KURUMSAL YÖNETİM VE HİSSE SENEDİ GETİRİSİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ

Yıl 2016, Sayı: 49, 124 - 143, 28.07.2016

Gülüzar Kurt Gümüş Bener Güngör Yusuf Gümüş

Öz

Bu çalışma, kurumsal yönetim ve hisse senedi getirisi arasındaki
ilişkiyi 2007 ve 2013 arasındaki dönem itibariyle endeks ve firma düzeyinde
incelemektedir. Endeks düzeyindeki analiz, Borsa İstanbul Kurumsal Yönetim
Endeksi ile Borsa İstanbul 100 Endeksi arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanmaktadır. Firma
düzeyindeki analiz ise, kurumsal yönetim performansının 2007 ve 2013 yılları
arasında Kurumsal Yönetim Endeksi’nde listelenen oniki firmanın hisse senedi
getirileri üzerindeki etkisini incelemektedir. Endeks düzeyindeki ilişki,
eşbütünleşme analizi ile incelenmiştir ve firma düzeyindeki ilişki ise birikimli
normal dışı getirileri hesaplamaktadır. Sonuçlara göre, endeks düzeyinde uzun
dönemli bir ilişki bulunmaktadır ve ayrıca kurumsal yönetim performansı hisse
senedi getirisi üzerinde etkilidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Borsa İstanbul, kurumsal yönetim, hisse senedi getirisi

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND STOCK RETURNS

Öz

This study investigates the relationship between corporate governance
and stock returns both at index and firm-level for the period between 2007 and
2013. The index-level analysis focuses on the long-run relationship between
Borsa İstanbul Corporate Governance Index and Borsa İstanbul 100 Index. The firm-level
analysis examines the effect of corporate governance ratings on stock returns.
The firm-level analysis includes twelve companies which have been listed on Corporate
Governance Index from 2007 till 2013. The index-level analysis employs co-integration
analysis, while the firm-level analysis calculates cumulative abnormal returns.
The results indicate that there is a long-run index-level relationship and also
corporate governance rating announcements have an effect on stock returns.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Borsa İstanbul, corporate governance, stock return

Kaynakça

• Abor, J. (2007). Corporate governance and financing decisions of Ghanaian listed firms. Corporate Governance, 7(1), 83 - 92.
• Alba, P., Claessens, S., & Djankov, S. (1998). Thailand’s corporate financing and governance structures: Impact on firm’s competitiveness’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No.2003.
• Antoniou, A., Guney, Y., Paudyal, K., (2008) “The Determinants of Capital Structure: Capital Market-Oriented versus Bank-Oriented Institutions, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 59–92.
• Ararat, M.; Orbay, H.; Yurtoglu, B. (2010). The Effects of Board Independence in Controlled Firms: Evidence from Turkey. Working Paper. Available online: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1663403
• Beiner, Stefan, Drobetz, Wolfgang, Schmid, Markus ve Zimmermann, Heinz (2004). “An Integrated Framework of Corporate Governance andFirm Valuation – Evidence from Switzerland”, ECGI - Finance Working Paper No. 34/2004.
• Black, B. (2001). “The Corporate Governance Behavior and Market Value of Russian Firms”, Emerging Markets Review, 2,89-108.
• Brown, L.D. ve Caylor, M.L. (2004). “Corporate Governance and Firm Performance”, Çalışma metni, Georgia State University.
• Cheng, S. (2008). “Board Size and The Variability of Corporate Performance”, Journal of Financial Economics, 87, 157-176
• Churaev, K. (2003). The Impacts of Corporate Governance Issues on Values of Turkish Companies, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi.
• Drobetz, Wolfgang, Schillhofer, Andreas ve Zimmermann, Heinz (2003), “Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: Evidence from Germany” ECGI - Finance Working Paper No. 11/2003.
• Du, J., Dai, Y., (2005), “Ultimate Corporate Ownership Structures and Capital Structures: evidence from East Asian economies”, Corporate Governance: An International Review,Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 60–71
• Ganiyu Y. O., Abiodun B. Y., (2012), “The Impact of Corporat Governance on Capital Structure Decision of Nigerian Firms”, Research Journal in Organizational Psychology & Educational Studies 1(2) 121-128
• George, Bill vd. (2004). Mastering Global Corparate Governance, Wiley Publication.
• Gill. A., Biger N., Mand, H.S., Shah C., (2012), “Corporate Governance and Capital Structure of Small Business Service Firms in India, International Journal of Economics and Finance; Vol. 4, No. 8.
• Gurarda,S; Ozsoz, E; Ates, A. (2016). "Corporate Governance Rating and Ownership Structure in the Case of Turkey", İnternational Journal of Financial Studies, 4, 1-16.
• Gürbüz, A.O.; Aybars, A.; Kutlu, Ö. (2010). Corporate Governance and Financial Performance with a Perspective on
• Institutional Ownership: Empirical Evidence from Turkey. J. Appl. Manag. Account. Res. 8, 21–37.
• Hsu, C.Y.; Chen, Y.L.; Lin,W.Y. (2007). Corporate governance and credit risk. NTU Manag. Rev. 6, 100–110.
• Kowalewski, O. (2012). “Does Corporate Governance Determine Corporate Performance and Dividends During Financial Crisis: Evidence from Poland”, Working Paper, Kozminski University.
• La Porta, R.; Silanes, F.L.; Shleifer, A.; Vishny, R.W. (1996). Law and Finance; Working Paper; National Bureau of Economic Research: Cambridge, MA, USA.
• Shleifer, A.; Vishny, R.W. (2007). Large Shareholders and Corporate Control. J. Political Econ. 94, 461–488.
• Wei’an, Li, Yuejun, Tang (2007), “An Evaluation of Corporate Governance Evaluation, Governance Index (CGINK) and Performance: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies in 03”, Frontiers of Business Research in China (1): 1-18.
• Wen, Y., Rwegasira, K., & Bilderbeek, J. (2002). Corporate governance and capital structure decisions of the Chinese Listed Firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 10, 75-83.