IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/fininn/v10y2024i1d10.1186_s40854-023-00526-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposal of an innovative MCDA evaluation methodology: knowledge discovery through rank reversal, standard deviation, and relationship with stock return

Author

Listed:
  • Mahmut Baydaş

    (Necmettin Erbakan University)

  • Orhan Emre Elma

    (Necmettin Erbakan University)

  • Željko Stević

    (University of East Sarajevo)

Abstract

Financial performance analysis is of vital importance those involved in a business (e.g., shareholders, creditors, partners, and company managers). An accurate and appropriate performance measurement is critical for decision-makers to achieve efficient results. Integrated performance measurement, by its nature, consists of multiple criteria with different levels of importance. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods have become increasingly popular for solving complex problems, especially over the last two decades. There are different evaluation methodologies in the literature for selecting the most appropriate one among over 200 MCDA methods. This study comprehensively analyzed 41 companies traded on the Borsa Istanbul Corporate Governance Index for 10 quarters using SWARA, CRITIC, and SD integrated with eight different MCDA method algorithms to determine the position of Turkey's most transparent companies in terms of financial performance. In this study, we propose "stock returns" as a benchmark in comparing and evaluating MCDA methods. Moreover, we calculate the "rank reversal performance of MCDA methods". Finally, we performed a "standard deviation" analysis to identify the objective and characteristic trends for each method. Interestingly, all these innovative comparison procedures suggest that PROMETHEE II (preference ranking organization method for enrichment of evaluations II) and FUCA (Faire Un Choix Adéquat) are the most suitable MCDA methods. In other words, these methods produce a higher correlation with share price; they have fewer rank reversal problems, the distribution of scores they produce is wider, and the amount of information is higher. Thus, it can be said that these advantages make them preferable. The results show that this innovative methodological procedure based on 'knowledge discovery' is verifiable, robust and efficient when choosing the MCDA method.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahmut Baydaş & Orhan Emre Elma & Željko Stević, 2024. "Proposal of an innovative MCDA evaluation methodology: knowledge discovery through rank reversal, standard deviation, and relationship with stock return," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-35, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:fininn:v:10:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s40854-023-00526-x
    DOI: 10.1186/s40854-023-00526-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s40854-023-00526-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s40854-023-00526-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Željko Stević & Dillip Kumar Das & Rade Tešić & Marijo Vidas & Dragan Vojinović, 2022. "Objective Criticism and Negative Conclusions on Using the Fuzzy SWARA Method in Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Serhat Yuksel & Hasan Dincer & Senol Emir, 2017. "Comparing the performance of Turkish deposit banks by using DEMATEL, Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) and MOORA approaches," World Journal of Applied Economics, WERI-World Economic Research Institute, vol. 3(2), pages 26-47, December.
    3. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    4. Kou, Gang & Yüksel, Serhat & Dinçer, Hasan, 2022. "Inventive problem-solving map of innovative carbon emission strategies for solar energy-based transportation investment projects," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 311(C).
    5. Spronk, J. & Hallerbach, W.G.P.M., 2002. "The Relevance of MCDM for Financial Decisions," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-69-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    6. Patrick L. Brockett & Linda L. Golden & Jaeho Jang & Chuanhou Yang, 2006. "A Comparison of Neural Network, Statistical Methods, and Variable Choice for Life Insurers' Financial Distress Prediction," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 73(3), pages 397-419, September.
    7. Mahmut Baydaş & Dragan Pamučar, 2022. "Determining Objective Characteristics of MCDM Methods under Uncertainty: An Exploration Study with Financial Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-25, March.
    8. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Ruan, Da, 2008. "Evaluation of software development projects using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 464-475.
    9. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
    10. Céline Verly & Yves De Smet, 2013. "Some results about rank reversal instances in the PROMETHEE methods," International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(4), pages 325-345.
    11. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    12. Mehdi KESHAVARZ GHORABAEE & Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS & Zenonas TURSKIS & Jurgita ANTUCHEVICIENE, 2016. "A New Combinative Distance-Based Assessment(Codas) Method For Multi-Criteria Decision-Making," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 50(3), pages 25-44.
    13. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2013. "Design of Products with Both International and Local Perspectives based on Yin-Yang Balance Theory and Swara Method," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 153-166, January.
    14. Wu, Cheng-Ru & Lin, Chin-Tsai & Tsai, Pei-Hsuan, 2010. "Evaluating business performance of wealth management banks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 971-979, December.
    15. Mir Seyed Mohammad Mohsen Emamat & Caroline Maria de Miranda Mota & Mohammad Reza Mehregan & Mohammad Reza Sadeghi Moghadam & Philippe Nemery, 2022. "Using ELECTRE-TRI and FlowSort methods in a stock portfolio selection context," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.
    16. Gang Kou & Yanqun Lu & Yi Peng & Yong Shi, 2012. "Evaluation Of Classification Algorithms Using Mcdm And Rank Correlation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 197-225.
    17. Banaitiene, Nerija & Banaitis, Audrius & Kaklauskas, Arturas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras, 2008. "Evaluating the life cycle of a building: A multivariant and multiple criteria approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 429-441, June.
    18. Li, Yanhong & Kou, Gang & Li, Guangxu & Peng, Yi, 2022. "Consensus reaching process in large-scale group decision making based on bounded confidence and social network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 790-802.
    19. Edward I. Altman, 1968. "Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis And The Prediction Of Corporate Bankruptcy," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 23(4), pages 589-609, September.
    20. George Baourakis & Michael Doumpos & Nikos Kalogeras & Constantin Zopounidis, 2002. "Multicriteria analysis and assessment of financial viability of agribusinesses: The case of marketing co-operatives and juice-producing companies," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 543-558.
    21. Gallizo, Jose L. & Salvador, Manuel, 2003. "Understanding the behavior of financial ratios: the adjustment process," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 267-283.
    22. West, Robert Craig, 1985. "A factor-analytic approach to bank condition," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 253-266, June.
    23. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    24. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    25. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    26. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    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. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    2. Montlaur, Adeline & Delgado, Luis & Prats, Xavier, 2023. "Domain-driven multiple-criteria decision-making for flight crew decision support tool," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    4. Mahmut Baydaş & Mustafa Yılmaz & Željko Jović & Željko Stević & Sevilay Ece Gümüş Özuyar & Abdullah Özçil, 2024. "A comprehensive MCDM assessment for economic data: success analysis of maximum normalization, CODAS, and fuzzy approaches," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, December.
    5. Xidonas, Panos & Thomakos, Dimitris & Samitas, Aristeidis, 2025. "On the integration of multiple criteria decision aiding and forecasting: Does it create value in portfolio selection?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 321(2), pages 516-528.
    6. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Syed Hammad Mian & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Strategic Outcome Using Fuzzy-AHP-Based Decision Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    8. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    9. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    10. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    11. Alireza Shahrasbi & Mehdi Shamizanjani & M. H. Alavidoost & Babak Akhgar, 2017. "An Aggregated Fuzzy Model for the Selection of a Managed Security Service Provider," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 625-684, May.
    12. József Dombi & Tamás Jónás, 2024. "Learning the weights using attribute order information for multi-criteria decision making tasks," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 61(4), pages 2379-2409, December.
    13. Liu, Xianliang & Liu, Yunfei, 2024. "Sensitivity analysis of the parameters for preference functions and rank reversal analysis in the PROMETHEE II method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    14. Weibing Sun & Fu Zhang & Shuya Tai & Jinkui Wu & Yaqiong Mu, 2021. "Study on Glacial Tourism Exploitation in the Dagu Glacier Scenic Spot Based on the AHP–ASEB Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, March.
    15. Eppe, Stefan & De Smet, Yves, 2014. "Approximating Promethee II’s net flow scores by piecewise linear value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 651-659.
    16. Ioannis Sitaridis & Fotis Kitsios, 2020. "Competitiveness analysis and evaluation of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a multi-criteria approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 377-399, November.
    17. Namık Kemal Erdoğan & Serpil Altınırmak & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2016. "Comparison of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) methods with respect to performance of food firms listed in BIST," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 5(1), pages 67-90.
    18. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    19. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    20. Irene Josa & Albert de la Fuente & Maria del Mar Casanovas-Rubio & Jaume Armengou & Antonio Aguado, 2021. "Sustainability-Oriented Model to Decide on Concrete Pipeline Reinforcement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-25, March.

    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:spr:fininn:v:10:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s40854-023-00526-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.