Do Leverage and External Debt Add Value to Companies from the Perspective of Liquidity Abundance? Evidence from Borsa Istanbul

Abstract

The low level of interest rates in international money markets since 2009 led to an abundance of liquidity in capital markets. The abundance of liquidity lasted until 2019, after which interest rates rose sharply in line with the decisions taken, beginning a period of liquidity scarcity. The purpose of this study is to examine whether the relationship between firms' leverage, external borrowing level and market capitalization is affected differently during periods of liquidity abundance and scarcity. In the study, the analysis was conducted using 190 companies and 52 quarterly data for the period 2010-2022, which covers the periods of liquidity abundance and scarcity of Borsa Istanbul manufacturing industry companies. In addition to the system GMM estimator, models are estimated with the Driscoll-Kraay method, which is another robust estimation method. As a result of the analysis, it is observed that the estimation findings of the models differ according to the period of liquidity abundance and scarcity. During the liquidity abundance period, there is a positive relationship between the leverage level of firms and market capitalization, while there is no relationship between external borrowing levels and market capitalization. On the other hand, in the period of liquidity scarcity, it is found that the external debt of companies has a decreasing effect on market value and there is no relationship between leverage level and market value. The opposite findings in both periods may indicate that the tax saving advantage of financial leverage has an impact on this process due to different interest rates.

Keywords

• Leverage
• External Debt
• Liquidity Abundance
• Corporate Value

Likidite Bolluğu Ekseninde Kaldıraç ve Dış Borçlanma Şirketlere Değer Kattı mı? Borsa İstanbul Üzerine Bir Uygulama

Abstract

Uluslararası para piyasalarında 2009 yılından itibaren faiz oranlarının oldukça düşük seviyelerde seyretmesi sermaye piyasalarında likiditenin bollaşmasına yol açmıştır. Yaşanan likidite bolluğu 2019 yılına kadar sürmüş, sonrasında alınan kararlar doğrultusunda faiz oranlarının sert bir şekilde yükselmesi likidite kıtlığı dönemini başlatmıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı likidite bolluğu ve kıtlığı dönemlerinde, şirketlerin kaldıraç, dış borçlanma düzeyi ile piyasa değeri ilişkisini farklı yönde etkileyip etkilemediğinin incelenmesidir. Çalışmada Borsa İstanbul imalat sanayi şirketlerinin likidite bolluğu ve kıtlığı dönemlerini kapsayan 2010-2022 döneminde, 190 şirket ve 52 çeyrek dönemlik veri kullanılarak analiz gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sistem GMM tahmincisi yanında diğer dirençli tahmin yöntemi olan Driscoll-Kraay yöntemi ile modeller tahmin edilmiştir. Gerçekleştirilen analiz sonucunda, likidite bolluğu ve kıtlığı döneminde modellerin tahmin bulgularının farklılaştığı tespit edilmiştir. Likidite bolluğu döneminde şirketlerin kaldıraç düzeyi piyasa değeri arasında pozitif yönlü bir ilişki; dış borçlanma düzeyleri ile piyasa değeri arasında bir ilişki olmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Likidite kıtlığı döneminde ise şirketlerin dış borçlanma düzeyinin piyasa değerini azaltıcı yönde etkisi olduğu, kaldıraç düzeyi ile piyasa değeri arasında ilişki bulunmadığı bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Her iki dönemde tam tersi bulgular elde edilmesinde, farklılaşan faiz oranları sebebiyle finansal kaldıracın vergi tasarrufu avantajının bu sürece etki edebileceği düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

• Kaldıraç
• Dış Borçlanma
• Likidite Bolluğu
• Firma Değeri

References

1. Abdullah, H. and Tursoy, T. (2021). Capital structure and firm performance: Evidence of Germany under IFRS adoption. Review of Managerial Science, 15(2), 379-398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-019-00344-5
2. Akhtar, M., Yusheng, K., Haris, M., Ain, Q.U. and Javaid, H.M. (2022). Impact of financial leverage on sustainable growth, market performance, and profitability. Economic Change and Restructuring, 55, 737-774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-021-09321-z
3. Allayannis, G., Brown, G.W. and Klapper, L.F. (2003). Capital structure and financial risk: Evidence from foreign debt use in East Asia. The Journal of Finance, 58(6), 2667-2710. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-6261.2003.00619.x
4. Arellano, M. and Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
5. Baltagi, B.H. (2021). Econometric analysis of panel data. UK: Springer publishing.
6. Barry, C.B. and Mihov, V.T. (2015). Debt financing, venture capital, and the performance of initial public offerings. Journal of Banking and Finance, 58, 144-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2015.04.001
7. Berger, A.N. and Di Patti, E.B. (2006). Capital structure and firm performance: A new approach to testing agency theory and an application to the banking industry. Journal of Banking and Finance, 30(4), 1065-1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2005.05.015
8. Blundell, R. and Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8

9. Brealey, R.A., Myers, S.C. and Marcus, A.J. (2007). Fundamentals of corporate finance. New York: McGraw Hill.
10. Brigham, E.F. and Houston, J.F. (2021). Fundamentals of financial management: Concise. Boston: Cengage Learning.
11. Chudik, A. and Pesaran, M.H. (2015). Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. Journal of Econometrics, 188(2), 393-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007
12. Copeland, T.E., Copeland, T., Koller, T., McKinsey, C. and Murrin, J. (2000). Valuation: Measuring and managing the value of companies. New York: Wiley.
13. Detthamrong, U., Chancharat, N. and Vithessonthi, C. (2017). Corporate governance, capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Thailand. Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 689-709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.07.011
14. Engel, N., Braun, R. and Achleitner, A.-K. (2012). Leverage and the performance of buyouts. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 82(5), 451-490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-012-0559-y
15. Fama, E.F. and French, K.R. (2002). Testing trade-off and pecking order predictions about dividends and debt. Review of Financial Studies, 15(1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/15.1.1
16. FED. (2023). Statistics of Federal Reserve Bank [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://www.federalreserve.gov
17. Gabrijel, M., Herman, U. and Lenarčič, A. (2016). Firm performance and (foreign) debt financing before and during the crisis evidence from firm-level data (European Stability Mechanism Working Paper No. 15/2016). Retrieved from https://crisisobs.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/WP_15_final.pdf
18. Ghosh, S. (2008). Leverage, foreign borrowing and corporate performance: Firm-level evidence for India. Applied Economics Letters, 15(8), 607-616. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850600722047
19. Giannetti, M. and Ongena, S. (2009). Financial integration and firm performance: Evidence from foreign bank entry in emerging markets. Review of Finance, 13(2), 181-223. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfm019
20. Giannetti, M. and Ongena, S. (2012). “Lending by example”: Direct and indirect effects of foreign banks in emerging markets. Journal of International Economics, 86(1), 167-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2011.08.005
21. Harris, M. and Raviv, A. (1991). The theory of capital structure. The Journal of Finance, 46(1), 297-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb03753.x
22. Harvey, C.R., Lins, K.V. and Roper, A.H. (2004). The effect of capital structure when expected agency costs are extreme. Journal of Financial Economics, 74(1), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2003.07.003
23. Healy, P.M., Palepu, K. and Bernard, V. (2020). Business analysis and valuation. In K.G. Palepu, P.M. Healy, S. Wright, M. Bradbury and J. Coulton (Eds.), Business analysis and valuation: Using financial Statements. Australia: Cengage.
24. Jadiyappa, N., Hickman, L.E., Jyothi, P., Vunyale, N. and Sireesha, B. (2020). Does debt diversification impact firm value? Evidence from India. International Review of Economics and Finance, 67, 362-377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2020.02.002
25. Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. The Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
26. Karadeniz, E., Yilmaz Kandir, S., Balcilar, M. and Beyazit Onal, Y. (2009). Determinants of capital structure: Evidence from Turkish lodging companies. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(5), 594-609. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110910967827
27. Karan, M. (2018). Yatırım analizi ve portföy yönetimi. Ankara: Gazi yayınevi.
28. Khémiri, W. and Noubbigh, H. (2020). Size-threshold effect in debt-firm performance nexus in the sub-Saharan region: A panel smooth transition regression approach. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 76, 335-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2019.09.009
29. Le, T.P.V. and Phan, T.B.N. (2017). Capital structure and firm performance: Empirical evidence from a small transition country. Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 710-726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.07.012
30. Liu, Y., Qiu, B. and Wang, T. (2021). Debt rollover risk, credit default swap spread and stock returns: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Financial Stability, 53, 100855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100855
31. Maddala, G.S. and Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 631-652. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1631
32. Majumdar, S.K. and Chhibber, P. (1999). Capital structure and performance: Evidence from a transition economy on an aspect of corporate governance. Public Choice, 98(3/4), 287-305. Retrieved from https://www.infona.pl/
33. Margaritis, D. and Psillaki, M. (2010). Capital structure, equity ownership and firm performance. Journal of Banking and Finance, 34(3), 621-632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2009.08.023
34. Miller, M.H. (1977). Debt and taxes. The Journal of Finance, 32(2), 261-275. https://doi.org/10.2307/2326758
35. Modigliani, F. and Miller, M.H. (1963). Corporate income taxes and the cost of capital: A correction. The American Economic Review, 53(3), 433-443. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org
36. Myers, S.C. (1984). Finance theory and financial strategy. Interfaces, 14(1), 126-137. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.14.1.126
37. Myers, S.C. and Majluf, N.S. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2), 187-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(84)90023-0
38. Pesaran, M.H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
39. Phillips, P.C.B. and Sul, D. (2003). Dynamic panel estimation and homogeneity testing under cross section dependence. The Econometrics Journal, 6(1), 217-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00108
40. Rajan, R.G. and Zingales, L. (1995). What do we know about capital structure? Some evidence from international data. The Journal of Finance, 50(5), 1421-1460. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05184.x
41. Ramli, N.A., Latan, H. and Solovida, G.T. (2019). Determinants of capital structure and firm financial performance—A PLS-SEM approach: Evidence from Malaysia and Indonesia. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 71, 148-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2018.07.001
42. Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Stata Journal, 9(1), 86-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0900900106
43. Ross, S.A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. The American Economic Review, 63(2), 134-139. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org
44. Sarafidis, V., Yamagata, T. and Robertson, D. (2009). A test of cross section dependence for a linear dynamic panel model with regressors. Journal of Econometrics, 148(2), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.10.006
45. T.C.M.B. (2023). Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası [Veri Seti]. Erişim adresi: https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/
46. Tsuruta, D. (2015). Leverage and firm performance of small businesses: Evidence from Japan. Small Business Economics, 44(2), 385-410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9601-5
47. Vithessonthi, C. and Tongurai, J. (2015). The effect of firm size on the leverage–performance relationship during the financial crisis of 2007–2009. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 29, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2014.11.001
48. Zeitun, R. and Tian, G.G. (2007). Capital structure and corporate performance: Evidence from Jordan. The Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, 1(4), 40-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v1i4.3
49. Zhang, K.Q. and Chen, H.H. (2017). Environmental performance and financing decisions impact on sustainable financial development of Chinese environmental protection enterprises. Sustainability, 9(12), 2260. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122260