中小企业融资行为研究:基于权衡理论和啄食理论比较的实证分析

运用权衡理论和啄食理论对选定的中小企业板样本上市公司的资本结构进行实证分析。除了利用样本企业2004年至2010年的有关数据对这两种主要的公司资本结构理论分别进行检验之外,还通过对其综合建模发现它们在影响上市中小企业融资行为中并不相互排斥,并同时得出权衡理论对上市中小企业融资行为的影响要远大于啄食理论的影响的结论。     

上市公司股权融资偏好的成本与收益分析——以海尔为例

本文基于我国上市公司的股权融资偏好现状,通过西方资本结构理论对公司融资选择的适用性分析,引入股权融资成本与收益计量模型,并以海尔作为实证样本,得出我国上市公司的股权融资成本低于债务融资成本,股权融资会在一定程度上增大企业价值的研究结论,从成本与收益两个方面对股权融资偏好行为进行了解释。     

债务融资方式会影响企业创新吗?——来自A股上市公司的实证研究

本文利用2002—2013年2011家中国上市公司的财务数据和专利申请数据,实证研究了不同的债务融资方式对企业创新的影响,结果发现:企业融资方式与其创新能力存在显著相关性,关系型融资在债务中的比重与创新能力负相关,主要原因是关系型融资对企业创新的促进作用要小于交易型融资,且银行竞争性增强有助于促进企业债务融资的创新绩效。在通过运用工具变量控制内生性后,本文的结论依然成立。     

我国上市公司融资啄序的实证分析

鉴于融资啄序理论主张的在信息不对称条件下的"留存收益-债权-股权"的企业最优融资啄序,以我国A股上市公司1994～2007年的融资数据为样本,根据上市公司的规模、成长性和杠杆水平对其进行分类,运用面板数据模型分析不同规模、成长性和杠杆水平的上市公司融资行为的啄序特征.实证结果表明:我国上市公司均存在不同程度的股权融资偏好,但这种偏好会受到诸如规模、成长能力和负债水平等内部条件以及外部融资政策的制约.     

上市商业银行融资结构对财务绩效的影响研究

本文基于2011-2020年我国上市商业银行融资结构及特点,突破以往研究单纯以某个静态财务指标评价经营绩效的局限性,引入我国上市商业银行多重财务指标,运用因子分析法建立综合财务绩效评价模型.本文以"理论分析—指标筛选—建立假设—实证分析"为主线,建立融资结构与财务绩效关系的假设,并通过实证研究验证股权融资、债务融资、内部融资与绩效之间的相关性,发掘上市商业银行融资结构的特征和问题,提出提升商业银行盈利水平、优化融资结构、实现企业利润最大化目标的有力对策.     

中国上市公司股权融资偏好研究

近年来的相关研究表明中国上市公司在进行再融资时偏好的融资顺序与西方上市公司完全不同,即与著名的“啄食顺序理论”所提出的从内源到外源的融资顺序相悖,中国上市公司具有独特的股权融资偏好。本文从中国上市公司融资现状出发,旨在分析上市公司融资偏好的成因及其带来的影响。并认为中国上市公司的融资偏好主要形成于股权融资资金成本对公司融资行为的软约束。     

我国上市公司过度股权融资的成因及对策

我国股票市场产生的基础存在着制度性的先天缺陷。研究表明,我国上市公司的融资顺序与现代资本结构理论关于啄食顺序原则存在明显的冲突。过度股权融资行为实际上是旧体制下国有企业“投资饥渴症”行为的延续。通过分析过度股权融资的内外因素,最后提出了完善法人治理结构、解决代理问题,构造合理融资结构,重视培育机构投资者,加大证券市场立法、执法,建立防止上市公司过度股权融资的措施。     

小微型企业融资渠道的选择及其影响因素的实证检验——基于江苏省的调查数据

小微型企业融资难问题一直是困扰着理论界和实务界的难题.本文对小微型企业融资难问题进行了理论回顾和文献综述;同时,基于苏北、苏中、苏南地区64份小微型企业的调查数据,并运用Probit模型进行实证检验,分析江苏省小微型企业融资渠道选择及其影响因素.实证结果表明,小微型企业目前仍以非正规金融组织融资渠道为主进行融资,而影响其融资渠道选择的因素主要有企业的经营年限、所属行业以及企业的资产规模.     

信息披露、市场关注与融资约束

本文运用中国证券市场的实证数据,研究了信息披露水平、市场关注程度对企业融资约束的影响。本文的理论分析表明,主动信息披露是解决信息不对称的有效方式,并且,市场关注程度对企业的融资约束也有影响,市场对企业越关注,越有利于企业私有信息的挖掘和公开信息的传播,进一步会减轻企业与市场的信息不对称问题。实证结果支持了上述理论:信息披露水平和以分析师为代表的市场关注程度提高能显著降低企业的融资约束。     

战略资源、专用性投资与融资结构

新发展起来的企业资源理论认为,为了实现自己的战略目标和提高企业的竞争力,企业要经常进行专用性投资。但由于专用性投资资产的不可调配性,专用性投资又影响着企业的融资结构。本文基于企业资源观点,运用交易成本经济学的分析框架分析探讨了专用性投资对融资结构的影响,并以2003～2006年上市公司作为研究样本,检验了资产专用性与融资结构的关系。理论分析显示,专用性投资水平达到一定程度以后,专用性投资水平与融资结构呈负相关,并通过实证分析得到了验证。     

The Impact of Financing Surpluses and Large Financing Deficits on Tests of the Pecking Order Theory

This paper extends the basic pecking order model of Shyam-Sunder and Myers by separating the effects of financing surpluses, normal deficits, and large deficits. Using a panel of US firms over the period 1971-2005, we find that the estimated pecking order coefficient is highest for surpluses (0.90), lower for normal deficits (0.74), and lowest when firms have large financing deficits (0.09). These findings shed light on two empirical puzzles: 1) small firms, although having the highest potential for asymmetric information, do not behave according to the pecking order theory, and 2) the pecking order theory has lost explanatory power over time. We provide a solution to these puzzles by demonstrating that the frequency of large deficits is higher in smaller firms and increasing over time. We argue that our results are consistent with the debt capacity in the pecking order model.     

Risk changes and external financing activities: Tests of the dynamic trade-off theory of capital structure

We provide new insight into the relevance of the dynamic trade-off theory of capital structure by examining firms’ external financing activities following risk changes. Consistent with the prediction of the dynamic trade-off theory but inconsistent with the pecking order theory, we find that firms issue equity following risk increases and debt after risk decreases, even when we narrowly focus on financially unconstrained firms. However, the results do not hold for firms with high market-to-book assets ratios, indicating that in this case, external financing activities are better captured by other factors than those explicitly considered in the trade-off theory, such as market timing. Our results are robust to a variety of risk measures including stock return volatility, default probability, implied asset volatility, and adjusted Ohlson (1980) scores.     

Is there a pecking order? Evidence from a panel of IPO firms

We test the pecking order model of capital structure by examining the financing of firms that went public in 1983. We estimate a logit to predict external financing, and a multinomial logit to predict the type of financing using data on the IPO firms' security offerings during 1984–1992. Our results indicate that the probability of obtaining external funds is unrelated to the shortfall in internally generated funds, although firms with cash surpluses avoid external financing. Firms that access the capital markets do not follow the pecking order when choosing the type of security to offer.     

The cash flow–investment relationship: International evidence of limited access to external finance

In efficient and complete financial markets, internal cash flows should have no impact on investment levels; but in inefficient and incomplete markets, the pecking order theory contends that there should be a positive relationship. Further, some studies show that investments of financially constrained firms are more sensitive to internal funds than those of less constrained firms but other studies show the opposite. Using comparable recent data on firms in the four largest industrialized countries (US, UK, Japan, and Germany), this study documents that in all four countries, controlling for the investment opportunity set, investment levels are significantly positively influenced by levels of internal cash flows, indicating that firms face limitation in access to external finance and may operate using a pecking order. Further, international differences in investment level sensitivities to opportunities indicate closer outside monitoring of firms in the bank-centered countries.     

Financing Preferences of Spanish Firms: Evidence on the Pecking Order Theory

This paper analyses some of the empirical implications of the pecking order theory in the Spanish market using a panel data analysis of 1,566 firms over 1994–2000. The results show that the pecking order theory holds for most subsamples analyzed, particularly for the small and medium-sized enterprises and for the high-growth and highly leveraged companies. It is also shown that both the more and the less leveraged firms tend to converge towards more balanced capital structures. Finally, we observe that firms finance their funds flow deficits with long term debt.     

How and When Do Firms Adjust Their Capital Structures toward Targets?

If firms adjust their capital structures toward targets, and if there are adverse selection costs associated with asymmetric information, how and when do firms adjust their capital structures? We suggest a financing needs‐induced adjustment framework to examine the dynamic process by which firms adjust their capital structures. We find that most adjustments occur when firms have above‐target (below‐target) debt with a financial surplus (deficit). These results suggest that firms move toward the target capital structure when they face a financial deficit/surplus—but not in the manner hypothesized by the traditional pecking order theory.     

Business cycles,financial cycles and capital structure

We perform peridogram based cycle analysis of firm capital structure and find evidence that firms’ leverage is both persistent and cyclical. The cyclicality of leverage is supported by the trade-off, pecking order and market timing capital structure theories (Korajczyk and Levy in J Financ Econ 68:75–109, 2003; Bhamra et al. in Rev Financ Stud 23:645–703, 2010). Although market timing theory research supports persistence, previous literature dictates that the trade-off and pecking order theories may predict either persistent or mean reverting leverage. Our tests reject mean reversion in favor of persistent and cyclical leverage. We corroborate pecking order theory literature that predicts leverage is persistent. In these models, when firms’ investment spending is below earnings, leverage decreases. In addition, we examine whether firms change their capital structure as a result of business and financial cycles. Since financial cycles last longer than business cycles, financial cycles should have a long term effect on leverage. Our findings confirm the persistent leverage business cycle models that suggest firms change their capital structure due to financial and credit cycles (Jermann and Quadrini in Am Econ Rev 102:238–271, 2012; Azariadis et al. in Rev Econ Stud 83:1364–1405, 2016). We conclude that leverage is persistent due to the cyclicality of the financing decision.     

Corporate Financing Decisions: UK Survey Evidence

Abstract:  Despite theoretical developments in recent years, our understanding of corporate capital structure remains incomplete. Prior empirical research has been dominated by archival regression studies which are limited in their ability to fully reflect the diversity found in practice. The present paper reports on a comprehensive survey of corporate financing decision-making in UK listed companies. A key finding is that firms are heterogeneous in their capital structure policies. About half of the firms seek to maintain a target debt level, consistent with trade-off theory , but 60% claim to follow a financing hierarchy, consistent with pecking order theory . These two theories are not viewed by respondents as either mutually exclusive or exhaustive. Many of the theoretical determinants of debt levels are widely accepted by respondents, in particular the importance of interest tax shield, financial distress, agency costs and also, at least implicitly, information asymmetry. Results also indicate that cross-country institutional differences have a significant impact on financial decisions.     

Do Portuguese private firms follow pecking order financing?

This paper tests for pecking order behavior in medium-sized private Portuguese firms. In contrast to the usual split between internal funds, debt, and external equity, we separate debt into four components – cheap trade credits (CTC), bank loans (BL), other loans, and expensive credits (EC). We use breakpoint tests to identify when firms switch between funding sources by examining the change in each funding source based on the financing deficit remaining after the previous pecking order funding source has been used. Our tests indicate that Portuguese companies generally move from lower cost to higher cost financing sources, but they do not exhaust each type of debt before moving on to the next funding source in the pecking order. Such behavior is consistent with a loose interpretation of pecking order financing, but not a strict interpretation of the theory. Instead, Portuguese firms may be balancing pecking order financing with a need to maintain some degree of financing flexibility.