. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 2007, vol. 34, iss. 9-10, pp. 1447–1469. URL: Link
  26. Gleason K.C., Mathur L.K., Mathur I. The Interrelationship between Culture, Capital Structure, and Performance: Evidence from European Retailers. Journal of Business Research, 2000, vol. 50, iss. 2, pp. 185–191. URL: Link00031-4
  27. Booth L., Aivazian V., Demirguc-Kunt A., Maksimovic V. Capital structures in developing countries. The Journal of Finance, 2001, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 87–130. URL: Link
  28. Rajan R.G., Zingales L. What Do We Know about Capital Structure? Some Evidence from International Data. The Journal of Finance, 1995, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1421–1460. URL: Link
  29. Himmelberg C.P., Hubbard R.G., Palia D. Understanding the Determinants of Managerial Ownership and the Link between Ownership and Performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 1999, vol. 53, iss. 3, pp. 353–384. URL: Link00025-2
  30. Stulz R.M. Managerial Discretion and Optimal Financing Policies. Journal of Financial Economics, 1990, vol. 26, iss. 1, pp. 3–27. URL: Link90011-N

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-8709 (Online)
ISSN 2071-4688 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 24, Iss. 9
September 2018

Archive