INTRODUCTION

Accurate financial information assists investors in making decisions about the purchase, retention, or sale of the issuer's shares, as well as the amount of dividends that the issuer is able to pay. A company's financial performance is not the only factor that determines whether an investor will acquire its shares; The share price determination also plays a role in decisions made by potential investors regarding investment (Dwilita, 2018; Firmansyah & Indriani, 2021; Hendra & Irawati, 2021; Maulani, 2020; Swari & Wiksuana, 2015). One of the most important things that affects the supply and demand for stocks is the stock price, which plays a role in both. Compared to the higher price per share, the lower price per share seems to be the most valuable for investors. Issuers will try to make it easier for investors to buy shares by lowering the price per share compared to those offered by competitors (Dewi, Sunarsih, & Dewi, 2019; Hanafie & Diyani, 2016; Hendra & Irawati, 2021; Kristianiarso, 2014; Labibah & Dwimulyani, 2014; Tanjung & Ali, 2021; Yuniartini & Sedana, 2020).

When the price per share is too high, investors will find it difficult to buy the stock. Because of this, people will not want to buy stock at a higher price than that, and stock sales are often low too. If the price per share is too high, investors will not have much opportunity to buy the stock. Because of how supply and demand work together, the price of a stock that is at an all-time high will continue to fall until it finds a new equilibrium. Stock splits are a common business strategy that companies use to keep their stock prices in the best range for trading. This helps ensure that the purchasing power of investors remains the same, especially the purchasing power of small investors who put their money into the business (Ikenberry, Rankine, & Stice, 1996; Tanjung & Ali, 2021).

Stock split not the same as active company mergers and acquisitions; they are just cosmetic. Regardless of the number of shares divided, it will not have an impact on the company's cash flow in the future, both now and in the future. Stock splits do not have an economic impact on the company, but have the potential to increase the number of shareholders, especially among small investors. Investors who hold large sums of money but fewer shares will have the illusion that they have become more prosperous as a result of the mirage impact of the stock split on the value of their holdings. Scientific research related to stock splits generally revolves around changes in stock prices or related to stock market reactions and stock trading liquidity in the short term (Adisetiawan, 2018; Bagaskoro, 2019; Cheung, Faff, Im, & Selvam, 2021; Dewi et al., 2019; Hanafie & Diyani, 2016; Jayanti & Fattah, 2021; Kohsaka, 2014; Kristianiarso, 2014; Maulida & Mahardhika, 2021; Paramitha, 2019; Purwata & Wiksuana, 2019; Rahayu & Murti, 2017; Suharno & Afriani, 2021; Tabibian, Zhang, & Jafarian, 2020; Trisanti, 2020; Wibowo, 2017). The findings of a study conducted by Cornell (2020) stated that Tesla's share price increased by 17.94 percent just two days after the stock split took place. shows that prices have increased significantly in a relatively short period of time. Over a long period of time, it is necessary to repeat the analysis.

Several studies suggest the impact of stock splits on long-term financial performance (Bajaj & Arora, 2017; Dwilita, 2018; Firmansyah & Indriani, 2021; Hendra & Irawati, 2021; Labibah & Dwimulyani, 2014; Madani, 2018; Nurdin & Abdani, 2020; Sabar, Ridjal, & Tangngisalu, 2022; Wibowo, 2017; Yustisia, 2018). This study emphasizes the impact of stock splits on differences in company performance in the long term.

Based on the description of the background of the research above, the authors are interested in studying, discussing and conducting research with the title "Analysis of Long-Term Financial Performance Differences before and after Stock Split in Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2015-2020". The aims of this research are (1). empirically test and prove the difference in debt to total assets (DAR) between before and after the stock split, (2) empirically test and prove the difference in current ratio (CR) between before and after the stock split, (3) empirically test and prove the difference total asset turnover (TATO) between before and after the stock split, (4) empirically testing and proving the difference in return on assets (ROA) between before and after the stock split.

METHOD

This research is a positivistic research using a quantitative approach. Attempts to acquire, generate, or demonstrate knowledge that can be used to understand, solve, and predict problems in a particular subject, researchers apply scientific methods known as research techniques. The population used as the object of research in this study consisted of 76 companies that carried out a stock split between 2015-2020 which were listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Data obtained from www.ksei.co.id www.idx.co.id, www.finance.yahoo.com, and www.reuters.com/ stocks. Purposive sampling technique was used to select and determine the sample used in the study. One of the criteria in purposive aside is that the selected company has provided a report 3 years before the stock split and 3 years after that to see how well it is doing financially. Given the reports that are available 3 years after 2021, 2020, 2019, respectively, the stock split was carried out between 2018 and 2017. Based on these criteria, 20 companies that carried out stock splits were selected as samples (objects of research).

Mann Whitney U Test is a non-parametric test that is used to determine the difference in the median of 2 independent groups if the dependent variable data scale is ordinal or interval/ratio but not normally distributed. The Mann Whitney U Test is also known as the Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test. It is a non-parametric test option if the Independent T Test cannot be performed because the assumption of normality is not met. However, despite the non-parametric form of the independent t test, the Mann Whitney U Test does not test the difference in the Mean (mean) of the two groups like the Independent T Test, but instead examines the difference in the Median (mean value) of the two groups.

Some experts statethat the Mann Whitney U Test not only tests the Median difference, but also tests the Mean. Why is it like that? because in various cases, the median of the two groups may be the same, but the P Value of the results is small, i.e. < 0.05, which means there is a difference. The reason is because the mean of the two groups is significantly different. So, it can be concluded that this test is not only testing the difference in the median, but also the difference in the mean.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Descriptive Statistical Analysis Results

1. Current Ratio (CR) Pre-Post Stock Split

One of the main components of assessing the condition of the company in a healthy or unhealthy condition is by measuring the ratio of the level of liquidity. Liquidity has a function as a counter to the company's strength in fulfilling its current financial responsibilities to internal or external parties. Liquidity is not only about compliance, but also managing current assets into cash. Ideally the ratio number is 2 or 200% or at least 1X or 100%. However, the standardization of each company is different regarding the minimum limit for the level of liquidity. The current ratio itself shows the company's ability to pay off its short-term obligations. The higher the current ratio, the higher the company's ability to pay off short-term obligations and this is a good sign for investors and creditors.

Of the 20 issuers studied within a period of 3 years, 9 companies showed an increase in the average current ratio, while 11 experienced a decrease in the average current ratio. In the first year since the stock split, only 8 issuers showed an increase in the current ratio, the remaining 12 issuers experienced a decrease in the current ratio. The results of descriptive statistical analysis of the distribution of the current ratio (CR) variable data before and after the stock split can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1

Results of Descriptive Statistics Current Ratio (CR) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
CR	Pre Stock Split	mean		157,874	14,924
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	128,011
			Upper Bound	187,737
		5% Trimmed Mean		151.061
		median		132.180
		Variance		13363,388
		Std. Deviation		115,600
		Minimum		0.480
		Maximum		484.360
		Range		483.880
		Interquartile Range		76.553
		Skewness		1.181	0.309
		Kurtosis		0.873	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		138.081	13,582
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	110,904
			Upper Bound	165,257
		5% Trimmed Mean		129,443
		median		123.650
		Variance		11067,645
		Std. Deviation		105,203
		Minimum		0.210
		Maximum		444,410
		Range		444,200
		Interquartile Range		125,948
		Skewness		1.096	0.309
		Kurtosis		1,248	0.608

The average value of the current ratio of the pre-stock split is 157.87, the average value of the post-stock split is 138.08. This shows a decrease in the current ratio from before the stock split of 1.58X down to 1.38X. This decrease indicates that in the long term, the stock split does not have a positive effect on the current ratio.

Based on the results of the descriptive statistics above, it can be seen that there is a difference in the mean (average value). We will test this mean difference further, whether it is statistically significant or not.

2. Debt to Total Assets (DAR) Pre-Post Stock Split

The debt ratio as a measure of the use of external funds to fund the company's wealth with the aim of encouraging its operational activities to be sustainable and earn a profit. The use of high debt with a fixed asset value will make it difficult to pay the nominal debt plus the interest expense so as to reduce liquidity. Of the 20 issuers studied within a period of 3 years, 8 companies showed an increase in the average debt asset ratio, while 1 fixed issuer and only 11 issuers experienced a decrease in the average debt asset ratio. In the first year since the stock split, only 12 issuers showed a decrease in the debt asset ratio, while the remaining 8 issuers experienced an increase in the debt asset ratio. The results of descriptive statistical analysis of the distribution of variable data Debt to Total Assets (DAR) before and after the stock split can be seen in Table 2

Table 2

Debt to Total Asset (DAR) Debt to Total Asset (DAR) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
CR	Pre Stock Split	mean		47,075	3.615
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	39,841
			Upper Bound	54,309
		5% Trimmed Mean		47,016
		median		45,725
		Variance		784,156
		Std. Deviation		28.003
		Minimum		0.690
		Maximum		99,840
		Range		99,150
		Interquartile Range		44,823
		Skewness		-0.087	0.309
		Kurtosis		-1.032	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		47,747	3,710
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	40,323
			Upper Bound	55,172
		5% Trimmed Mean		47,166
		median		56,205
		Variance		825,973
		Std. Deviation		28,740
		Minimum		0.620
		Maximum		147,060
		Range		146,440
		Interquartile Range		38.343
		Skewness		0.294	0.309
		Kurtosis		0.914	0.608

Combined, the average Debt to Total Asset pre-stock split is 47.07, the post-stock split average is 47.75. This shows that in the long term there is no decrease in the debt to total asset ratio, there is an increase. Based on the results of the descriptive statistics above, it can be seen that there is a difference in the mean (average value). We will test this mean difference further, whether it is statistically significant (significant) or not.

3. Total Asset Turnover (TATO) Pre-Post Stock Split

The smaller the total asset turnover ratio (decreased) then the total assets are slower to rotate in achieving profits and the less efficient the use of total assets in generating sales levels. In the aspect of activity with the Total Assets Turn Over Ratio (TATO) proxy in a three-year period, of the 20 issuers studied, 14 issuers experienced a decrease in the ratio, only 6 issuers experienced a slight increase. Meanwhile, in the first year since the stock split, only 10 issuers have increased while 10 other issuers have decreased. The low ratio can be caused by several factors, such as overproduction accompanied by a decrease in product demand. The cause could be constraints in the supply chain so that the number of products cannot meet the company's sales targets

Table 3

Descriptive Statistics Results of Total Asset Turnover (TATO) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
Total Asset Turnover	Pre Stock Split	mean		75,363	6.605
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	62,146
			Upper Bound	88,580
		5% Trimmed Mean		73,245
		median		74.625
		Variance		2617,689
		Std. Deviation		51.163
		Minimum		1,800
		Maximum		186,970
		Range		185.170
		Interquartile Range		83.613
		Skewness		0.310	0.309
		Kurtosis		-0.825	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		58,472	5,712
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	47.042
			Upper Bound	69,902
		5% Trimmed Mean		55,888
		median		64,680
		Variance		1957,772
		Std. Deviation		44,247
		Minimum		1.020
		Maximum		171.870
		Range		170.850
		Interquartile Range		74.570
		Skewness		0.478	0.309
		Kurtosis		-0.539	0.608

The average value of Total Asset Turnover (TATO) pre-stock split is 75.36, the average value of post-stock split is 58.47. This shows a decrease in the asset turnover ratio from before the stock split of 75.36% to 58.47%. This decrease shows that in the long term, there is no positive effect of stock split on company performance. The results of this study are in line with the research of Pascafiani (2021) which states that based on the average results of 9 industrial sectors in the aspect of activity ratio (TATO) it shows that all industries have decreased in the total asset turnover ratio.

4. Return on Assets (ROA) Pre-Post Stock Split

Profitability ratios provide benefits to interested parties in the company, including to measure the amount of net profit generated from every rupiah invested from total assets. Profitability ratio with ROA proxy describes the company's ability to generate profit from every rupiah invested from total assets. Of the 20 issuers studied, in a period of 3 years 7 issuers experienced an increase in ROA, 5 fixed issuers and 8 issuers decreased. Within 1 year since the stock split, 9 issuers experienced an increase in ROA, 5 fixed issuers and 6 issuers experienced a decrease in ROA. The results of descriptive statistical analysis of the distribution of Return on Assets variable data (ROA) before and after the stock split can be seen in Table 4 below.

Table 4

Results of Descriptive Statistics of Return on Assets (ROA) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
Return on Assets	Pre Stock Split	mean		4.394	0.938
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	2.518
			Upper Bound	6.270
		5% Trimmed Mean		4.291
		median		3,005
		Variance		52,754
		Std. Deviation		7.263
		Minimum		-10,070
		Maximum		21,490
		Range		31,560
		Interquartile Range		9.560
		Skewness		0.339	0.309
		Kurtosis		-0.164	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		1,243	1.232
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	-1.223
			Upper Bound	3,708
		5% Trimmed Mean		1.161
		median		1.185
		Variance		91.060
		Std. Deviation		9.543
		Minimum		-26,240
		Maximum		26,400
		Range		52,640
		Interquartile Range		9,243
		Skewness		0.014	0.309
		Kurtosis		1,000	0.608

The average return on assets (ROA) of the pre-stock split is 4.39, the average value of the post-stock split is 1.24. This shows that the stock split in the long run does not have a positive effect on financial performance. Based on the results of the descriptive statistics above, it can be seen that there is a difference in the mean (average value). We will test this mean difference further, whether it is statistically significant (significant) or not.

5. Return on Equity (ROE) Pre-Post Stock Split

The profitability ratio with ROE proxy describes the company's ability to generate profit from each rupiah of its own capital invested in total assets. The higher the ROE, the faster the shareholders will get their investment back. Based on the results of research conducted on 20 issuers, in the long term only 7 issuers increased their ROE after the stock split, the remaining 2 fixed issuers and 11 issuers decreased. In the short term, after the stock split, there were 10 issuers whose ROE increased, 4 fixed issuers and 6 issuers decreased their ROE. The results of the descriptive statistical analysis of the distribution of the Return on Equity (ROE) variable data in the long term from all issuers before and after the stock split.

Table 5

Results of Descriptive Statistics of Return on Equity (ROE) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
ROE	Pre Stock Split	mean		7.068	2.330
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	2.406
			Upper Bound	11,730
		5% Trimmed Mean		8,471
		median		8025
		Variance		325,661
		Std. Deviation		18.046
		Minimum		-74,580
		Maximum		35,870
		Range		110,450
		Interquartile Range		17,895
		Skewness		-1,749	0.309
		Kurtosis		6.330	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		1,962	2.481
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	-3.003
			Upper Bound	6.927
		5% Trimmed Mean		2.882
		median		3.080
		Variance		369,373
		Std. Deviation		19,219
		Minimum		-56.190
		Maximum		55,770
		Range		111.960
		Interquartile Range		19,538
		Skewness		-0.647	0.309
		Kurtosis		2.128	0.608

The average return on equity (ROE) of the pre-stock split is 7.07, the average value of the post-stock split is 1.96. This indicates a decrease in the return on equity ratio. In the long term, the stock split does not have a positive effect on financial performance, especially return on equity. Thus the signaling theory has no effect in the long run.

6. Price Earnings Ratio (PER) Pre-Post Stock Split

Price Earning Ratiois the ratio used to evaluate the low or high price of a stock based on the issuer's capacity to generate earnings per share. Price Earning Ratio that is too high indicates that investors expect high net profits from issuers.

Of the 20 issuers studied, in the long term, 11 issuers showed an increase in price earning ratio and 9 issuers showed a decrease in price earning ratio. In the short term, only 7 issuers have an increase in price earning ratio, the remaining 13 issuers have a decrease in price earning ratio. The results of descriptive statistical analysis of variable data distribution Price Earnings Ratio (PER) before and after the stock split can be seen in Table 6.

Table 6

Descriptive Statistical Results of Price Earnings Ratio (PER) Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split				Statistics	Std. Error
Price Earnings Ratio	Pre Stock Split	mean		-3.075	15,617
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	-34.325
			Upper Bound	28.175
		5% Trimmed Mean		3.484
		median		5780
		Variance		14633.958
		Std. Deviation		120,971
		Minimum		-480,000
		Maximum		376,610
		Range		856610
		Interquartile Range		20,260
		Skewness		-1.291	0.309
		Kurtosis		7.438	0.608
	Post Stock Split	mean		27,721	12.165
		95% Confidence Intervals for Mean	Lower Bound	3.380
			Upper Bound	52.062
		5% Trimmed Mean		15,480
		median		6,980
		Variance		8878,591
		Std. Deviation		94.226
		Minimum		-94,500
		Maximum		437,970
		Range		532,470
		Interquartile Range		32,965
		Skewness		2,761	0.309
		Kurtosis		8.348	0.608

The average value of the price earnings ratio of the pre-stock split is 3.07X, the average value of the post-stock split is 27.72. This shows an increase in the ratio of share price to earnings per share from 3.07% before the stock split down to 27.96X. This increase was due to a decrease in stock prices due to a stock split.

Based on the results of descriptive statistics for each variable before and after the stock split, it can be seen that there is a difference in the mean (average value). We will test this mean difference further, whether it is statistically significant or not.

B. Assumption Test (Normality)

One of the assumptions required to perform a different test using the Man-Whitney U Test is that the data is not normally distributed. Normality test is a test carried out to assess the distribution of data in a group of data or variables, whether the distribution of the data is normal or not. In this study, the Kolmogorov Smirnov technique was used to test whether the data distribution was normal or not.

The Kolmogorov Smirnov technique is a test of difference between the data being tested for normality and standard normal data. The Kolmogorov Smirnov test saw a significance value of 0.05. If the significance value is > 0.05 then the data is normally distributed because there is no significant difference. Vice versa, if the significant value is <0.05, then there is a significant difference and the data can be said to have not reached normal.

The results of the homogeneity test used the Levene's test method. Levene's test is recommended because the test can be used to test the homogeneity of variance on data that are not normally distributed. While the other test, namely the Fisher F test is preferred if the data is normally distributed. The value of Levene's Test is shown in the Value Based on Mean row, with Sig (p value) 0.757 > 0.05, which means that the variance of the two groups is the same or is called homogeneous. Then the second assumption, namely homogeneity, has been fulfilled. Next we will test the hypothesis, namely the Mann Whitney U Test.

Table 30

Test Results of Price Earnings Ratio (PER) Variable Rank – Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post Stock Split		N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks
Price Earnings Ratio	Pre Stock Split	60	61.13	3668.00
	Post Stock Split	60	59.87	3592.00
	Total	120

The table above shows the Mean Rank or the average rank of each group. In the Pre Stock Split group, the average ranking is 61.13, which is higher than the average Post Stock Split rating, which is 59.87. To test the difference in the average ranking of the two groups above, statistically significant (significant) can be done with a significance test.

Table 31

Man Whitney Significance Test Results for Price Earnigs Ratio (PER) Variables

	Price Earnings Ratio
Mann-Whitney U	1762,000
Wilcoxon W	3592,000
Z	-0.199
asymp. Sig.(2-tailed)	0.842
a. Grouping Variable: Pre-Post Stock Split

Based on the above, it shows that the U value is 1762 and the W value is 3592. When converted to a Z value, the value is -0.199. The Sig value or P Value is 0.842 > 0.05. considering the p value > the critical limit of 0.05, there is no significant difference (significant) Price Earnings Ratio (PER) between before and after the stock split. Thus, hypothesis 6 which states that there is a significant difference in Price Earnings Ratio (PER) between before and after the stock split is not statistically supported.

D. Summary of Hypothesis Testing

Based on the results of the hypothesis testing of the long-term financial performance difference as indicated by the Current Ratio (CR), Debt to Total Assets (DAR), Total Asset Turnover (TATO), Return on Assets (ROA, Return on Equity (ROE) and Price Earning Ratio (PER), briefly can be seen in Table 32:

Table 32

Summary of Hypothesis Testing

Man Whitney Different Test	Z-Score	asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	Information
CurrentRatio (CR)	-0.853	0.394	Rejected
Debt to Total Assets (DAR)	-0.005	0.996	Rejected
Total Asset Turnover (TATO)	-1.918	0.055	Received at alpha 10%
Return on Assets(ROE)	-1,992	0.046	Received
Return on Equity (ROE)	-2013	0.044	Received
Price Earnings Ratio (PER)	-0.199	0.842	Rejected

Based on the summary of hypothesis testing in table 32, several things can be explained as follows:

1. The results of the different test using Man Whitney for the variable current ratio (CR) has a Z-score value of -0.853 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed is 0.394. Thus, hypothesis 1 which states that there is a significant difference in current ratio (CR) between before and after the stock split is statistically rejected.

2. The results of the different test using Man Whitney for the variable debt to total assets (DAR) have a Z-score value of -0.005 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed) is 0.996. Thus, hypothesis 2 which states that there is a significant difference in debt to total assets (DAR) between before and after the stock split is statistically rejected.

3. The results of the different test using Man Whitney for the total asset turnover (TATO) variable have a Z-score value of -1.918 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed is 0.055. Thus, hypothesis 3 which states that there is a significant difference in total asset turnover (TATO) between before and after the stock split is statistically rejected at 5% alpha (95% confidence interval) at 10% alpha or confidence interval 10%, this hypothesis is accepted.

4. The results of the different test using Man Whitney for the return on asset (ROA) variable have a Z-score value of -1.992 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed) is 0.046. Thus, hypothesis 4 which states that there is a significant difference in return on assets (ROA) between before and after the stock split is statistically accepted.

5. The results of the different test using Man Whitney for the return on equity (ROE) variable have a Z-score value of -2,013 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed) is 0.044. Thus, hypothesis 5 which states that there is a significant difference in return on equity (ROE) between before and after the stock split is statistically accepted.

6. The test results are different fromusing Man Whitney for the price earning ratio (PER) variable has a Z-score value of -0.199 with an Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed) is 0.842. Thus, hypothesis 6 which states that there is a significant difference in price earning ratio (PER) between before and after the stock split is statistically rejected.

E. Discussion

1. Current Ratio (CR) before and after Stock Split

The results showed that the current ratio (CR) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term, the stock split does not provide a difference in the current ratio (CR) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

The results of this study are in line with research Nur (2017) which concludes that long-term financial performance does not show a significant difference. The results of this study are also in line with research Dwilita (2018) which concluded that the significance test on financial performance (liquidity ratio, and profitability ratio) obtained a T-count comparison smaller than the T-table. These results conclude that the decision to do a stock split has no effect on financial performance, namely the company's profitability which is indicated by the absence of differences in ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS. Then based on the correlation test, the financial performance (profitability ratio) is obtained by comparing the value of Sig. which is greater than 0.05,

In general, companies do stock splits to increase the number of outstanding shares by making the stock price cheaper so that it can attract investors and the company's shares become more liquid. By making the stock price cheaper and affordable for investors, it will generate investors' interest in making transactions on these shares. This resulted in the stock being more active, more liquid, and avoiding delisting.

2. Debt to Total Assets (DAR) before and after the Stock Split.

The results showed that debt to total assets (DAR) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term the stock split does not provide a difference in debt to total assets (DAR) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

In accordance with the Signaling Theory which states that managers have more information about the condition of the company than investors, as well as when the company conducts a stock split, it will provide a signal that will be captured by investors and potential investors as a good or bad sign in accordance with other information that the investor has. Company leaders with better information about their company will be encouraged to convey more information they have to potential investors in order to increase the value of the company. This will also give creditors the confidence to lend funds to the company.

3. Total Asset Turnover (TATO) before and after Stock Split

The results showed that the total asset turnover (TATO) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. This result is significant at the 10% alpha or 90% confidence interval. In the long term stock split provides a difference in total asset turnover (TATO) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

In the context of the asset turnover ratio (TATO), the results of this study are different from (Bajaj & Arora, 2017) which shows that profitability (Return on Assets, and Return on Equity, Net Profit Margin, Return on Sales) does not show a significant difference between before and after stock split.

4. Return on Assets (ROA) before and after Stock Split

The results showed that the return on assets (ROA) showed a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term stock split provides a significant difference in return on assets (ROA) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

In the context of the return on asset (ROA) profitability ratio, the results of this study are different from (Bajaj & Arora, 2017) which shows that profitability (ROA, and ROE) do not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. The results of this study are different from research (Madani, 2018) which states that there is no difference in return on assets (ROA) before and after the stock split.

The results of this study are also different from research (Dwilita, 2018) which concluded that the significance test on financial performance (profitability ratio) obtained that the T-count comparison was smaller than the T-table. These results conclude that the decision to do a stock split has no effect on financial performance, namely the company's profitability which is indicated by the absence of differences in ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS. Then based on the correlation test, the financial performance (profitability ratio) is obtained by comparing the value of Sig. which is greater than 0.05, it means that the stock split event is not correlated with financial performance in this case is ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS. The results of this study are also different from (Sabar et al., 2022) which shows that profitability (ROA, ROE,

5. Return on Equity (ROE) before and after Stock Split

The results showed that the return on equity (ROE) showed a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term stock split provides a significant difference in return on equity (ROE) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split. The results of this study are in line with research (Madani, 2018) which states that there are differences in return on equity (ROE) before and after the stock split.

In the context of the return on asset profitability ratio (ROA), the results of this study are different from (Bajaj & Arora, 2017) which shows that profitability (ROA, and ROE) do not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. The results of this study are different from research (Dwilita, 2018) which concluded that the significance test on financial performance (profitability ratio) obtained that the T-count comparison was smaller than the T-table. These results conclude that the decision to do a stock split has no effect on financial performance, namely the company's profitability which is indicated by the absence of differences in ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS. Then based on the correlation test, the financial performance (profitability ratio) is obtained by comparing the value of Sig. which is greater than 0.05. The results of this study are also different from (Sabar et al., 2022) which shows that profitability (ROA, ROE, and Net Profit Margin) does not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split.

6. Price Earnings Ratio (PER) before and after Stock Split

The results showed that the price earnings ratio (PER) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term, the stock split does not provide a significant difference in the price earnings ratio (PER) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split. In relation to stock split with Price Earning Ratio, the results of this study are in line with research (Bajaj & Arora, 2017) which shows that Earning per Share and Price Earning Ratio do not show significant differences between before and after the stock split. In the context of earnings, the results of this study are in line with research (Dwilita, 2018) which concluded that the significance test on financial performance (profitability ratio) obtained that the T-count comparison was smaller than the T-table. These results conclude that the decision to do a stock split has no effect on financial performance, namely the company's profitability which is indicated by the absence of differences in ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS. Then based on the correlation test, the financial performance (profitability ratio) is obtained by comparing the value of Sig. which is greater than 0.05, it means that the stock split event is not correlated with financial performance in terms of these are ROE, ROA, PMS, and EPS.

CONCLUSION

Current ratio (CR) does not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term, the stock split does not provide a difference in the current ratio (CR) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

Debt to total assets (DAR) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term the stock split does not provide a difference in debt to total assets (DAR) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

Total asset turnover (TATO) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. This result is significant at the 10% alpha or 90% confidence interval. In the long term stock split provides a difference in total asset turnover (TATO) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

Return on assets (ROA) shows a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term stock split provides a significant difference in return on assets (ROA) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

Return on equity (ROE) shows a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term stock split provides a significant difference in return on equity (ROE) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

Price earnings ratio (PER) did not show a significant difference between before and after the stock split. In the long term, the stock split does not provide a significant difference in the price earnings ratio (PER) for 3 years before and 3 years after the stock split.

REFERENCES

Adisetiawan, R. (2018). Does Stock Split Influence to Liquidity and Stock Return?(Empirical Evidence in The Indonesian Capital Market). Asian Economic and Financial Review, 8(5), 682–690. Google Scholar

Bagaskoro, B. S. (2019). The effect of stock split on liquidity stock in companies which listed on BEI 2007-2015. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 3(11), 160–169. Google Scholar

Bajaj, P., & Arora, H. (2017). Effect of Stock Split on the Shareholder’s Wealth and Company’s Profitability. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research (IJEMR), 7(1), 20–27. Google Scholar

Cheung, W. M., Faff, R. W., Im, H. J., & Selvam, S. (2021). Stock liquidity and investment efficiency: Evidence from two quasi-natural experiments in China. Available at SSRN 3966116. Google Scholar

Cornell, B. (2020). The Tesla stock split experiment. Journal of Asset Management, 21(7), 647–651. Google Scholar

Dewi, K. W., Sunarsih, N. M., & Dewi, N. P. S. (2019). Pengaruh Kebijakan Stock Split terhadap Return Dan Volume Perdagangan Saham. Kumpulan Hasil Riset Mahasiswa Akuntansi (KHARISMA), 1(1). Google Scholar

Dwilita, H. (2018). Penilaian kinerja keuangan perusahaan pada pasar modal indonesia sebelum dan setelah melakukan stock split saham. Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis Dan Publik, 8(2), 140–157. Google Scholar

Firmansyah, A., & Indriani, T. S. (2021). Kebijakan Stock Split Perusahaan Non-Financial Di Indonesia: Manajemen Laba, Kinerja Operasi, Kinerja Pasar. Owner: Riset Dan Jurnal Akuntansi, 5(2), 345–357. Google Scholar

Hanafie, L., & Diyani, L. A. (2016). Pengaruh Pengumuman Stock Split Terhadap Return Saham, Abnormal Return dan Trading Volume Activity. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Komunikasi, 3(2), 13–20. Google Scholar

Hendra, H., & Irawati, W. (2021). Pengaruh Stock Split dan Kinerja Keuangan terhadap Return Saham. EkoPreneur, 2(2), 169–179. Google Scholar

Ikenberry, D. L., Rankine, G., & Stice, E. K. (1996). What do stock splits really signal? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 357–375. Google Scholar

Jayanti, N. E., & Fattah, V. (2021). Analisis Perbandingan Volume Perdagangan Saham Sebelum Dan Sesudah Stock Split Di Bei. Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen Universitas Tadulako (JIMUT), 7(1), 1–11. Google Scholar

Kohsaka, Y. (2014). The Japan Stock Split Bubble and the Livedoor Shock. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 6(5), 33. Google Scholar

Kristianiarso, A. A. (2014). Analisis Perbedaan Likuiditas Saham, Harga Saham, dan Return Saham Sebelum dan Sesudah Stock Split (Studi Pada Perusahaan Go Public yang Melakukan Stock Split Periode 2011-2014). Jurnal Operations Excellence: Journal of Applied Industrial Engineering, 6(3), 268830. Google Scholar

Labibah, M. I., & Dwimulyani, S. (2014). Analisis Harga Saham, Likuiditas Saham, Earning Per Share, Dan Price Earnings Ratio Antara Sebelum Dan Setelah Stock Split. Jurnal Akuntansi Trisakti, 1(2), 33–48. Google Scholar

Madani, M. N. (2018). Analisis Profitabilitas Sebelum Dan Sesudah Stock Split Pada Perusahaan Yang Terdaftar Di Pt Bursa Efek Indonesia. Ekonomia, 7(1), 1–17. Google Scholar

Maulani, D. (2020). Analisis Kinerja Keuangan Dalam Keputusan Stock Split. Moneter: Jurnal Keuangan Dan Perbankan, 8(2), 60–64. Google Scholar

Maulida, D., & Mahardhika, A. S. (2021). Analisis Perbedaan Harga Saham, Volume Perdagangan Saham, dan Return Saham Sebelum dan Sesudah Stock Split. Jurnal Akuntansi, 1(1), 1–7. Google Scholar

Nur., D. I. (2017). Analysis of Stock Split and Corporate Financial Performance in Indonesian Stock Exchange. International Journal of Advanced Research, 5(2), 2241–2246. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/3400 Google Scholar

Nurdin, F., & Abdani, F. (2020). The effect of profitability and stock split on stock return. Journal of Accounting Auditing and Business, 3(2), 52–63. Google Scholar

Paramitha, D. (2019). Analisis reaksi pasar atas pengumuman stock split. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 27(3), 1897–1924. Google Scholar

Purwata, I. P., & Wiksuana, I. G. B. (2019). Reaksi Pasar Terhadap Peristiwa Stock Split Di Bursa Efek Indonesia. E-Jurnal Manajemen, 8(4), 2252–2380. Google Scholar

Rahayu, D., & Murti, W. (2017). Pengaruh Pemecahan Saham (Stock Split) Terhadap Return Saham, Bid-Ask Spread Dan Trading Volume Activity Pada Perusahaan Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia Periode Tahun 2009–2013. Jurnal Akuntansi, 11(1). Google Scholar

Sabar, A., Ridjal, S., & Tangngisalu, J. (2022). Analisis Profitabilitas Sebelum dan Sesudah Stock Split Pada Perusahaan Yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal MSA (Matematika Dan Statistika Serta Aplikasinya), 10(1), 15–21. Google Scholar

Suharno, H., & Afriani, A. (2021). Analysis Of Differences Of Price Earning Ratio (Per) And Stock Liquidity Before (10 Days) And After (10 Days) Stock Split In Go Public Company In Indonesia Stock Exchange Period 2009–2016. Ekonomi Bisnis, 27(1), 471–484. Google Scholar

Swari, I. G. A. W., & Wiksuana, I. G. B. (2015). Analisis Kinerja Saham Sebelum dan Sesudah Stock Split Pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Udayana University. Google Scholar

Tabibian, S. A., Zhang, Z., & Jafarian, M. (2020). How does split announcement affect stock liquidity? Evidence from Bursa Malaysia. Risks, 8(3), 85. Google Scholar

Tanjung, A. H., & Ali, S. (2021). Analisis Likuiditas Saham Pada Perusahaan Yang Melakukan Stock Split: Pengujian Terhadap Trading Range Theory Pada Bursa Efek Indonesia (Studi Pada Perusahaan Yang Melakukan Stock Split Tahun 2017-2019). Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen Dan Akuntansi Terapan (JIMAT), 12(3), 239–252. Google Scholar

Trisanti, T. (2020). Stock split and stock market reaction: The evidence of indonesian public company. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 8(2), 1–7. Google Scholar

Wibowo, A. A. (2017). Komitmen dan Kompensasi terhadap Prestasi Kerja di PT Somit Karsa Trinergi Jakarta. Agregat: Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 1(1), 1–19. Google Scholar

Yuniartini, N. K. W., & Sedana, I. B. P. (2020). Dampak Stock Split Terhadap Harga Saham dan Aktivitas Volume Perdagangan Saham di Bursa Efek Indonesia. E-Jurnal Manajemen, 9(4), 1465–1484. Google Scholar

Yustisia, N. (2018). The impact of stock split on the performance in Indonesian manufacturing companies. Binus Business Review, 9(1), 39. Google Scholar

One-Sample Kolmogorov-SmirnovTest
		Current Ratio	Debt to Total Asset	Total Asset Turnover	Return on Equity	Return on Asset	Price Earnings Ratio
N		120	120	120	120	120	120
Normal Parameters, b	mean	147,977	47,411	66,917	4,515	2.818	12,323
Normal Parameters, b	Std. Deviation	110,506	28,256	48,378	18,740	8,591	109,071
Most Extreme Differences	Absolute	0.157	0.097	0.126	0.113	0.100	0.261
	Positive	0.157	0.060	0.126	0.049	0.076	0.261
	negative	-0.091	-0.097	-0.087	-0.113	-0.100	-0.251
Test Statistics		0.157	0.097	0.126	0.113	0.100	0.261
asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)		.000c	.008c	.000c	.001c	.005c	.000c
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
c.Lilliefors Significance Correction.

		Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
Current Ratio	Based on Mean	0.113	1	118	0.737
	Based on Median	0.012	1	118	0.912
	Based on Median and with adjusted df	0.012	1	113.818	0.912
	Based on trimmed mean	0.069	1	118	0.793

		Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
Debt to Total Assets	Based on Mean	0.011	1	118	0.918
	Based on Median	0.083	1	118	0.774
	Based on Median and with adjusted df	0.083	1	110,547	0.774
	Based on trimmed mean	0.005	1	118	0.945

		Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
Total Asset Turnover	Based on Mean	1.187	1	118	0.278
	Based on Median	1,240	1	118	0.268
	Based on Median and with adjusted df	1,240	1	114.713	0.268
	Based on trimmed mean	1.111	1	118	0.294

		Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
Return on Assets	Based on Mean	1.191	1	118	0.277
	Based on Median	1.373	1	118	0.244
	Based on Median and with adjusted df	1.373	1	107.282	0.244
	Based on trimmed mean	1,210	1	118	0.274

2. Debt to Total Assets (DAR) Pre-Post Stock Split

3. Total Asset Turnover (TATO) Pre-Post Stock Split

4. Return on Assets (ROA) Pre-Post Stock Split

5. Return on Equity (ROE) Pre-Post Stock Split

6. Price Earnings Ratio (PER) Pre-Post Stock Split

B. Assumption Test (Normality)

Table 7

Normality Assumption Test Results

C. Different Test Results – Mann-Whitney

Table 10

Test Results for Rank Variable Current Ratio – Pre-Post Stock Split

Table 11

Man Whitney Significance Test Results for Variable Current Ratio

2. Debt to Total Assets (DAR)

Table 12

Normality Assumption Test Results for Variable Debt to Total Assets

Figure 4. Histogram of Pre-Post Stock Split – Return on Asset

Table 23

Man Whitney Significance Test Results for the Return on Asset Variable

6. Price Earnings Ratio (PER)

D. Summary of Hypothesis Testing

Table 32

Summary of Hypothesis Testing

E. Discussion

Pre-Post Stock Split		Kolmogorov-Smirnova			Shapiro-Wilk
Pre-Post Stock Split		Statistics	df	Sig.	Statistics	df	Sig.
Current Ratio	Pre Stock Split	0.212	60	0.000	0.861	60	0.000
Current Ratio	Post Stock Split	0.134	60	0.009	0.912	60	0.000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

	Current Ratio
Mann-WhitneyU	1637,500
Wilcoxon W	3467,500
Z	-0.853
asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	0.394
a. Grouping Variable: Pre-Post Stock Split

	Debt to Total Assets
Mann-Whitney U	1799,000
Wilcoxon W	3629000
Z	-0.005
asymp. Sig.(2-tailed)	0.996
a. Grouping Variable: Pre-Post Stock Split

	Total Asset Turnover
Mann-Whitney U	1434,500
Wilcoxon W	3264,500
Z	-1.918
asymp. Sig.(2-tailed)	0.055
a. Grouping Variable: Pre-Post Stock Split

Pre-Post StockSplit		N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks
Return on Assets	Pre Stock Split	60	66.83	4009.50
	Post Stock Split	60	54.18	3250.50
	Total	120

	Return on Assets
Mann-Whitney U	1420,500
Wilcoxon W	3250,500
Z	-1,992
asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	0.046
a. Grouping Variable: Pre-PostStock Split

	Return on Equity
Mann-Whitney U	1416,500
Wilcoxon W	3246,500
Z	-2013
asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)	0.044
a. Grouping Variables:Pre-Post Stock Split