Journal of Business, Social and Technology (Bustechno) http://bustechno.ridwaninstitute.co.id/index.php/jbt/issue/current |
DOES THE INVESTMENT
OPPORTUNITY SET STRENGTHEN THE EFFECT OF PROFITABILITY, MANAGERIAL
OWNERSHIP AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE ON FIRM VALUE?
Garnis Mulya Ningrum1, Khomsiyah2
Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia
Email: [email protected]1, [email protected]2
|
Abstract |
Article Information: Received: 28-12-2022 Revised: 11-01-2023 Accepted: 25-01-2023 Keywords: Firm Value; Profitability; Managerial ownership; Capital Structure and Investment
Opportunity Set. |
This study aims to examine the effect of
profitability,
managerial ownership, and capital structure on firm value and to test
whether the investment opportunity set strengthens Profitability, managerial
Ownership, and capital structure on firm value. As part of the purposive
sampling method used in this study, which leverages secondary data, 60 data
points were collected from 15 firms between 2018 and 2021 that met the
required requirements. Moderate Regression Analysis (MRA) is the method of
data analysis used in this study. According to the findings of the
study, profitability has not to effect on firm value, managerial ownership has a
positive effect on firm value, capital structure has a positive effect
on firm value, investment opportunity sets weaken the relationship between profitability
on firm
value, investment opportunity sets weaken the relationship between managerial
ownership on
firm value, and
investment opportunity set strengthens the relationship between capital
structure on
firm value. This research's objective was to
ascertain if the investment opportunity set enhances both the direct and
indirect impacts of Profitability, managerial Ownership, and capital
structure on firm value. Based on the
conclusions and limitations that exist, there are several suggestions
addressed to parties related to research regarding the role of investment
opportunity sets in moderating Profitability, managerial Ownership, and
capital structure on firm value. |
Introduction
Investment in the property and real
estate industry has a long term and may develop in step with economic trends,
making it a viable investment. The property industry is resistant to various
circumstances, including digital disruption. In fact, during the Covid-19
pandemic, property prices tended to rise. Indonesia's property and real estate
market is beginning to show signs of improvement, which is in line with the
recovery of the economic sector and people's activities gradually returning to
normal. Based on the Commercial Property Development report (PPKOM) issued by
Bank Indonesia, demand for commercial property in quarters 1-2022 showed an
increase of 1.19 per cent from the previous year (Kompas Indonesia, 2022).
Although the growth is still very limited after being affected by the Covid-19 pandemic
for the last two years, it is because public consumption
has not recovered. This can be seen during the first nine months of 2021. Household consumption (RT) has only grown
by 1.50% (YoY) (CNBC Indonesia, 2021).
The investor's evaluation of a
company is known as a firm value and is frequently linked to stock prices. Firm
value and stock price are positively correlated, meaning that when stock prices
rise, so does the worth of a firm. Investors will use the company's valuation
to gauge its performance over the next few years. One foundation for evaluating
a firm's success is kept on its value. Apart from that, it can also
be an index of the market assessment of a company as a whole (Rizqi & Anwar, 2021).
Figure 1. Graph of Valuation of Businesses in the
Property and Real Estate Subsector
Source: Property and Real Estate Companies
Financial Report, 2022
Graph 1 above
shows the firm value, which fluctuates every year. PT Binakarya Jaya Abadi in
2018 was at 0.78 and then increased to 0.79 in 2019. It experienced an increase
in 2020 to 1.14 and decreased in 2021 to 1.10. PT Intiland Development Tbk in
2018 was at 0.77 and decreased to 0.69 in 2019. In 2020 it increased to 0.76
and decreased again in 2021 to 0.73. There was fluctuation at PT Fortune Mate
Indonesia Tbk, which showed that in 2018 it was at 2.31, then decreased in 2019
to 1.73, experiencing a significant increase to 2.38 in 2020 and 1.46 in 2021.
This phenomenon is caused by the market's fluctuation in share prices, which is
determined by profitability and other factors such as managerial ownership and
capital structure.
A company's good
or bad condition is assessed from its financial performance by analyzing
financial ratios, one of which is the profitability ratio. Profitability is a
ratio that illustrates how successfully a business uses its resources and
operates (Brigham & Houston, 2013). This profitability is a matter for
consideration by potential investors and shareholders because it relates to the
share price and dividends to be received. The better a corporation can use its
current resources or assets to create revenues, the higher its profitability
will be, creating high corporate value and maximizing dividends to its
shareholder. Several studies on profitability have been carried out, but with
varying and inconsistent results. Research conducted by (Mubyarto, 2020) says profitability
significantly impacts the stock price. It has been persistent to findings by
Natalia (Natalia & Jonnardi., 2022) that Prosperity
has a favourable and considerable impact on the worth of a business. These
findings, however, go counter to Thaib's research, which found no evidence of a
substantial relationship between profitability and business value.
Management stock
ownership is the amount of common stock to which management is a shareholder.
The managerial choices made for the organization will be reviewed as a result
of management ownership. Management stock shareholding is the ratio of common
property stock belonged by management. The judgments made by the corporate
management would be scrutinized because of management ownership. According to
empirical data from Anggraini and Fasridon's study, managerial ownership
structure affects business value (2021). Evidence that contradicts the
research's conclusion that management shareholding does not impact business
value includes (Nurkhin, Wahyudin, & Fajriah, 2017).
Owner's equity,
short-term debt, current liabilities, and other sources of funding that support
long-term assets make up the capital structure (Wari & Trisnaningsih, 2021). Here, DER
represents the balance sheet. DER has a portion used to calculate debt and
equity. The amount can be calculated by comparing all debts classified as
current debt with all equity. The capital structure in a company is a crucial
consideration in making decisions in the financial sector. Companies can get
funding from internal parties and external parties. Internal capital structure
is obtained from the sale of shares and retained earnings.
Meanwhile, the
external capital structure provides credit from investors or other parties such
as banks (Savitri & Irwansyah, 2021). Research conducted by� (Susanti, Mintarti, & Asmapane, 2018) and (Mudjijah, Khalid, & Astuti, 2019) claims that Capital structure has a detrimental effect on the business
worth. According to research (Irawan & Kusuma, 2019), capital
arrangement does not influence a firm's worth.
Currently, the
firm's financing possibilities in the financial system are favourable and
influence how profitability, management ownership, and capital structure affect
firm value. The Investment Opportunity Set (IOS) can affect how managers,
investors, and creditors see the firm. The stock market value indicator used to
determine a firm's worth is heavily impacted by investment opportunities. An
investment opportunity set (IOS) is a future business opportunity anticipated
to generate a sufficient return to raise the company's worth (Fitriyah, 2019).
These phenomena and research gaps lead to problems of
consistency in the findings of studies examining the influencing of
profitability, corporate shareholding, and market assessment in accounting
records, indicating the existence of contingent variables that impact the
connection to the three. The investment opportunity set is used in this study
as a moderating variable, which distinguishes it from earlier studies. The
purpose of that kind of study was to examine and evaluate whether (1) profitability
has a positive effect on firm value, (2) managerial ownership has a positive
effect on firm value, (3) capital structure has a positive effect on firm
value, (4) IOS strengthens the relationship between profitability on firm
value, (5) IOS strengthens the relationship between managerial ownership on
firm value and (6) IOS strengthens the relationship between capital structure
on firm value. For the year 2018�2021,
the sample consists of the enterprises registered to the Indonesia Stock
Exchange are the residential and commercial property industries. Research on
profitability, management ownership, capital structure, and investment
opportunity sets is anticipated to contribute to the academic literature. It
will also enlighten academics and researchers. The knowledge regarding the
things that may be done by the business to raise firm value is anticipated to
be the practical contribution of this study.
A.
Agency Theory
Jensen and Meckling (1976)
identified the company's connection, whereas a legal agreement to
management (agent) and the investor (principal). Due to the potential for the
agent to act contrary to the interests of the principal, resulting in agency
fees, the owner and the agent have a conflict of interest. In agency theory,
conflicts are typically brought on by decision-makers who refrain from taking
risks due to poor decisions. The risk should be absorbed by the shareholders,
according to the decision-makers. This causes the managers' and the
shareholders' interests to be out of sync. A party hired by shareholders to
represent their interests is called management. Because of this, management is
held accountable to shareholders for all of its activities. The agent is seen
to behave in a way that is consistent with the interests of the shareholders if
both sides have the same objective of increasing the company's worth. Conflicts
between shareholders and firm management can be mitigated by requiring managers
to get the firm in line
by attracting
shareholders and managers to get choices under
the objectives of stockholders (Sri Wahyuni, Dev, Rifki Khoirudin, & Dev, 2020).
B.
Signalling Theory
The theory is
explicitly designed to be employed in an endeavour to increase the worth of the
firm. Signal Theory was proposed for the first time (Ross, 1977). According to signalling theory, the firm's
investment choices will send a positive message about its future development,
driving up the share price on the stock exchange, which has given size to the firm's worth (Wulanningsih & Agustin, 2020). This theory
explains that companies that have good quality in the market can also give good
signals to the company. Due to this, businesses must maximize their financial
performance consistently. That way, investors can get a return on the
investment made. The link between signal theory and firm value is where the firm gives investors positive signalling invaluable data. With the signal in
the form of good information, investors will likely be interested, so
investment decisions will increase. Additionally, operational profit will rise,
and creditors will feel more comfortable lending the business money in debt.
C. The pecking order theory
According to the pecking order
idea, businesses favour internal money over external capital, particular debt
over risky debt, and common stock as a last resort (Miner, 2005). The
proposal of the chain of importance idea (Myers & Majluf, 1984)
adopts the premise that there is no fixed goal proportion of shareholder equity
and that the company has a hierarchy of preferred funding sources. This
theory's central tenet is that there are two kinds of capital: internal and
external. This idea explains why successful businesses often take on modest
levels of debt. This is not because businesses have a low goal-debt ratio; they
only need a little outside funding. Due to two factors, namely (1) limited
internal funding and (2) debt being the preferable external source, less
profitable companies will often employ higher debt levels. As a result, the
pecking order hypothesis establishes a hierarchy of funding sources, including
internal (retained earnings) and external sources (debt and stocks). Myers
(1984) also argued that the management and shareholder knowledge gaps are to
blame for using external sources. Because management has access to more
information than shareholders, information asymmetry exists.
D. Trade-off theory
In line with the trade-off
argument put out by �(Myers & Majluf, 1984),
Companies will take on debt up to a point where the risk of financial
difficulty outweighs the tax benefits (tax shields) from further debt
(financial distress). The cost of bankruptcy (bankruptcy costs), reorganization
(reorganization costs), and agency expenses (agency costs), which rise as a
result of a company's loss of credibility, are the costs of economic hardship. By presumption of balanced
economic justification and symmetric information, the advantages of borrowing
money are just a few of the factors taken into account by taxes, agency fees,
and costs related to financial difficulties when calculating the optimum
capital structure. As long as the benefits exceed the drawbacks, taking on more
debt is still appropriate.
E.
Firm Value
When a corporation is traded to
interested parties or stakeholders, high stock prices can also result in high
corporate value or company prices. Firm value is an established view of
investors on the firm's capacity to enhance its skills. In
addition, a high firm value shows how the company's
credibility is running and the firm's prospects for
the future on a going concern basis (Setiadharma & Machali, 2017). To measure the value
of a firm in this research,
researchers used proxies based on price and firm value and proxies based on the
investment that has been used as a measure in measuring firm value, namely
Tobin'Q. In previous research (Murwaningsari & Ardi, 2018) and (Sunardi, Husain, & Kadim, 2020). Tobin's is
determined by The book worth has been counted by multiplying the market price by book value, which
has been derived by computed by dividing equity
by the number of shares remaining.
F.
Profitability
The capacity of a business to
generate income (profit) in a specific amount is known as profitability.
Investors will feel more confident investing in a firm if it is more
profitable. Return on Assets, sometimes known as ROA, is one metric for
profitability. ROA is a ratio
that compares a company's profit or net margin to its total resources or an
average number of assets. Thus, the profitability ratio is a proportion that indicates so much more an asset can
provide net income or profit (Husna & Satria, 2019). How well the business
handles these assets to produce profits may be determined by comparing the
value of assets and net income (Atidhira & Yustina, 2017). Based on this,
this study employs a measurement instrument created with research to calculate
the ratio of return on assets (Husna & Satria, 2019) by contrasting net profit amounts with all assets.
G. Managerial Ownership
Managerial
ownership is part of corporate governance where the manager is involved in
shared ownership or can be called a shareholder. This managerial ownership will
be stated as a percentage based on the percentage of the company's shares that
managers, commissioners, and directors belonged to the year ending. In this paper, it is
assumed that the management would make every effort to serve the interests of
the shareholders the greater the managerial ownership. The management will also
earn if the business is profitable (Bintara, 2018).
H. Capital Structure
The financial system consists of
debt since it determines how much of a company's funding comes from debt, often
known as (debt financing) (Hermuningsih, 2012). According to (Pratiwi, Waruwu, Utomo, & Syahputra, 2019). Personal
assets and lengthy debt are contrasted in capital structure. Capital structure
is a way to compare corporate stock and debt (Danlami, Aliyu,
& Danmaraya, 2018).
Alternatively, the ratio of a stock, both preferred and shared, to debt
instruments on the balance sheet. The percentage of Sustainable long-term
financing using debt and equity, either extraordinary or ordinary, is defined
by capital structure. In order to assess the capital structure of the firm,
this research makes use of a metric established by (Pratiwi et al., 2019), which contrasts a company's debt and assets having the Debt to Equity Ratio as a metric (DER).
I.
Investment Opportunity Sets
The number of investment opportunities companies get
to decide what investments to make in the future (Masruroh & Farid, 2019). The magnitude of
the investment opportunity is influenced by management's perspective on the firm's financial condition and growth prospects. Market to Book Value of
Equity, one of the proxies in IOS, explains how the market evaluates returns or
returns on investment activities in the coming day
concerning the expected return on using company equity. The greater the IOS
ratio, the lower the return in the kind of cash
returns that can be provided to stocks (Hidayah, 2017). The following conceptual framework explains how one
dependent variable, three independent variables, and one moderating variable in
this study relate to one another:
Figure 2. Research Model
Research Source: Research data processed by the author,
2022
J.
The Effect of Profitability on Firm Value
As a
result of its capacity to identify businesses that may provide healthy profits
for shareholders, high profitability might entice investors to invest in them.
According to signal theory, everything a corporation does is a signal, and
investors will take notice of it. Investors will invest in the firm if they
believe it has high future potential, which will raise the stock price. The
stock price will rise in tandem with the company's profits whenever it
experiences an uptick, increasing its worth. The capability of the
business to get higher profits will be shown by the
degree of profitability. The business's prospects will be more robust and more
profitable, and investors will see the business favourably. This is consistent
with research performed by (Mubyarto, 2020), who said that profitability does have a substantial impact on stock
valuation.
Furthermore, (Rizqi & Anwar, 2021) The firm's capacity to create more income will be
shown by a higher degree of profitability. By doing so, the firm's future
possibilities will be enhanced. Its profitability growth will also improve the
company's standing among investors.
H1: Profitability has a positive effect on firm value
K.
The Effect of Managerial Ownership on Firm Value
Managerial Ownership is the
composition of the number of managerial shares in proportion to where
management has the same authority as other shareholders in managing the
company. This managerial ownership aims to reduce agency conflicts because
managers with rights to company shares will work to achieve personal interests.
The high number of managerial shares will affect managers' performance to
improve company performance �(Widyasari, Mukzam, & Prasetya, 2015). Agency theory
states that if the number of managers' shares is high, management will optimize
the use of resources to achieve the company's interests. However, if share
ownership is lower, managers will try to maximize their performance for their
benefit (Nurwahidah, Hunan, & Putra, 2019). Empirical evidence (Kusumawati & Setiawan, 2019), (Nurwahidah et al., 2019), (Widianingsih, 2018), (Susilawati & Rakhman, 2018)
proves that managerial ownership can affect firm value.
Managers have more contributions through share ownership, so managers will
optimize their business so that share values rise and maximize profits to
increase firm value.
H2: Managerial
ownership has a positive effect on firm value
L.
The Effect of Capital Structure on Firm Value
According to the trade-off idea, if the financial
leverage is below the target level, every dollar of new debt will raise the
firm's worth. On the other hand, if any additional financial leverage is
outside the appropriate range, debt will decrease the firm's market value (Myers & Majluf, 1984). The trade-off theory, therefore, anticipates a
positive determinant of capital structure and firm value
when the appropriate financing target point has not been attained. The firm
must carefully evaluate the capital structure used for funding since It will
affect how much the firm is worth. The financial leverage compares the levels
of long-term debt and shareholder capital. Since taxes are calculated from
operational profit after deducting loan interest, which results in a more
significant net profit that belongs to shareholders, businesses that use debt
in their operations will benefit from tax savings (Meythi, 2012). The firm's value will increase with its capital structure for that outcome.
However, a company cannot simultaneously use all debt in its capital structure.
This results from the fact that when debt levels rise, so does the organization's
financial risk. Empirical evidence (Dahar, Yanti, & Rahmi, 2019), (Savitri & Irwansyah, 2021), and (Firnaliyanti, Mintarti, & Asmapane, 2019) substantiates
The significance of a corporation's capital structure on profitability.
H3: Capital structure has a positive effect on firm
value
M.
Investment
Opportunity Set Strengthens The Relationship Between Profitability on Firm Value
The market may have
informed which corporation can effectively
manage its resources if it experiences high corporate profits. The amount of
money available to the firm for investment and retained earnings will rise as
profitability exists. The pecking order idea states that businesses with
high-profit margins have more internal financing sources. A high level of
business earnings might allow management to set aside money for significant
investments. Investment decisions made by the firm may signal to the market
that substantial profits will be generated in the future, increasing the share
price. The company has strong business prospects for the future due to its high
degree of profitability and wide range of investment opportunities, which
exudes confidence among investors and influences the company's stock price (Risqi
et al., in Habibi and Andreany, 2018). Wijaya and Sedana's (2017) and Habibi
and Andreany's (2018) research findings demonstrate that IOS increases the link
between profitability and business value.
H4: Investment opportunity set strengthens profitability on firm value
N.
Investment Opportunity Set Strengthens The Relationship
Between Managerial
Ownership on Firm Value
Managerial ownership illustrates the dual function of management, who simultaneously serves as a shareholder. Of course,
managers want the business to avoid financial troubles or bankruptcy as
management and stakeholder (Tarjo & Jogiyanto, 2020). If there are several
manager shares, management will use resources as efficiently as possible to
further distinct corporate interests. This will raise the company's worth. The
impact of managerial control over the firm value will be strengthened by a high
investment opportunity set (IOS). Managerial parties will favour taking
advantage of the chance to invest and profit. Khairun's (2018) and Andri and
Dewi's (2019) research results prove that IOS strengthens the connection
between ownership concentration and enterprise value.
H5: Investment opportunity set strengthens managerial
ownership on firm value
O.
Investment Opportunity Set Strengthens the Relationship between
Capital Structure on Firm Value
The option of whether to employ
internal or external sources of funding is left up to the firm. According to
the pecking order idea, the firms' top options are retained profits, debt, and
securities funding sources. Retained profits are a tool that managers may
employ to fund daily operations. Investment operations are carried out to seize
possibilities for potential future earnings. It is intended that the firm would
expand through reinvestment. The share demand will rise as soon as investors
believe the firm has promising future possibilities, increasing the business's
valuation. It has consistent with research undertaken by (Nurcahyani, 2019) and (Suardika & Sparta, 2017), which
claim that when a business expands, it needs cash. Growing businesses will have
more access to financing. As a result, the rise in capital in a firm will
correspond to the number of investment possibilities the company owns.
H6: Investment
opportunity set
strengthens capital structure on firm value
Method
This
kind of study, known as causality research, looks at the connections between
different variables using data from earlier studies. The research's objective is to determine the
effect of business valuation, tempered to the investment opportunity
set, on profitability, management ownership, and capital structure. An
organization Companies that traded on the Indonesia Stock Exchange between 2018
and 2021 functioned as the measure of measure in this research. This quantitative
research utilizes
secondary data from the banking statements of firms that act as sampling and
are selected for a specific reason�operational variable analysis of the connection among business value and profitability,
managerial ownership, and capital structure.
Table
1. Operational Definition and Variable Measurement
Dependent Variable |
Scale |
Firm Value Investors'
perceptions of how businesses might improve their chances of success are
frequently linked to stock prices. High stock prices can also result in a
high corporate value or company prices if sold to interested parties or
stakeholders (Murwaningsari & Ardi, 2018). � |
Ratio |
Independent Variable |
Scale |
Profitability How
well the business handles these assets to produce profits may be determined
by comparing the value of assets and net income. (Atidhira & Yustina, 2017). Managerial Ownership percentage
of management shares owned by those with voting rights in the firm
(commissioners and directors) (Nurkhin et al., 2017). Capital Structure Proportion
in fulfilling company spending needs with long-term funding sources
originating from internal funds and external funds (Savitri & Irwansyah, 2021). |
Ratio |
Moderating Variable |
|
Investment
Opportunity Sets The number of investment
alternatives that businesses have to choose from when determining future
investments (Masruroh & Farid, 2019). |
Ratio |
Source:
Research data processed by the author, 2022
When two
or more independent variables are changed in value to serve as predictor
factors (those up and down) in this study's research, multiple linear analytic
methods are used to determine how the state of the predictor variables (up and
down) will be (Sugiyono, 2017). The regression
coefficient will be utilized in multiple regression analysis to evaluate whether
the hypothesis is accepted or rejected (Ghozali, 2018). Multiple linear regression
analysis is made to aim effecting of revenues and profits,
managerial ownership, and capital structure on firm value and to ascertain if the investment
opportunity set may enhance the link between Profitability, Ownership, and
capital structure. The interaction test, specifically moderated regression
analysis, is employed to examine the effect of moderating factors (MRA). The
following is the regression equation model that will be looked at:
Y = α + β1P + β2MO + β3CS +β4P*IOS +
β5MO*CS + β6CS*IOS + е
Information:
α:
Constant
β:
regression coefficient
Y:
Firm Value (Dependent
variable)
P: Profitability
MO: Managerial Ownership
CS: Capital Structure
е:
error coefficient
Results
and Discussion
The population in this study comprises
65 sub-property and real estate firms registered on the Indonesia Stock
Exchange (IDX) from 2018 to 2021. The sample is a subset of the population, and
this population's characteristics are estimated. The sampling approach uses a
purposive sampling technique by defining the sample according to the following
criteria.
Table 2. Purposive Sampling
Criteria
No |
Information |
Total |
1 |
Number
of property and real estate companies on the IDX in the 2018-2021 period |
65 |
2 |
Companies
that do not publish complete data for the 2018-2021 period |
(45) |
3 |
Companies
that were delisted during the study period |
(5) |
|
The
number of sample companies used |
15 |
|
Number
of years of research |
4 |
|
Final sample |
60 |
Source: Research data processed by the author, 2022
The table below
explains the broad characteristics of the data without changing the study's
conclusions. Each variable underwent a descriptive statistical analysis. The
lowest, maximum, average, and standard deviation data from this investigation
were included in the analysis.
Table
3. Descriptive Statistics
|
N |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
P |
60 |
,00 |
,15 |
,0402 |
,03793 |
MO |
60 |
,00 |
,82 |
,1400 |
,21715 |
CS |
60 |
,08 |
1,73 |
,5753 |
,42357 |
FV |
60 |
,22 |
3,75 |
,9193 |
,69049 |
IOS |
60 |
,15 |
4,73 |
,8793 |
,94305 |
Valid
N (listwise) |
45 |
|
|
|
|
Source:
Research data processed by the author, 2022
Profitability (P) is measured using a
proxy return on assets (ROA) which gets a min value of 0.00, a max value of
0.15, an average value (mean) of 0.0402, and a standard deviation value of
0.3793. Managerial Ownership (MO) gets a min value of 0.00, a max value of
0.82, an average value of 0.1400, and a standard deviation of 0.21715. Capital
structure (CS) is calculated by using a debt-to-equity ratio (DER) proxy with a
min value of 0.08, a max value of 1.73, an average value (mean) of 0.5753, and
a standard deviation value of 0.42357. Firm value (FV) is counted by having
Tobin's Q proxy with a min value of 0.22, a max value of 3.75, an average value
(mean) of 0.9193, and a standard deviation value of 0.69049. The investment
opportunity set (IOS) has a min value of 0.15, a max value of 4.73, an average
value of 0.8793, and a standard deviation of 0.94305.
A. Normality test
The variables in
this research satisfy the criteria of normality, as evidenced by the fact that
the data on the p-plot graph are distributed, encircle the diagonal line and go
forward in the same direction as the diagonal line.
Figure 3. Normal P-Plot Regression Standardized Residuals
Source:
Researcher data, processed in 2022
Researchers also
conducted a normality test with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test. The outcome of
data management using the below are obtained:
Table 4. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov
Test |
||
|
Unstandardized Residual |
|
N |
45 |
|
Normal
Parameters,b |
Mean |
,0000000 |
Std.
Deviation |
,02305062 |
|
Most
Extreme Differences |
Absolute |
,111 |
Positive |
,063 |
|
Negative |
-,111 |
|
Test
Statistic |
,111 |
|
Asymp.
Sig. (2-tailed) |
,200c,d |
|
a.
Standard is the test allocation. |
||
b.
Derived by the information. |
||
c.
Lilliefors Significance Correction. |
||
d.
This represents the minimum level of importance. |
Source: Researcher data, processed in 2022
Testing with Kolmogorov-Smirnov shows the probability (significance) of
testing is more significant than 0.05, namely 0.200. This demonstrates the normal
distribution of the data.
B.
Multicollinearity Test
Table 5.
Coefficients
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
Collinearity Statistics |
|||
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
Tolerance |
VIF |
||
1 |
(Constant) |
,098 |
,015 |
|
|
|
P |
,229 |
,186 |
,012 |
,289 |
3,461 |
|
MO |
,090 |
,040 |
,021 |
,302 |
3,310 |
|
CS |
,331 |
,020 |
,183 |
,214 |
4,681 |
|
IOS |
,852 |
,015 |
1,160 |
,062 |
16,145 |
|
P*IOS |
-,019 |
,098 |
-,003 |
,124 |
8,088 |
|
MO*IOS |
-,051 |
,046 |
-,010 |
,330 |
3,030 |
|
CS*IOS |
-,291 |
,028 |
-,176 |
,092 |
10,850 |
|
a.
Dependent Variable: FV |
Source: Researcher data, processed in 2022
As seen in the outcome in the table above, the calculated VIF value for
the investment opportunity set variable, capital structure*investment
opportunity set, has a value exceeding ten. The two parameters' reliability
coefficient is less than 0.10, indicating that there are symptoms of
multicollinearity in this study, however, according to Gujarati (2009). If the
study has a moderating variable, this is considered reasonable. This is because
the nature of moderation mutually reinforces the interaction between the
independent variables.
C. Heteroscedasticity Test
Table 6. Nonparametric correlations
|
P |
MO |
CS |
IOS |
Unstandardized Residual |
||
Spearman's rho |
P |
Correlation
Coefficient |
1,000 |
-,130 |
-,363* |
,281 |
,004 |
Sig.
(2-tailed) |
. |
,394 |
,014 |
,061 |
,981 |
||
N |
45 |
45 |
45 |
45 |
45 |
||
MO |
Correlation
Coefficient |
-,130 |
1,000 |
,355** |
-,298* |
,252 |
|
Sig.
(2-tailed) |
,394 |
. |
,005 |
,021 |
,095 |
||
N |
45 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
45 |
||
CS |
Correlation
Coefficient |
-,363* |
,355** |
1,000 |
,103 |
,129 |
|
Sig.
(2-tailed) |
,014 |
,005 |
. |
,432 |
,399 |
||
N |
45 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
45 |
||
IOS |
Correlation
Coefficient |
,281 |
-,298* |
,103 |
1,000 |
,084 |
|
Sig.
(2-tailed) |
,061 |
,021 |
,432 |
. |
,585 |
||
N |
45 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
45 |
||
Unstandardized
Residual |
Correlation
Coefficient |
,004 |
,252 |
,129 |
,084 |
1,000 |
|
Sig.
(2-tailed) |
,981 |
,095 |
,399 |
,585 |
. |
||
N |
45 |
45 |
45 |
45 |
45 |
||
*.
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). |
|||||||
**.
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). |
Source: Researcher data,
processed in 2022
The heteroscedasticity test using Spearman's Rank Correlation test states
that profitability has a significance value of 0.981>0.05, managerial
Ownership with a value of 0.095>0.05, and Capital Structure 0.399>0.05,
so it can be said to be free from heteroscedasticity.
D. MRA Test
Table 7. Test Results
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
|
||
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
|
|
|
||
1 |
(Constant) |
,098 |
,015 |
|
6,658 |
,000 |
|
P |
,229 |
,186 |
,012 |
1,234 |
,225 |
|
|
MO |
,090 |
,040 |
,021 |
2,248 |
,031 |
|
|
CS |
,331 |
,020 |
,183 |
16,779 |
,000 |
|
|
IOS |
,852 |
,015 |
1,160 |
57,107 |
,000 |
|
|
P*IOS |
-,019 |
,098 |
-,003 |
-,191 |
,849 |
|
|
MO*IOS |
-,051 |
,046 |
-,010 |
-1,121 |
,270 |
|
|
CS*IOS |
-,291 |
,028 |
-,176 |
-10,544 |
,000 |
|
|
|
F
Test |
5587,849 |
|
||||
|
Sig
F |
,000 |
|
||||
|
Adjusted
R Square |
0,899 |
|
||||
a.
Dependent Variable: FV |
Source: Researcher data,
processed in 2022
Under table 7, the regression equation
is as follows:
Y=0.098+0.229P+0.090MO+0.331CS+(0.019)P*IOS+(0.051)MO*CS+(0.291)CS*IOS
The outcomes in
table 5, the Adjusted R Square value in this study shows the number 0.999,
meaning that the variables of Profitability, managerial Ownership, capital
structure, P*IOS, MO*IOS, and CS*IOS have an 89,9% effect on firm value. The
remaining 10.1% is affected by additional factors not looked at in this
research. The outcome of the ANOVA test on the F statistic is 5587,849, with
information in table F of 2.19. The test results are 55587.849>2.19 with a
significance level of 0.000. The outcome is that Profitability, managerial
Ownership, capital structure, P*IOS, MO*IOS, and CS*IOS have a significant
overall or simultaneous effect on business.
As seen in the
outcome in the table above, the profitability significance value shows
0.225>0.05. These findings support the assertion that profitability has no
bearing on corporate value. Therefore, H1 is rejected, meaning that
profitability does not affect the firm value. This shows that investors do not
only rely on ROA as a metric for evaluating business performance to forecast
overall stock returns on the capital market (particularly on the IDX).
Therefore, this ROA does not ensure growth in share price or firm value from
investors. In addition, there is a tendency for investors to prefer to make
short-term investments (trading) so that they pay less attention to other
aspects, such as profitability when buying company shares because they look
more at market conditions when they want to buy or sell their shares so that
profitability is not impacting firm value in this research. The outcome of this
research concurs with those of research (Savitri & Irwansyah, 2021) which shows that A
return on assets does not affect its worth. This demonstrates that the
company's profit margin does not alter the company's worth. ROA is used in this
study as a stand-in for variable profitability. The quantity of a company's
profit-generating resources cannot affect the firm's value.
According to the
outcome of the table above, the number 0.031 > 0.05 exemplifies the
significance of management ownership. According to these data, The component of
profitability affects the firm's profitability. Therefore, H2 is
accepted, indicating that corporate governance has a considerable beneficial
effect on firm value by a greater degree of managerial ownership correlating
with a higher level of firm value. These findings are consistent with agency
theory, which holds that management would maximize resource usage to further
the organization's interests if the number of managers' shares is high. Each
firm manager might attempt to maximize the value or profit created in
decision-making by taking into account the influence of managerial ownership to
impact raising the value of a company. Empirical data from earlier studies also
demonstrate that Managerial shareholding substantially impacts business value.
Previous studies that looked at how management ownership affected corporate
value were done by (Kusumawati & Setiawan, 2019),(Nurwahidah et al., 2019), (Widianingsih, 2018) (Susilawati & Rakhman, 2018) who assert that
management ownership positively impacts corporate value.
The
significant value of the capital structure displays the value 0.000>0.05
based on the outcome in the table above. Based on these findings, capital
structure enhances business value. Therefore H3 is accepted,
implying that financial leverage affects firm value positively. The worth of
the business will rise along with the capital structure. Because investors view
debt as an indication that a company has potential future development
prospects, this study shows that increasing debt usage is about enhancing a
firm's value. The trade-off hypothesis, which claims that any additional debt
would lower a firm value if its capital structure is out of balance, supports
this study. According to capital structure theory, there should not be any
issues as long as the company can balance the benefits and drawbacks of debt.
Thus, a large capital structure combined with effective management can boost
profitability and initial returns. This outcome is having the past study
determined by (Dahar et al.,
2019), (Savitri &
Irwansyah, 2021), and (Firnaliyanti et
al., 2019),
which demonstrates that capital structure affects firm value positively.
Based on the outcomes above, the significance value of
profitability*IOS shows 0.849>0.05. These results conclude that the
profitability*IOS variable has no impact on firm value. Therefore H4
is rejected, meaning that IOS weakens The relationship between profitability
and firm value. This finding contradicts the pecking order theory, which holds
that enterprises with more significant profit margins have more internal
financing sources. A high level of corporate profits can also allow management
to allocate funds for high investments. This is caused by managers who prefer
to invest in trading, so they pay less attention to other aspects, such as
profitability. They look more at market conditions when buying or selling
shares. This theory is inconsistent with research conducted (Kurniawan &
Maemanah, 2020)
which proves that IOS strengthens The relationship between profitability and
corporate value. These outcomes, however, are consistent with previous research
by (Haya, Andini,
Nassau, Siregar, & Wulandari, 2022), who in their
research said that IOS was unable to strengthen the link between corporate
profitability and worth.
The table above
shows the significant value of managerial ownership*IOS shows 0.270>0.05.
According to these data, the variable management ownership*IOS does not
influence the firm's worth. Therefore, H5 is rejected, meaning that
IOS weakens the relationship between profitability and firm value. This result
rejects previous research conducted by Khairun (2018) and Andri and Dewi
(2019), which stated that a high investment opportunity set (IOS) would strengthen
the effect of managerial ownership on firm value. From the results obtained in
this study, the agency theory of managerial share ownership cannot minimize
agency problems because the interests of managers who hold firm shares differ
from those of ordinary investors. The degree of management ownership cannot
prevent agency interactions and cannot align the interests of managers and
investors. Therefore, more than high management ownership is required to entice
investors to invest and earn returns. The outcome of the investigation is
helped by research examined by Chandra (2020).
The significant value of the capital structure*IOS indicates the number
0.000>0.05 based on the outcomes above. According to these findings, the
variable capital structure*IOS significantly and negatively affects business
value. Therefore, H6 is accepted. In other words, the IOS variable
can strengthen the connection between capital structure and firm value. The
Pecking order hypothesis asserts that a company's growth potential influences
its capital structure (Seftianne & Handayani, 2017). When the company
grows, the company requires considerable capital. Growing companies will have
more excellent opportunities to borrow funds. Therefore, the increase in
capital in a company will align with the number of investment opportunities
owned by the company. Companies with high growth opportunities and capabilities
will have high investment opportunities, resulting in high funding
requirements. The company's internal funds need to be increased (Herdinata
(2019). Optimal capital structure arises because of the fulfilment of funds
using debt. The best capital structure will boost business earnings and
increase stock prices. This finding is consistent with an earlier study by
Wayan (2019) and Suardhika (2017), which found that when a firm grows, its
profitability increases and the company requires considerable capital. Growing
companies will have more excellent opportunities to borrow funds. As a result,
a company's rise in capital will correspond to the number of investment
opportunities it now has.
Conclusion
This research's objective was to
ascertain if the investment opportunity set enhances both the direct and
indirect impacts of Profitability, managerial Ownership, and capital structure
on firm value. It is concluded from the
data analysis results mentioned in the discussion that (1) profitability does
not affect firm value, (2) managerial ownership has a positive effect on firm
value, (3) capital structure has a positive effect on firm value, (4) IOS
weakens the relationship between profitability on firm value, (5) IOS weakens the
relationship between managerial ownership on firm value and (6) IOS strengthens the relationship
between capital structure on firm value.
Based on the
conclusions and limitations that exist, there are several suggestions addressed
to parties related to research regarding the role of investment opportunity
sets in moderating Profitability, managerial Ownership, and capital structure
on firm value, namely: (1) Further research should increase the research period
because in This research is only 4 (four) years, from 2018-2021 and only gets
15 companies as samples. (2) Investors are advised to study and examine all
information related to managerial Ownership, ROA, and DER when investing in the
company so that investors do not suffer losses and get maximum profits. (3)
Future researchers can use other independent variables related to this
research, it is hoped that such as independent commissioners and institutional
ownership, so that they can form a research model that better explains the
factors that influence firm value.
Atidhira, Agung
Tri, & Yustina, Andi Ina. (2017). The influence of return on asset, debt to
equity ratio, earnings per share, and company size on share return in property
and real estate companies. JAAF (Journal of Applied Accounting and Finance),
1(2), 128�146. Google Scholar
Bintara,
Rista. (2018). Pengaruh profitabilitas, growth opportunity, dan struktur modal
terhadap nilai perusahaan dengan good corporate governance sebagai variabel
pemoderasi (Studi empiris pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di Bursa
Efek Indonesia tahun 2012-2015). Profita: Komunikasi Ilmiah Dan Perpajakan,
11(2), 306�328. Google Scholar
�
CNBC
Indonesia. (2021). CNBC Indonesia. Google Scholar
Dahar,
Reni, Yanti, Nino Sri Purnama, & Rahmi, Fitria. (2019). Pengaruh Struktur
Modal, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Return On Equity Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan
Property And Real Estate yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal
Ekonomi Dan Bisnis Dharma Andalas, 21(1), 121�132. Google Scholar
Dalam
Sugiyono, Suriasumantri. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif,
dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta, CV.� Google Scholar
Danlami,
Abubakar Hamid, Aliyu, Sirajo, & Danmaraya, Ismail Aliyu. (2018). Energy
production, carbon emissions, and economic growth in lower-middle-income
countries. International Journal of Social Economics. Google Scholar
Firnaliyanti,
Avinda Agustina, Mintarti, Sri, & Asmapane, Set. (2019). Pengaruh
Intellectual Capital terhadap Pertumbuhan Laba dan Nilai Pasar Saham Perusahaan
Properti dan Real Estate yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu
Akuntansi Mulawarman (JIAM), 4(3). Google Scholar
Fitriyah.
(2019). Pengaruh Sustainability Report dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan dengan Investment Opportunity Set Sebagai Variabel Moderating. Google Scholar
Ghozali,
Imam. (2018). Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 25. Google Scholar
Haya,
Salwa Fadhilah, Andini, Risfa Dwi, Nasyaa, Sultan Rasy, Siregar, Iyas Alwi,
& Wulandari, Sari. (2022). Economic Development Planning in Medan City. Jurnal
Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi Review, 2(2), 533�546. Google Scholar
Hermuningsih,
Sri. (2012). Pengaruh profitabilitas, size terhadap nilai perusahaan dengan
sruktur modal sebagai variabel intervening. Jurnal Siasat Bisnis, 16(2). Google Scholar
Hidayah,
Khoirul. (2017). Hukum Hak Kekayaan Intelektual. Setara Press. Google Scholar
Husna,
Asmaul, & Satria, Ibnu. (2019). Effects of return on asset, debt to asset
ratio, current ratio, firm size, and dividend payout ratio on firm value. International
Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 9(5), 50. Google Scholar
Irawan,
Dedi, & Kusuma, Nurhadi. (2019). Pengaruh Struktur Modal Dan Ukuran
Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Aktual, 17(1),
66�81. Google Scholar
Kurniawan,
Rachmad Risqy, & Maemanah, Arina. (2020). Praktek Bunga Majemuk Rentenir
dan Larangannya Dalam Perspektif Ekonomi Islam. Jurnal Ilmu Al Quran Dan
Tafsir, 3. Google Scholar
Kusumawati,
Eny, & Setiawan, Adi. (2019). The Effect of Managerial Ownership,
Institutional Ownership, Company Growth, Liquidity, and Profitability on
Company Value. Riset Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, 4(2),
136�146. Google Scholar
Masruroh,
Izzah, & Farid, Muhammad. (2019). Pengaruh Pengelolaan Ekonomi Produktif
dalam Mengentaskan Kemiskinan di Kota Lumajang Studi pada Badan Amil Zakat
Nasional (BAZNAS) Kabupaten Lumajang. Iqtishoduna: Jurnal Ekonomi Islam,
8(1), 209�229. Google Scholar
Meythi,
Meythi. (2012). Dampak interaksi antara kebijakan utang dan kebijakan dividen
dalam menilai perusahaan. Jurnal Keuangan Dan Perbankan, 16(3). Google Scholar
Miner,
John B. (2005). Organizational Behavior: Essential theories of motivation
and leadership. one (Vol. 1). ME Sharpe. Google Scholar
Quarto,
N. (2020). The Influence of Profitability on Firm Value using Capital Structure
As The Mediator. Jurnal Ekonomia, 16(2). Google Scholar
Mudjijah,
Slamet, Khalid, Zulvia, & Astuti, Diah Ayu Sekar. (2019). Pengaruh kinerja
keuangan dan struktur modal terhadap nilai perusahaan yang dimoderasi variabel
ukuran perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 8(1), 41�56. Google Scholar
Murwaningsari,
E., & Ardi, S. (2018). Financial Performance Determination, Earnings
Quality, Intellectual Capital, and Company Value. South
East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business. Economics and Law, 15(5),
1�16. Google Scholar
Myers,
S. C., & Majluf, Nicholas S. (1984). Corporate financing and investment
decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of
Financial Economics, 13(2), 187�221. Google Scholar
Natalia
& Jonnardi. (2022). Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Struktur Modal, dan
Likuiditas Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Google Scholar
Nurcahyani,
Endang. (2019). Analisis Kandungan Karbohidrat Terlarut Total Planlet Buncis
(Phaseolus Vulgaris L.) Menggunakan Metode Fenol-Sulfur Secara in Vitro. Analit:
Analytical and Environmental Chemistry, 4(1), 73�80. Google Scholar
Nurkhin,
Ahmad, Wahyudin, Agus, & Fajriah, Anisa Septiani Aenul. (2017). Relevansi
struktur kepemilikan terhadap profitabilitas dan nilai perusahaan barang
konsumsi. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 8(1), 35�46. Google Scholar
Nurwahidah,
Nurwahidah, Husnan, Lalu Hamdani, & Putra, I. (2019). Artikel 38: Pengaruh
Kepemilikan Manajerial Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Struktur Modaldan
Profitabilitas Sebagai Variabel Intervening Pada Perusahaan Real Estate Di
Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Magister Manajemen (JMM), 8(4),
363�377. Google Scholar
Pratiwi,
Fadila, Waruwu, Fince Tinus, Utomo, Dito Putro, & Syahputra, Rian. (2019).
Penerapan Metode ARAS Dalam Pemilihan Asisten Perkebunan Terbaik Pada PTPN V. Seminar
Nasional Teknologi Komputer & Sains (SAINTEKS), 1(1). Google Scholar
Rizqi,
LItausiil, & Anwar, Muhadjir. (2021). Analisis Nilai Perusahaan Property
Dan Real Estate Bursa Efek Indonesia. E-Bisnis: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Dan
Bisnis, 14(2), 30�39. Google Scholar
Ross,
S. A. (1977). The determination of financial structure: the
incentive-signalling approach. The Bell Journal of Economics, pp. 23�40. Google Scholar
Savitri,
Syahnaz, & Irwansyah, Irwansyah. (2021). The Use of Instagram Stories at
the Age of COVID-19 Pandemic. Jurnal Aspikom, 6(1), 182�196. Google Scholar
Setiadharma,
Stephani, & Machali, Muslichah. (2017). The effect of asset structure and
firm size on firm value with capital structure as an intervening variable. Journal
of Business & Financial Affairs, 6(4), 1�5. Google Scholar
Sri
Wahyuni, S. E., Dev, M. Ec, Rifki Khoirudin, S. E., & Dev, M. Ec. (2020). Pengantar
Manajemen Aset. Nas Media Pustaka. Google Scholar
Suardika,
I. Nyoman, & Suparta, I. Wayan Darya. (2017). Aplikasi Simulasi Monte Carlo
untuk Penjadwalan Proyek Konstruksi Menggunakan Microsoft Project. Prosiding
Sentrinov (Seminar Nasional Terapan Riset Inovatif), 3(1), TS194�TS202. Google Scholar
Sunardi,
Nardi, Husain, T., & Kadim, A. (2020). Determinants of Debt Policy and
Company's Performance. International Journal of Economics and Business
Administration, 8(4), 204�213. Google Scholar
Susanti,
Yuli, Mintarti, Sri, & Asmapane, Set. (2018). Pengaruh struktur modal,
kinerja keuangan perusahaan, ukuran perusahaan dan kualitas auditor eksternal
terhadap nilai perusahaan pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di bursa
efek indonesia. Akuntabel, 15(1), 1�11. Google Scholar
Susilawati,
Desi, & Rakhman, Fuad. (2018). The effect of ownership structure and investor
protection on firm value: analyst following as moderating variable.
Muhammadiyah University Yogyakarta. Google Scholar
Wari,
Mega Ardianis, & Trisnaningsih, Sri. (2021). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan
Saham, Struktur Modal, Dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Pada
Perusahaan Farmasi Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) Tahun
2015-2020. JIMAT (Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Akuntansi) Undiksha, 12(3),
968�979. Google Scholar
Widianingsih,
Dewi. (2018). Kepemilikan manajerial, kepemilikan institusional, komisaris
independen, serta komite audit pada nilai perusahaan dengan pengungkapan csr
sebagai variabel moderating dan firm size sebagai variabel kontrol. Jurnal
Akuntansi Dan Pajak, 19(01), 38�52. Google Scholar
Widyasari,
Reni, Mukzam, M. Djudi, & Prasetya, Arik. (2015). Pengaruh pelatihan
terhadap kemampuan dan kinerja karyawan (studi pada karyawan PT. Bank Negara
Indonesia cabang utama Malang). Brawijaya University. Google Scholar
Wulanningsih,
Srirahayu, & Agustin, Henri. (2020). Pengaruh Investment Opportunity Set,
Pertumbuhan Perusahaan Dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal
Eksplorasi Akuntansi, 2(3), 3107�3124. Google Scholar
Garnis Mulya Ningrum, Khomsiyah (2023) |
First publication right : Journal of Business, Social and Technology (Bustechno) |
This article is licensed under the following: |