- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
In this paper, we draw on the Hansen (1999) threshold regression model to examine the empirical links between leverage and firm performance by means of a new threshold variable, firm size. We ask whether there exists an optimal firm size for which leverage is not negatively related to firm performance. Accordingly, with a panel data of 101 listed firms in Nigeria between 2003 and 2007, we explore whether the ultimate effect of leverage on firm performance is contingent on firm size; that is, whether the type of impact that leverage has on the performance of a firm is dependent on the size of the firm. Our results show that the negative effect of leverage on firm performance is most eminent and significant for small-sized firms and that the evidence of a negative effect diminishes as a firm grows, eventually vanishing when firm size exceeds its estimated threshold level. We find that this result continues to hold, irrespective of the debt ratios utilized. In line with earlier studies, our results show that the effect of leverage on Tobin’s Q is positive for Nigeria’s listed firms. However, our new finding is the evidence that the strength of the positive relationship depends on the size of the firm and is mostly higher for small-sized firms.
We present new evidence on the contingent role of firm size in determining the relationship between leverage and firm performance, using data from 101 listed firms in Nigeria over the period 2003 – 2007. We use three measures of leverage – total debt to asset ratio, long-term debt to asset ratio and short-term debt to asset ratio – and three measures of firm performance – ROA and ROE which are firm accounting performance measures and Tobin’s Q which represents firm market performance measure. One major contribution of the paper is the use of a new threshold, firm size, and the adoption of the threshold regression model of Hansen (1999) to comprehensively uncover the role of firm size in the relationship between leverage and firm performance. In order words, we ask the question – does size matter in the relationship between leverage and firm performance?
We find that the answer to the above question is yes. Particularly, our results suggest that much of the negative effects of leverage on firm performance are borne by small-sized firms while no evidence exists that the same is true for large-sized firms; this finding holds for the three measures of leverage employed. In the case of Tobin’s Q where the impact of leverage on firm performance is positive in both low- and high-SIZE regimes, we find that the positive effect is mostly much stronger in the low-SIZE regime for all measures of leverage. Furthermore, we find that the negative effect of leverage on ROE and ROA for small-sized firms is highest when short-term debt to asset ratio is the measure of leverage while the positive effect of leverage on firm market performance measure (Tobin’s Q) for small-sized firms is highest when short-term debt to asset ratio is the measure of leverage, leading to a trade-off between maximizing gains in market performance and minimizing loss in accounting performance via leverage for small-sized firms in Nigeria.