全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

基于ESG表现和金融化的企业违约风险预警分析
An Analysis of Enterprise Default Risk Warning Based on ESG Performance and Financialization

DOI: 10.12677/orf.2024.142113, PP. 71-82

Keywords: ESG表现,企业金融化,违约风险
ESG Performance
, Enterprise Financialization, Default Risk

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

文章基于2022年被首次特殊处理的40家我国A股上市公司及其对应的107家未被特殊处理的A股上市公司样本数据,利用因子分析对11个财务指标提取5个公因子,并基于ESG视角构造金融化指标,运用Logistic模型对企业违约概率进行实证检验。研究发现:1) 企业的ESG表现与违约风险呈显著负相关关系;2) 企业的金融化程度在一定情况下与违约风险呈显著正相关关系,尤其是反映企业在当年来自金融渠道的收益与营业总收入之比的流量指标在大多数情况下与违约风险呈显著正相关关系。3) 利用聚类分析对预测因子进行聚类后,只会对模型预测效果产生轻微影响,但是对其进行聚类后,不仅方便企业对自身财务和ESG进行控制和优化,也方便投资者对投资对象违约风险的评估。这些结论为投资者在选择投资对象、企业在资产配置和战略选择以及管理当局在信息披露管理等方面提供了启示。
The article is based on the sample data of 40 A-share listed companies in China that were first specially treated in 2022 and their corresponding 107 A-share listed companies that were not specially treated. Factor analysis is used to extract 5 common factors from 11 financial indicators, and financialization indicators are constructed from the ESG perspective. Logistic models are used to empirically test the default probability of enterprises. Research has found that: 1) There is a significant negative correlation between the ESG performance of enterprises and default risk; 2) The degree of financialization of enterprises is significantly positively correlated with default risk under certain circumstances, especially the flow indicator that reflects the ratio of profits from financial channels to total operating income of enterprises in the current year is significantly positively correlated with default risk in most cases. 3) After clustering the predictive factors using clustering analysis, it will only have a slight impact on the model’s prediction performance. However, clustering it not only facilitates the enterprise to control and optimize its own financial and ESG, but also facilitates investors to evaluate the default risk of investment objects. These conclusions provide insights for investors in selecting investment targets, enterprises in asset allocation and strategic choices, and management authorities in information disclosure management.

References

[1]  周宏, 徐兆铭, 彭丽华, 等. 宏观经济不确定性对中国企业债券信用风险的影响——基于2007-2009年月度面板数据[J]. 会计研究, 2011(12): 41-45, 97.
[2]  陈佳音. 上市企业债券违约的影响因素[J]. 中国经贸导刊(中), 2019(23): 63-64.
[3]  郭吉涛, 朱义欣. 数字经济影响企业信用风险的效应及路径[J]. 深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2021, 38(6): 69-80.
[4]  Beaver, W.H. (1966) Financial Ratios as Predictors of Failure. Journal of Accounting Research, 4, 71-111.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2490171
[5]  Opler, T., Pinkowitz, L., Stulz, R. and Williamson, R. (1999) The Determinants and Implications of Corporate Cash Holdings. Journal of Financial Economics, 52, 3-46.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(99)00003-3
[6]  Chiang, S.M., Chung, H. and Huang, C.M. (2015) A Note on Board Characteristics, Ownership Structure and Default Risk in Taiwan. Accounting & Finance, 55, 57-74.
https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12045
[7]  耿得科, 张旭昆. 公司声誉、财务信息与债务违约风险估计[J]. 经济与管理研究, 2011(5): 94-101.
[8]  潘泽清. 企业债务违约风险Logistic回归预警模型[J]. 上海经济研究, 2018(8): 73-83.
[9]  王化成, 侯级然, 刘欢. 战路定位差异、业绩期望差距与企业违约风险[J]. 南开管理评论, 2019(4): 4-19.
[10]  张建伟. 全要素生产率、融资成本与企业违约风险[J]. 技术经济与管理研究, 2022(6): 64-69.
[11]  Shih, Y.C., Wang, Y., Zhong, R. and Ma, Y.M. (2021) Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Default Risk: Evidence from China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 68, Article ID: 101596.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2021.101596
[12]  Atif, M. and Ali, S. (2021) Environmental, Social and Governance Disclosure and Default Risk. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30, 3937-3959.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2850
[13]  张琳, 潘佳英. 融入ESG因素的企业债券信用风险预警研究[J]. 金融理论探索, 2021(4): 51-65.
[14]  张晓娟. ESG因子对信用债违约风险的预警作用研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2022.
[15]  刘学娟, 常如月, 张静怡, 等. 考虑ESG表现的企业违约风险预警研究[J]. 金融理论与实践, 2023(4): 45-57.
[16]  Baud, C. and Durand, C. (2012) Financialization, Globalization and the Making of Profits by Leading Retailers. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 241-266.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwr016
[17]  邓路, 刘欢, 侯粲然. 金融资产配置与违约风险:蓄水池效应, 还是逐利效应? [J]. 金融研究, 2020(7): 172-189.
[18]  黄贤环, 王瑶, 王少华. 谁更过度金融化:业绩上升企业还是业绩下滑企业? [J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2019, 21(1): 80-94, 138.
[19]  于建玲, 佟孟华, 朱泽君. 企业金融化对财务风险的影响——基于经济政策不确定性的调节效应研究[J]. 国际金融研究, 2021(10): 88-96.
[20]  赵芮, 曹廷贵. 实体企业金融化与企业风险: 对冲效应抑或扩大效应[J]. 当代财经, 2021(6): 64-77.
[21]  张军, 周亚虹, 于晓宇. 企业金融化的同伴效应与实体部门经营风险[J]. 财贸经济, 2021, 42(8): 67-80.
[22]  徐隽翊, 周越, 陈升萌. 金融化与企业风险承担[J]. 湖南大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 34(6): 73-82.
[23]  许志勇, 胡伟, 邓青, 等. 企业金融化、市场化进程与风险承担[J]. 中国软科学, 2020(10): 165-174.
[24]  方元, 陈经伟, 宋英男. 企业金融化增加了债务违约风险吗?——来自中国上市企业的证据[J]. 中国注册会计师, 2023(3): 50-56.
[25]  石晓军, 任若恩, 肖远文. 边界Logistic违约率模型Bayes分析及实证研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2006(4): 25-29.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133