IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v11y2016i4p240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relationship between Accounting Based Risk and Return: Analysis for Turkish Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Metin Coskun
  • Gulsah Kulali

Abstract

Accounting based risk and return relationship is a relatively incomplete issue, which has mostly been studied under a separate framework from financial markets based risk and return. Researchers find different results for different classifications of companies/industries/time frames. This paper reports the cross-section and panel correlations between accounting risk and return for various industrial company size categories in Turkey. The goal is to show the direction and magnitude of the relationship. When standard deviation is used as a risk measure, significant correlations are typically positive for small & medium sized companies and large companies. The positive relationship is very strong when the performance measure is ROE. All significant correlations become negative for very large sized companies. For each size category, no difference is observed between low-performers and high-performers in terms of significant coefficient signs. However, when we look at the magnitude of coefficients, there are some substantial differences between size categories, and between performance categories. When the risk measure is total debt to total assets ratio, our results show significant negative association between return and risk for all company size categories.

Suggested Citation

  • Metin Coskun & Gulsah Kulali, 2016. "Relationship between Accounting Based Risk and Return: Analysis for Turkish Companies," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(4), pages 240-240, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/54603/31086
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/54603
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fletcher, Jonathan, 2000. "On the conditional relationship between beta and return in international stock returns," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 235-245.
    2. Robert M. Wiseman & Philip Bromiley, 1996. "Toward a Model of Risk in Declining Organizations: An Empirical Examination of Risk, Performance and Decline," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 524-543, October.
    3. Johannes M. Lehner, 2000. "Shifts of Reference Points for Framing of Strategic Decisions and Changing Risk-Return Associations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 63-76, January.
    4. Timothy W. Ruefli & Robert R. Wiggins, 1994. "When Mean Square Error Becomes Variance: A Comment on "Business Risk and Return: A Test of Simultaneous Relationships"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 750-759, June.
    5. Torben J. Andersen & Jerker Denrell & Richard A. Bettis, 2007. "Strategic responsiveness and Bowman's risk–return paradox," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 407-429, April.
    6. Gooding, Richard Z. & Goel, Sanjay & Wiseman, Robert M., 1996. "Fixed versus variable reference points in the risk-return relationship," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 331-350, March.
    7. Deephouse, David L. & Wiseman, Robert M., 2000. "Comparing alternative explanations for accounting risk-return relations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 463-482, August.
    8. James S. Ang & Rebel A. Cole & James Wuh Lin, 2000. "Agency Costs and Ownership Structure," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 81-106, February.
    9. Timothy B. Palmer & Robert M. Wiseman, 1999. "Decoupling risk taking from income stream uncertainty: a holistic model of risk," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(11), pages 1037-1062, November.
    10. Edward H. Bowman, 1984. "Content Analysis of Annual Reports for Corporate Strategy and Risk," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 61-71, February.
    11. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Benjamin M. Oviatt & Alan D. Bauerschmidt, 1991. "Business Risk and Return: A Test of Simultaneous Relationships," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(11), pages 1405-1423, November.
    13. Fleming, Grant & Heaney, Richard & McCosker, Rochelle, 2005. "Agency costs and ownership structure in Australia," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 29-52, January.
    14. Veliyath, Rajaram & Ferris, Stephen P., 1997. "Agency influences on risk reduction and operating performance: An empirical investigation among strategic groups," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 219-230, July.
    15. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    16. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-636, May-June.
    17. Singh, Manohar & Davidson III, Wallace N., 2003. "Agency costs, ownership structure and corporate governance mechanisms," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 793-816, May.
    18. Robert M. Wiseman & Philip Bromiley, 1991. "Risk‐return associations: Paradox or artifact? An empirically tested explanation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 231-241, March.
    19. Sinha, Tapen, 1994. "Prospect theory and the risk return association: Another look," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 225-231, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nickel, Manuel Núñez & Rodriguez, Manuel Cano, 2002. "A review of research on the negative accounting relationship between risk and return: Bowman's paradox," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Henkel, Joachim, 2007. "The Risk-Return Paradox for Strategic Management: Disentangling True and Spurious Effects," CEPR Discussion Papers 6538, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Núñez-Nickel, Manuel & Cano Rodríguez, Manuel, 2002. "Las tres caras del riesgo estratégico: riesgo sistemático, riesgo táctico y riesgo idiosincrásico," DEE - Documentos de Trabajo. Economía de la Empresa. DB db021508, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    4. Farrukh Mahmood & Robert M. Kunst, 2023. "Modeling nonlinear in Bowman’s paradox: the case of Pakistan," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 2357-2372, May.
    5. Núñez-Nickel, Manuel & Cano Rodríguez, Manuel, 2002. "Comportamiento heterocedástico entre rentabilidad y riesgo," DEE - Documentos de Trabajo. Economía de la Empresa. DB db021710, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    6. Díez-Esteban, José María & García-Gómez, Conrado Diego & López-Iturriaga, Félix Javier & Santamaría-Mariscal, Marcos, 2017. "Corporate risk-taking, returns and the nature of major shareholders: Evidence from prospect theory," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 900-911.
    7. Li, Xu & Vermeulen, Freek, 2021. "High risk, low return (and vice versa): the effect of product innovation on firm performance in a transition economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Cano Rodríguez, Manuel & Núñez-Nickel, Manuel, 2002. "Is the risk-return paradox still alive?," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB wb024818, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    9. Ranjan Das Gupta & Rajesh Pathak, 2018. "Firm’s Risk-Return Association Facets and Prospect Theory Findings—An Emerging versus Developed Country Context," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-32, December.
    10. DRAGHICI, Dalis Maria, 2021. "Implementing Quantitative Techniques In Assessing The Risk Attitudes," Studii Financiare (Financial Studies), Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 25(2), pages 64-78, June.
    11. Ooi, Chai-Aun & Hooy, Chee-Wooi, 2022. "Muslim CEOs, risk-taking and firm performance," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    12. Fakhrul Hasan & Umar Nawaz Kayani & Tonmoy Choudhury, 2023. "Behavioral Risk Preferences and Dividend Changes: Exploring the Linkages with Prospect Theory Through Empirical Analysis," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(4), pages 517-535, December.
    13. Johannes M. Lehner, 2000. "Shifts of Reference Points for Framing of Strategic Decisions and Changing Risk-Return Associations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 63-76, January.
    14. Sarkar, Soumodip & Osiyevskyy, Oleksiy, 2018. "Organizational change and rigidity during crisis: A review of the paradox," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 47-58.
    15. Mathias Arrfelt & Michael Mannor & Jennifer D. Nahrgang & Amanda L. Christensen, 2018. "All risk-taking is not the same: examining the competing effects of firm risk-taking with meta-analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 621-660, July.
    16. Joo, M. Hashemi & Parhizgari, A.M., 2021. "A behavioral explanation of credit ratings and leverage adjustments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C).
    17. Jiménez, Alfredo & Delgado-García, Juan Bautista, 2012. "Proactive management of political risk and corporate performance: The case of Spanish multinational enterprises," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 1029-1040.
    18. Ho, Ron Yiu-wah & Strange, Roger & Piesse, Jenifer, 2006. "On the conditional pricing effects of beta, size, and book-to-market equity in the Hong Kong market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 199-214, July.
    19. Radosław Kurach, 2013. "Does Beta Explain Global Equity Market Volatility – Some Empirical Evidence," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 7(2), June.
    20. Shaikh, Salman, 2013. "Investment Decisions by Analysts: A Case Study of KSE," MPRA Paper 53802, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.