The
Effect of Company Growth and Liquidity on Company Value with Capital Structure as
an Intervening Variable
Lydia
Indah Permatasari1*, Yanuar Ramadhan2
1*,2 Esa Unggul University,
Indonesia
*e-mail:
1* [email protected], 2[email protected]
|
Keywords |
|
ABSTRACT |
|
Company growth, liquidity, capital structure, company value |
|
This
study aims to obtain empirical evidence about the effect of company growth
and liquidity on firm value, with capital structure as the intervening
variable. The company's growth variable is measured using the percentage
increase in the company's total sales, the difference between the company's
total sales in this period and the previous period's total sales. The
variable liquidity is measured by the current ratio, which is a measurement
of the current assets owned by the company and the current liabilities of the
company. The capital structure variable as an intervening variable is
measured by the debt-to-equity ratio, which is the ratio between the total
debt owned by the company and the capital owned by the company itself. The
firm value variable as the dependent variable is measured based on the book
value of the stock price, namely the stock price compared to the book value
per share. The population in this study used 24 coal sub-sector mining
companies listed on the IDX for the 2018�2022 period. The sample was selected
using a purposive sampling method. The researcher obtained a sample of 11
companies in the coal mining sub-sector. The results of this study found that
while company growth has no effect on capital structure, liquidity has a
negative effect on capital structure. Company growth, liquidity, and capital
structure have no effect on firm value. The capital structure is unable to
mediate the relationship between company growth and liquidity and firm value. |
|
|
||
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
Companies are formed to achieve expected
profits and maximize their value. The value of future profits will be reflected
in the company's share price (Farid & Ramadhan,
2022). The performance of a company is an informative signal that a company is
in good health and has investment prospects in the future. To increase business
value, businesses must be able to operate efficiently. Growth in company value
in the long term is by increasing company performance so that share prices on
the IDX are pushed higher (Munandar & Alvian, 2022). The company will have a value expressed
through the value of business assets and the ability to generate business
profits (Yulianti & Ramadhan, 2022). The measure
for investors in assessing the success of a company is how well the company can
manage its resources at the end of each current year, this can be seen from its
share price. The high value of the company shows the prosperity of large
shareholders and will build a positive image that will make potential investors
interested in investing in a business (Fajariyah
& Susetyo, 2020).
In the capital market, an increase in
share prices will be accompanied by an increase in the value of the company and
if it goes down, it will be followed by a decrease in the value of the company.
The Indonesian economy felt the effects of the Covid-19 outbreak in early 2020.
The Coordinating Minister for the Economy Susiwijono Moegiarso explained that from an economic perspective, most
sectors were affected and the Indonesian economic slowdown was most felt in the
second quarter of 2020. The national economy experienced a significant
contraction, i.e. minus 5.32%, and this growth was recorded as the worst in
recent years (Merdeka.com, 2021).
The coal industry is one of the industries
affected. The coal mining industry has made a significant contribution to the
economy because it is the primary sector for many sectors and as a supplier of
energy resources, the coal industry has a large contribution to national income
every year. Revenue from this industry is a major contributor to government
revenue. In 2021, state revenue from the mining and coal sector will amount to
IDR 124.4 trillion. This value includes taxes, export duties, PNBP and until
September 2022. The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources records PNBP in
the mineral and coal sector reaching IDR 130 trillion (CNBC Indonesia, 2022).
With the existence of this coal company, the state can work together in order
to be able to manage and utilize abundant natural resources. The results can be
used for people's welfare and can provide maximum benefits for Indonesia's
economic growth and the development of a strong and competitive national industry
(Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, 2021).
A country that has abundant natural
resources and the fifth largest coal producer in the world is Indonesia
(Kompas.com, 2022). The emergence of news in the media regarding the Covid-19
outbreak can affect the stock market index in Indonesia (Bi.go.id, 2022). There
is a different impact on the coal sub-sector regarding the company's share
price. PT Adaro Energy Indonesia (ADRO) in 2018-2019 saw its share price
increase by 22%, in 2019-2020 it fell by -4%, in 2020-2021 it rose by 57% and
in 2021-2022 it rose by 71%. In the company Baramulti
Suksessarana Tbk (BSSR) in
2018-2019 the share price fell by -22%, in 2019-2020 it fell by -7% and in
2020-2022 it rose drastically to 100%. Meanwhile for the Samindo
Resources Tbk (MYOH) company in 2018-2019 it rose by
24%, in 2019-2020 it rose by 0.39%, 2020-2021 rose by 35% and in 2021-2022 it
fell by -9%. In the company PT Evidence Asam Tbk (PTBA) in 2018-2019 it fell by -38%, in 2019-2020 it
rose by 5.64%, in 2020-2021 it fell by -4% and in 2021-2022 it rose by 36%.
According to a study conducted by the Institute for Energy Economics and
Financial Analysis (IEEFA) to assess the resilience of coal companies in
Indonesia during the Covid-19 pandemic, the majority of coal companies listed
on the IDX are threatened with financial condition, this is due to the drop in
reference coal prices. The decline in coal prices will make it difficult for
company management to manage company costs, be unable to achieve efficiency and
even have difficulty maintaining the company's cash flow (Tirto.id, 2020).
From the phenomenon explained above, the
share price of each company listed on the IDX must be able to maintain the
company's value. Steps that can be taken so that company value can be
maintained is to improve the company's financial condition, because mining
companies really need large enough funds to be used to explore natural
resources. To strengthen finances and absorb more investment, many mining
companies have entered the capital market. Factors that can influence company
value include company size, profitability, liquidity, growth rate, size,
interest rates, inflation and capital structure (Syaifuddin,
2021) (Sari & Sedana, 2020).
The growth rate is assessed by making a
comparison between the current year's sales minus the previous period. The
existence of growth shows that the company is making a profit so that the
company's image is valued well by investors so that the value of the company
can increase (Fauziah & Jamal, 2020). With an increase in sales volume, the
company's income increases and it can cover all costs for operational needs and
can obtain the expected profits. If the revenue growth rate increases, then it
can be said that the financial income in the company is stable. Thus, companies
that experience an increase in sales attract investors to invest and the
company value gets the impact, namely an increase in its value. There are
previous studies that have been conducted before, namely by Fauziah & Jamal
(2020), Adnyani & Suaryana
(2020) and IAPT Dewi & Sujaya
(2019) proving that there is a positive effect of company growth on firm value
while the results of research from Rahayu et al.
(2020), Alfinur & Hidayat
(2021), Romadhina & Andhitiyara
(2021) found that there was no effect of the growth rate on company value.
Liquidity reflects the amount of capital
required to fund the company's operational activities, this has a direct impact
on business profitability. Companies with high liquidity values indicate that
the company can fulfill its short-term commitments (Dominika, 2017). Companies
need to plan and monitor liquidity to avoid the risk of being unable to finance
short-term debt. The company's success is monitored and maintained by measuring
the potential of capital structure to influence liquidity and ultimately create
value (Sari & Sedana, 2020). A company that
cannot fulfill all its obligations will give a negative signal and give the
impression that the company is experiencing financial problems, which will have
an impact on investors' lack of confidence in investing and will result in a
decrease in company value. Previous researchers Yanti & Darmayanti
(2019), N. Dewi et al. (2018), IAPT Dewi & Sujaya (2019) and Widayanthi & Sudiartha (2018)
have examined the relationship between liquidity and company value and found
that there is an influence. However, different results were found by Aslindar & Lestari (2020), Iman et al. (2021), Afinindy et al. (2021) and Pertiwi et al. (2022) who found
that there was no effect of liquidity on company value.
The comparison between total debt and
total equity is a calculation of capital structure (Ermaini
et al., 2021). Companies need to make the right decisions when choosing capital
structure because it is closely related to company value (Fajariyah
& Susetyo, 2020). Making the right decision
regarding capital structure will affect financial performance and company value
(Yulianti & Ramadhan, 2022). Capital structure is
very important for a company because it has an influence on the risks that
shareholders will accept and the level of profit that will be obtained. Capital
structure is used by researchers as an intermediary variable to measure the
influence of company growth and liquidity on company value. Khoiril
et al. (2018), N. Dewi et al., (2018) and Atiningsih & Wahyuni (2020) obtained results where the
growth rate can influence value through capital structure. However, different
results were obtained by Wijaya (2019), Isnawati & Widjajanti, (2019)
and Afinindy et al. (2021) where company growth has
no effect on company value through capital structure. Research conducted by N. Dewi et al. (2018), Aslindar
& Lestari (2020) and Pertiwi et al. (2022) liquidity influences company
value through capital structure as an intermediary variable, while different
research results from Rahmatullah (2019), Uli (2020) and Hamdani et al.
(2022) argue that liquidity cannot influence company value through capital
structure.
There are still research gaps based on
research that has been carried out by previous researchers and theory
development will be carried out. The coal industry listed on the IDX for 5
years from 2018-2022 was chosen by researchers in conducting this research. The
aim of this research is to analyze the relationship between company growth and
company liquidity on company value with capital structure as an intermediary
variable.
METHODS
Quantitative methods and secondary data
were chosen in this research. Secondary data is in the form of annual financial
reports published by the BEI between 2018 and 2022. Companies in the coal
subsector of the mining industry registered on the BEI constitute the
population of this study. The purposive sampling method was chosen in this
research by considering several conditions such as: companies in the coal
subsector that use rupiah and foreign currency, companies in the coal subsector
that publish financial reports during the observation period, companies in the
coal subsector that do not conduct initial public offerings during the period. Observations
and companies in the coal subsector that generated profits in 2018-2022 were
all considered for inclusion in the sample. Panel data regression analysis
method using eviews software version 10 was used in
this study. The data analysis techniques used in the research are descriptive
statistical analysis, selecting panel data regression models (Common, Fixed and
Random Effect) by conducting Chow, Hausman and Langrange multiplier tests. Classic assumption test,
hypothesis, sobel test. The Sobel test uses the Sobel
Test Calculator for the Significance of Mediation which is accessed through
www.danielsoper.com. The Sobel test is a test to determine whether a
relationship through intervening variables tends to mediate the relationship
significantly. The form of the path analysis regression equation can be
described as follows:
SM=β_1 PP+ β_2
LIK+ ε_2
NP=β_1 PP+ β_2
LIK+β_3 SM+ ε_1
Information:
|
SM �������� : Capital structure |
NP �������� : Company Value |
ε 1 ��������� : Error sub structure 1 |
|
PP �������� : Sales Growth |
β 0 ��������� :
Constant |
ε 2 ��������� : Error sub structure 2 |
|
LIK ������� : Liquidity |
β 1- β n � : Coefficient |
|
RESULTS
Table 1
Descriptive statistics
|
|
SG |
CR |
DER |
PBV |
|
Mean |
0.288364 |
2.658909 |
0.701455 |
2.382727 |
|
Median |
0.190000 |
1.980000 |
0.570000 |
1.500000 |
|
Maximum |
1.970000 |
10.07000 |
1.910000 |
22.30000 |
|
Minimum |
-0.390000 |
0.730000 |
0.090000 |
0.550000 |
|
std. Dev. |
0.494173 |
2.017338 |
0.465210 |
3.243763 |
|
Observations |
55 |
55 |
55 |
55 |
This data analysis is used to explain in general by
taking into account the minimum, maximum, average and standard deviation
values. Table 1 provides a summary of the information for 11 samples of coal
companies that have been listed on the IDX in 2018-2022. The average business
growth rate is 0.288 and std. dev 0.494, which means the distribution of
company growth data is different. The maximum value for company growth is 1.970
and the minimum value is -0.390. Liquidity has an average of 2.658 with a
standard deviation of 2.017 lower than that average, which means the
distribution of liquidity data is homogeneous. The maximum liquidity value is
10.070 and the minimum value is 0.730. Capital structure has an average of
0.701 with std.dev 0.465 smaller than that average,
which means that the distribution of capital structure data is homogeneous.
Capital structure maximum value is 1.910 and minimum value is 0.090. Company
value has an average of 2.382 with std.dev 3.243
which is higher than the average, which means that the distribution of company
value data changes or fluctuates. The maximum value of the company value is
22.300 and the minimum value is 0.550.
Selection of the Regression Equation Model
The selection of the research model used the Chow, Hausman and Lagrange tests.
Table 2
Selection of Regression Equation Models
|
|
Model Equation 1 |
Model Equation 2 |
||
|
|
Results |
Selected Models |
Results |
Selected Models |
|
Test Chow |
0.0000 < 0.05 |
FEM |
0.0000 < 0.05 |
FEM |
|
Hausman test |
0.0572 > 0.05 |
BRAKE |
0.3211 > 0.05 |
BRAKE |
|
LM test |
0.0000 < 0.05 |
BRAKE |
0.0000 < 0.05 |
BRAKE |
|
|
Selected Model Equation 1 & 2 REM |
|||
���������������
Classical Assumption Testing
To find out whether the regression model in this
research is feasible or not, a hypothesis test is carried out. This test is
carried out with a normality test as proven by a probability value > 0.05 so
the sample is normally distributed, a multicollinearity test to see whether
there are similarities between independent variables as proven by a coefficient
value < 80 so it is free from multicollinearity problems and a
heteroscedasticity test as proven by the variable probability value independent
> 0.05, thus avoiding the problem of heteroscedasticity, this test is
carried out to see whether the regression model has unequal variances from the
residuals of one observation to another. Testing the normality of equation 1
obtained a probability value of 0.100594 > 0.05, it was concluded that the
data in equation 1 was normally distributed. Testing the normality of equation
2, the probability value was 0.397327 > 0.05, it was concluded that the data
in equation 2 was normally distributed. The multicollinearity test in equation
1 shows that the independent variable has a coefficient <0.80, so equation 1
does not have a multicollinearity problem. The multicollinearity test of
equation 2 shows that the independent variable has a coefficient <0.80, so
that equation 2 does not experience multicollinearity problems. The
heteroscedasticity test in regression 1 and regression 2 using the Glejser test obtained a probability value for the
independent variable > 0.05, so the data used avoided heteroscedasticity
problems.
Hypothesis test
Hypothesis testing in model 1 and model 2 uses the
Random Effect Model (REM).
Table 3
Hypothesis testing
|
Model 1 (REM) |
Model 2 (REM) |
|||||||
|
|
Coeff. |
SE |
t-stat |
Prob. |
Coeff. |
SE |
t-stat |
Prob. |
|
SG |
-0.0448 |
0.0551 |
-0.8125 |
0.4202 |
0.8596 |
0.7454 |
1.1532 |
0.2542 |
|
CR |
-0.0644 |
0.0203 |
-3.1656 |
0.0026 |
0.0254 |
0.2835 |
0.0898 |
0.9288 |
|
DER |
|
|
|
|
2.2968 |
1.4880 |
1.5434 |
0.1289 |
|
F-Stat |
4.6886 |
|
|
0.0134 |
1.4601 |
|
|
0.2363 |
|
Adj. R 2 |
0.1201 |
|
|
|
0.0249 |
|
|
|
|
Obs |
55 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
Model 1 in table 3 proves the results of the influence
of company growth and liquidity on capital structure. There is no effect
between growth and capital structure with -tcount<-ttable of -0.8125 < -2.0066 and a significance of 0.4202
> 0.05. Liquidity has a significant negative effect on capital structure
with -tcount>-ttable of
-3.1656 > -2.0066 and a significance value of 0.0026 <0.05. The results
of the F model 1 test show that company growth and liquidity simultaneously and
significantly affect capital structure with Fcount>Ftable of 4.6886 > 3.1751 and a prob
value. 0.0013 <0.05. The adjusted r square value is 0.1201 or 12.01%, this
indicates that the joint influence of company growth and liquidity on capital
structure is 12.01% and 87.99% is explained by other variables not explained in
this research.
Model 2 in table 3 shows the impact of company growth,
liquidity and capital structure on firm value. There is no influence between
company growth on firm value with tcount<ttable of 0.7454 <2.0076 and a significance of 0.2542
> 0.05. Liquidity has no effect on firm value with tcount<ttable of -0.0898 < -2.0076 and a significance of 0.9288
> 0.05. There is no influence between capital structure and firm value with tcount<ttable of 1.5434
<2.0076 and a significance of 0.1289 > 0.05. The results of the F model 2
test show that company growth, liquidity and capital structure simultaneously
have no effect on firm value with Fcount<Ftable of 1.4601 <2.7862 and a prob
value. 0.2363 > 0.05. The adjusted r square value is 0.0249 or 2.49%, this
indicates that together company growth, liquidity and capital structure have an
influence on firm value of 2.49% and 97.51% is explained by other variables
that are not explained in this research.
Table 4
Sobel Test
|
|
Coefficient |
SE |
Sobel test Stat. |
One-Tailed Prob. |
Two-tailed Prob. |
|
SG |
-0.0448 |
0.0552 |
-0.7224 |
0.2349 |
0.4699 |
|
CR |
-0.0645 |
0.0204 |
-1.4176 |
0.0781 |
0.1562 |
The results of the Sobel test prove that capital
structure is unable to mediate the relationship between company growth and
company value with a value of Z < t table or -0.0448 < 2.0066 and a
two-tailed prob of 0.4699 > 0.05. The results of
the Sobel test prove that capital structure is unable to mediate the
relationship between liquidity and company value with a value of Z < t table
or -0.0645 < 2.0066 and a two-tailed prob of
0.1562 > 0.05.
Table 5
Conclusion Hypothesis Testing
|
Hypothesis |
X |
Y |
Prob. |
Conclusion |
|
H1 |
pp |
BC |
0.4202 |
Rejected |
|
H2 |
CR |
BC |
0.0026 |
Accepted |
|
H3 |
pp |
N.P |
0.2542 |
Rejected |
|
H4 |
CR |
N.P |
0.9288 |
Rejected |
|
H5 |
BC |
N.P |
0.1289 |
Rejected |
|
H6 |
PP-SM-NP |
|
0.4699 |
Rejected |
|
H7 |
CR-SM-NP |
|
0.1562 |
Rejected |
|
Source: Lydia Indah P (2023) |
||||
Discussion
The partial results of the first hypothesis show a
value of -tcount <-ttable
of -0.8125 < -2.0066 and a significance of 0.4202 > 0.05. The results
show a figure of more than 0.05, which means the hypothesis is rejected. These
results are not in accordance with the research of Khoiril
et al. (2018), Dewiningrat & Mustanda
(2018), Wijaya (2019) and Atiningsih
& Wahyuni (2020) which state that income growth has a negative impact on
capital structure. The company's high revenue growth will minimize the use of
debt. With an increase in sales levels, the company will receive more cash so
that the company uses internal funds for its operations (Purba
et al., 2020). In line with Andayani & Suardana's (2018) research, Purba
et al. (2020) and Afinindy et al. (2021) which states
that there is no effect of company growth on capital structure.
The results of the second hypothesis research
partially show that the -tcount>-ttable value is -3.1656 > -2.0066 and the significance
value is 0.0026 <0.05, which means the hypothesis is accepted. The research
results are in line with Dewiningrat & Mustanda (2018), Deviani & Sudjarni (2018), Uli (2020), Afinindy et al. (2021) and Pertiwi et al. (2022) which
states that liquidity has a negative influence on capital structure. The
current ratio is used to assess whether or not a company is able to pay all its
obligations, so that it can attract investors to invest. Reducing the portion
of debt in the capital structure can be done by paying off short-term debt.
When cash rises, the capital structure of the business falls. Companies with
lots of cash will look to their own resources first before making large
investments, as the pecking order principle suggests. High liquidity companies
often avoid debt because they can fund their operations with existing resources
rather than having to go out and borrow money. Companies that have excess
liquid assets are able to finance their operational activities and will reduce
the use of debt in a company's capital structure (Deviani
& Sudjarni, 2018).
The results of the third hypothesis research partially
show a value with tcount <ttable
of 0.7454 < 2.0076 and a significance of 0.2542 > 0.05, which means the
hypothesis is rejected. These results are not in line with research by N. Dewi et al. (2018), Amanda et al. (2018) and Adnyani & Suaryana (2020)
which show that company growth has a positive effect on company value. The
sales growth rate is not a consideration for investors when investing because
high or low sales levels in a business cannot be a guarantee of the return on
investment that investors expect (Afinindy et al.,
2021). If there are fluctuations in sales levels in each company, the effect
will not directly affect the value of a company. Investors are more interested
in seeing the level of profit or profits generated by the company compared to
the level of sales and this will attract more investors to invest. This result
is not in line with signaling theory where the level of sales can be a signal
that has an impact on investors' investment decisions. The research results are
in line with the findings of Rahayu et al. (2020), Alfinur & Hidayat (2021), Romadhina & Andhitiyara
(2021), Afinindy et al. (2021) and Yusmaniarti et al. (2021) and Mutiara
et al. (2022) which states that company growth has no influence on company
value.
The results of the fourth hypothesis research
partially show a tcount <ttable
value of -0.0898 < -2.0076 and a significance of 0.9288 > 0.05, which
means the hypothesis is rejected. This result is not in accordance with Yanti
& Darmayanti (2019), N. Dewi
et al. (2018), Uli, (2020) and Hapsoro
& Falih (2020) where the results of this research
show that liquidity has a positive effect on company value. The level of
liquidity a company has cannot affect the value of the business. Low liquidity
does not affect the value of the company, it only shows that the ability to pay
short-term debt is problematic, it does not mean that the value of the company
will immediately decrease. However, too much liquidity is also not good because
it shows a lot of idle money, that is, there is no cash flow to generate
profits (Afinindy et al., 2021). Liquidity is related
to the company's internal conditions in fulfilling short-term obligations,
investors look more at the long-term return on investments made which can be
assessed from the profitability ratio. This result is not in accordance with
signal theory where companies that have the ability to fulfill their
obligations will receive a positive signal because they can provide guarantees
for future prospects. The results of this study are in accordance with the
findings of Aslindar & Lestari (2020), Iman et
al. (2021), Afinindy et al. (2021) and Pertiwi et al.
(2022).
The results of the fifth hypothesis research partially
show a tcount <ttable
value of 1.5434 < 2.0076 and a significance of 0.1289 > 0.05, which means
the hypothesis is rejected. These results are not in accordance with research
conducted by Khoiril et al. (2018), Wijaya (2019), Isnawati & Widjajanti (2019) and N. Dewi et
al. (2018) which states that capital structure does not have a positive
influence on company value. The value of the company, as represented in the
share price, is not affected by changes in capital structure. Financial
decisions made by management are considered to have little impact on the
choices made by investors. The size of the debt owned by the company is less
attractive to investors, because investors will see how effectively the funds
are used to increase the company's value (Uli, 2020).
Companies that expand their business will require additional debt so that it
will make the company more developed. In the coal mining industry, it
definitely requires large amounts of financing obtained from both internal and
external companies to carry out its operational activities, so high or low
capital structure is not a concern for potential investors as long as the
company is able to manage and fulfill all its obligations. Investors can
measure the company's long-term financial health and can assess the investment
decisions to be taken. Apart from capital structure, income growth and
liquidity also have no effect on company value, it seems that potential
investors do not see this when investing. Investors will be more interested in
seeing how long a company has been established or seeing the existence of
companies that have been listed on the IDX as well as seeing the company's
track record in general and the rate of return investors receive while
investing in a company. The results of this study are not in line with the
signal theory where an increase in the value of debt will give a positive
signal to firm value. The conclusion of this study that capital structure does
not affect firm value is consistent with the findings of Tumangkeng
(2019), Hutahaean & Bu'ulolo
(2020), (Uli, 2020) and (Mahanani
& Kartika, 2022).
The results of the Sobel test prove that capital
structure cannot mediate the relationship between company growth and company
value with a value of Z < ttable or -0.0448 <
2.0066 and a two-tailed probability of 0.4699 > 0.05, which means the
hypothesis is rejected. Research inconsistent with Khoiril
et al. (2018), N. Dewi et al., (2018) and Atiningsih & Wahyuni (2020) which emphasize that
capital structure can play a mediating role in company growth and value. The
level of financial structure cannot affect the relationship between revenue
growth and company value because revenue growth can only increase if the
company implements a good marketing strategy based on these conditions (Afinindy et al., 2021). There is no influence between
income growth and capital structure and there is no influence of capital
structure on company value, so capital structure cannot be used as an
intermediary variable in this research. The research results of Wijaya (2019), Isnawati & Widjajanti, (2019) and Afinindy
et al. (2021) are consistent with this conclusion.
The results of the Sobel test show that capital
structure cannot mediate the relationship between liquidity and company value
with a value of Z < ttable or -0.0645 < 2.0066
and a two-tailed prob of 0.1562 > 0.05, which
means the hypothesis is rejected. This result is not in line with N. Dewi et al. (2018), Aslindar
& Lestari (2020) and Pertiwi et al. (2022) who argue that capital structure
can mediate between liquidity and company value. Since capital structure has
little impact on a company's value, investors focus on whether or not the
company uses capital efficiently and whether it creates added value for
investors. Companies and investors find that there are other factors that can
influence company value. Liquidity has a negative impact on capital structure
so it has no impact on company value. These results are in line with the
findings of Rahmatullah (2019), Uli
(2020) and Hamdani et al. (2022).
CONCLUSION
The relationship between liquidity and capital structure has a
negative effect, but there is no growth effect on capital structure. There is
no impact of growth rate, liquidity or capital structure on firm value. The
results of the Sobel test explain that capital structure cannot mediate the
relationship between growth and liquidity on firm value. It can be concluded
that coal sector companies do not use sales levels, liquidity and capital
structure as a reference or determinant in investing because it can be seen
from the results of hypothesis testing where the influence of the variables
studied has a small percentage influence on company value. Prospective
investors will look more in terms of the profits generated by this industry,
how much profit investors will get if they invest their capital in the coal
industry, apart from that the coal industry also definitely has liquid assets whose
use can be maximized so that they can be an addition in increasing profit.
Companies need to manage their assets and inventory optimally so that it will
have an impact on investor decisions.
Researchers found that there were limitations in this research,
firstly, in selecting the sample companies, not all mining companies in
Indonesia were sampled, only the coal sub-sector, there were companies that did
not publish financial reports so they could not be included in the data
processing and the companies selected were only those that obtained profit in
the research period. The variables used are minimal and do not have a
significant influence on the coal industry.
Suggestions to future researchers could be to choose a sample
with a larger scope and use samples from other industries on the IDX or by
using a sample of mining industry companies as a whole using different
variables so that they can find other factors that can influence company value
such as profitability to find out how Companies are able to obtain profits from
business activities and also value for shareholders by calculating return ROA,
ROI, ROE and activity ratios to measure the efficiency of a business in
converting its assets into income by measuring total asset and inventory
turnover. It is hoped that in further research, results will be obtained that
are more appropriate and reflect conditions that suit the company.
REFERENCES
Adisurya,
P. (2022). Covid-19 and its Effects on Indonesian Capital Market Performance.
Bi. Go. Id. https://www.bi.go.id/id/bi-institute/BI-Epsilon/Pages/Covid-19-dan-Efeknya-ke-Performa-Pasar-Modal-Indonesia.aspx
Adnyani,
IGNS, & Suaryana, IGNA (2020). The Effect of
Company Sizes, Sales Growth, and Profitability on Firm Values. American Journal
of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR), 4(6).
Afinindy,
I., Salim, U., & Ratnawati, K. (2021). The Effect
of Profitability, Firm Size, Liquidity, Sales Growth on Firm Value Mediated
Capital Structure. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 24(4).
Alfinur,
& Hidayat, CW (2021). Firm Size, Sales Growth,
Profitability and Firm Value in the Basic Industry and Chemical Sector. MBR
(Management and Business Review), 5(1).
Amanda, R., Utary, AR, &
Defung, F. (2018). The influence of capital structure
and company growth and commodity prices on profitability and company value in
the coal mining industry in Indonesia. The influence of capital structure and
company growth and commodity prices on profitabi.
Journal of Management, 10(2), 147�158.
Andayani,
IAKT, & Suardana, KA (2018). The Influence of
Profitability, Liquidity, Sales Growth, and Asset Structure on Capital
Structure. Udayana University Accounting E-Journal,
24(1).
Aslindar,
DA, & Lestari, UP (2020). The Influence of Profitability, Liquidity and
Growth Opportunities on Company Value with Capital Structure as an Intervening
Variable. Dynamics of Accounting, Finance and Banking, 9(1), 91�106.
Atiningsih,
S., & Wahyuni, AN (2020). The Influence of Firm Size, Sales Growth, Asset
Structure and Profitability on Company Value with Capital Structure as an
Intervening Variable (Empirical Study of Manufacturing Companies Listed on the
Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) for the 2012 - 2017 Period). Journal of STIE
Semarang, 12(1).
Chabachib,
M., Hersugondo, H., Septiviardi,
D., & Pamungkas, ID (2020). The effect of
investment opportunity sets and company growth on firm value: Capital structure
as an intervening variable. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and
Change, 12(11), 139�156.
Chasanah, N.,
& Sucipto, A. (2019). Liquidity Ratio,
Profitability, and Solvency on Stock Returns With
Capital Structure As An Intervening Variable (Study On Food And Beverage Sub
Sector Listed In Indonesia Stock Exchange (Idx)
Period 2013-2017). Ekspektra: Journal of Business and
Management, 3, 52�68. https://doi.org/10.25139/ekt.v3i1.1476
Darmawan.
(2022). Sharia Financial Management (I). UNY Press.
Deviani,
MY, & Sudjarni, LK (2018). The Effect of Growth
Rate, Asset Structure, Profitability, and Liquidity on the Capital Structure of
Mining Companies in Bei. Udayana
University Management E-Journal, 7(3), 1222.
https://doi.org/10.24843/ejmunud.2018.v7.i03.p04
Dewi, IAPT, & Sujaya, IK (2019). The Effect of Liquidity, Sales Growth,
and Business Risk on Company Value. Udayana
University Accounting E-Journal, 26(1).
Dewi, N., Andini, R., &
Santoso, EB (2018). The influence of liquidity and company growth on company
value with the capital structure variable as an intervening variable. Journal
of Accounting Pandanaran Semarang University, 4(4),
1�19.
Dewiningrat,
AI, & Mustanda, IK (2018). The Influence of
Liquidity, Profitability, and Asset Structure on Capital Structure. Unud Management E-Journal, 7(7), 18�31.
https://doi.org/10.32877/eb.v2i3.137
Dominika, D. (2017). The Influence of Liquidity and
Capital Structure on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening
Variable in Companies Listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange. UPN Faculty of
Economics and Business. Vol 20. No.1. https://repository.upnvj.ac.id/4477/. Angewandte Chemie International
Edition, 6(11), 951�952., 3(1), 103�111.
Endiana,
IDM, & Suryandari, NNA (2021). Going Concern
Opinion: In terms of agency theory and triggers. EQUITY (Journal of Economics
and Finance), 5(2), 224�242. https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2021.v5.i2.4490
Ermaini, Suryani, AI, Sari, MI, & Hafidzi,
AH (2021). Fundamentals of Financial Management (M. Suardi
(ed.); First). Blue Ocean Publishers.
Fajariyah,
Z., & Susetyo, A. (2020). Effect of Profitability
Ratio, Liquidity Ratio, Company Growth on Firm Value and Capital Structure as
Intervening Variables. Scientific Journal of Management, Business and
Accounting Students (JIMMBA), 2(2), 259�270.
https://doi.org/10.32639/jimmba.v2i2.474
Farid, F. Al, & Ramadhan,
Y. (2022). Financial Performance as Mediator: Liquidity, Leverage, Corporate
Tax, Corporate Value. Indonesian Scientific Journal, 7.
Fauziah, F., & Jamal, SW (2020). Analysis of the
Influence of Leverage, Financial Performance, Firm Size and Sales Growth on
Firm Value in Manufacturing Companies on the Indonesian Stock Exchange.
Research Journal of Accounting and Business Management (RJABM), 4(2).
Franita,
R. (2018). Good Corporate Governance and Company Values (H. Wahyuni (ed.);
First). AQLI Scientific Research and Writing Institute.
Hamdani,
ML, Partini, S., & Pratama, AA (2022). Analysis
of the Effect of Profitability, Company Size and Liquidity on Company Value
with Capital Structure as an Intervening Variable. Jempper
Journal, 2(2).
Handini,
S., & Astawinetu, ED (2020). Portfolio Theory and
Indonesian Capital Markets. Scopindo Media Library.
Hantono.
(2018). Concept of Financial Report Analysis Using the Ratio & SPSS
Approach (First). CV Budi Utama.
Hapsoro,
D., & Falih, ZN (2020). The Effect of Firm Size,
Profitability, and Liquidity on the Firm Value Moderated by Carbon Emission
Disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Investment, 21(2).
https://doi.org/10.18196/jai.2102147
Harry. (2016). Financial Statement Analysis:
Integrated and Comprehensive Edition. PT Grasindo.
Harry. (2017). Accounting Research Review. PT Grasindo.
HS, S., & Anlia, VLB
(2021). Corporate Financial Performance of the Jakarta Islamic Index during the
Covid -19 Pandemic (FA Pratama (Ed.)). Insania Publisher.
Hutahaean,
T.F., & Bu'ulolo, E.K. (2020). The Effect of
Capital Structure, Interest Rates and Company Size on Firm Value. Economics,
Finance, Investment and Sharia (EQUITY), 2(1).
Faith, C., Sari, FN, & Pujiati,
N. (2021). The Effect of Liquidity and Profitability on Firm Value. Journal of
Perspectives, 19(2), 191�198. https://doi.org/10.31294/jp.v19i2.11393
Indrarini,
S. (2019). Corporate Value through Profit Quality (Good Governance and
Corporate Policy) (N. Azizah (Ed.)). Scopindo Media Library.
Isnawati,
FN, & Widjajanti, K. (2019). The Influence of Institutional
Ownership, Profitability, Company Size and Sales Growth on Company Value with
Capital Structure as an Intervening Variable. Journal of Economics and Business
Research, 12(1).
Indonesian Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources.
(2021). Government Encourages Mineral and Coal Utilization Policy to Maintain
Domestic Energy Security. Indonesian Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources.
https://www.esdm.go.id/id/media-center/arsip-berita/gov-jangan-politik-pecepatan-mineral-dan-batubara-untuk-jaga-kelahanan-energi-domestik
Khoiril,
S., Pranaditya, A., & Supriyanto,
A. (2018). The Influence of Company Profitability and Growth on Company Value
with Capital Structure as an Intervening Variable (Case Study at the company's
most active in BEI and the period 2011-2015). Journal of Accounting, 8, 1�16.
http://jurnal.unpand.ac.id/index.php/AKS/article/view/977
Kompas.com. (2022). Potential of Indonesia's Natural
Resources. Kompas.Com.
https://www.kompas.com/skola/read/2020/05/28/110000269/potensi-source-daya-alam-indonesia?page=2
Kustiningsih,
N., & Farhan, A. (2022). Financial Management: Basics of Financial
Management (CV Globalcare (Ed.)). CV Globalcare.
Mahanani,
HT, & Kartika, A. (2022). The influence of capital structure, liquidity,
company size, and profitability on company value. Fair Value: Scientific
Journal of Accounting and Finance, 5(1).
Mulyadi,
O., Suryadi, D., Sari, DP, & Sari, PIP (2022).
Advanced Financial Management (Case Study Theory and Problem Solving). Media
Scholar Partners CV.
Munandar,
A., & Alvian, R. (2022). The Influence of Debt to
Equity Ratio, Net Profit Margin and Cash Ratio on Firm Value. Fair Value:
Scientific Journal of Accounting and Finance, 5(2), 2622�2205.
Mutiara,
N., Purwohedi, U., & Zulaihati,
S. (2022). The Influence of Firm Size, Sales Growth and Profitability on
Company Value in Companies Listed in the Healthcare, Technology and Food and
Beverage Sectors on the Indonesian Stock Exchange for the 2018-2020 Period.
Indonesian Journal of Economy, Business, Entrepreneurship and Finance, 2(3).
Nita, N., & Hairul, A.
(2017). Analysis of Factors that Influence the Capital Structure of Mining
Sector Companies. JSHP (Journal of Social Humanities and Education), 1(1), 53.
https://doi.org/10.32487/jshp.v1i1.235
Pertiwi, S., Rahmawati, IY, Darmawan,
A., & Innayah, MN (2022). Effect of
Profitability, Firm Size and Liquidity on Firm Value With Capital Structure as
Intervening Variable (Case Study on Manufacturing Companies Listed on the
Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2017-2020 Period). Economic Media, 22(2).
Purba, MN, Kristiany, E., Djilani, A., &
Farera, W. (2020). The Effect of Current Ratio,
Return on Assets, Total Asset Turnover and Sales Growth on Capital Structure in
Manufacturing Company. International Journal of Social Science and Business,
4(3).
Putra, DA (2021). Coordinating Ministry for Economic
Affairs on a Year of Covid-19: Almost All Sectors Are Affected. Merdeka. Com.
https://www.merdeka.com/uang/kemenko-perekonomian-soal-setahun-covid-19-virtually-all-sector-terdampak.html
RM, B., & DA, K. (1986). The moderator�mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic,
and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51(6).
Rahayu,
VS, Mustikowati, RI, & Suroso,
A. (2020). The Influence of Company Size, Sales Growth and Profitability on
Company Value. Management Student Research Journal (JRMM), 8(1).
Rahmatullah,
DD (2019). The Influence of Profitability and Liquidity on Company Value with
Capital Structure as an Intervening Variable. AKUNESA Accounting Journal, 7.
https://ejournal.unesa.ac.id/index.php/jurnal-akuntansi/article/view/29926
Romadhina,
AP, & Andhitiyara, R. (2021). The Influence of
Tax Planning, Sales Growth and Dividend Policy on Company Value. Journal of
Information Systems, Applied, Management, Accounting and Research, 5(2).
Saluy, AB, Fitri, EM, Sudjono, & K, N. (2020). The Effect of Capital
Structure, Dividend Policies, and Working Capital Routing on Company Value and
Profitability as Intervening Variables in Property and Real Estate Companies in
Indonesia Stock Exchange 2014-2018. International Research Journal of
Innovations in Engineering and Technology, 4(10), 14�19.
https://doi.org/10.47001/irjiet/2020.410003
Sari, IAGDM, & Sedana,
IBP (2020). Profitability and liquidity on firm value and capital structure as
intervening variables. International Research Journal of Management, IT and
Social Sciences, 7(1), 116�127. https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v7n1.828
Sivalingam,
L., & Kengatharan, L. (2018). Capital structure
and financial performance: A study on commercial banks in Sri Lanka. Asian
Economic and Financial Review, 8(5), 586�598.
https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.aefr.2018.85.586.598
Sudarno,
Renaldo, N., Hutauruk, MB, Junaedi,
AT, & Suyono. (2022). Financial Research Theory
(Andi (ed.); I). CV. Eternal Archipelago Literacy.
Syahputra,
E. (2022). This is the Role of the Coal Industry in the National & Regional
Economy. CNBC Indonesia. https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/market/20221004113736-17-377028/ini-peran-industri-batu-bara-ke-economic-national-region
Syaifuddin,
MS (2021). The Effect of Investment Opportunity Set, Capital Structure,
Interest Rate and Inflation on Firm Value. Journal of Islamic Economic Scholar,
2(2), 62. https://doi.org/10.14421/jies.2021.2.2.62-72
Thomas, VF (2020). Corona Impact: 6 out of 11 Coal
Companies Threatened with Collapse. Tirto. Id.
https://tirto.id/dampak-corona-6-dari-11-corporation-batu-bara-terancam-terpuruk-frdo
Tumangkeng,
MF (2019). The Influence of Capital Structure, Company Growth, Profitability
and Company Size on Company Value. Journal of Accounting Science and Research,
7(6).
Uli, R. (2020). The Effect
of Liquidity on Company Value through Capital Structure and Profitability. Tirtayasa Economics, 15(2).
Widayanthi,
NMDG, & Sudiartha, GM (2018). The Effect of
Growth Rate on Company Value with Capital Structure as a Moderating Variable. Udayana University Management E-Journal, 7(4), 2196.
https://doi.org/10.24843/ejmunud.2018.v07.i04.p17
Wijaya,
IGNS (2019). The Effect of Sales Growth on Firm Value with Capital Structure as
an Intervening Variable. Journal of Management Science (JUIMA), 9(2).
Yanti, IGADN, & Darmayanti,
NPA (2019). Effect of Profitability, Company Size, Leverage and Liquidity on
Company Value. Journal of Management, 8(4).
Yulianti,
V., & Ramadhan, Y. (2022). Effect of Capital Structure, Profitability and
Company Size on Firm Value. Indonesian Scientific Journal, 7.
Yusmaniarti, Sauma, A., Khair, U., Marini,
& Ratnawili. (2021). the Influence of Company
Growth, Solvability and Profitability on Firm Value in Indonesian Property and
Real Estate Companies. Ekombis Review Journal -
Scientific Journal of Economics and Business, 9(1).