Моделирование прогнозирования банкротства предприятий обрабатывающего производства
This article provides the results of development of bankruptcy prediction static model and its testing on the sample of more than thousand companies of manufacturing industry. The main scenarios of bankruptcy are identified and it is shown that depending on the bankruptcy scenario possible insolvency can be predicted one or four years before.
The chief aim of this paper is to analyse dynamics of linear and non-linear methods to predict bankruptcy for Russian private small and medium-sized retail and wholesale trade companies. We use financial and non-financial data prior and subsequent to the economic crisis of 2008—2009. We use the following methods: logistic regression and random forest.
This research will be of vital importance especially to banks and other credit organisations providing loans to small and medium businesses.
Our dataset comprises from 200,000 to 600,000 companies depending on specific year. We use data from the Ruslana database which covers the period from 2004 to 2012.
The definition of default is extended to financial difficulties by adding voluntary liquidated firms to those liquidated as a result of legal bankruptcy. We study active companies and two types of liquidated ones.
Heterogeneity of Russian companies is taken into account in several ways. In addition to financial ratios derived from financial statements we include non-financial variables such as regional distribution, age, size and legal form into statistical models.
Evaluation of the prediction performance is done with the help of out-of-sample forecasts. We obtain models with quite high predictive power, area under ROC curve reaches 0.75. Random forest outperformed logit-model. Adding non-financial information such as age and federal region leads to the improved forecasts while legal form and size do not have a great impact on the outcome. Among financial measures liquidity, profitability and leverage ratios turned out to be essential. Moreover, our models captured a structural change which was likely to be caused by the crisis of 2008—2009.
This book provides a unique and timely analysis of the role of structural change in the economic development of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) with a consideration for the role of industry, and in particular manufacturing. The emergence of BRICS reflects an ongoing change in the international economic order. BRICS now account for very substantial part of global GDP, global manufactured value added and global manufactured exports. The book examines their economic experiences and structural change in BRICS over the past three decades, identifying both differences and commonalities, and deriving lessons for other industrializing countries. Section I contains comparative studies focusing on the commonalities and differences of the experiences of BRICS. Section II includes six country studies providing a more detailed analysis of the long-run experiences of each of the countries. Section III consists of a set of seven thematic studies focusing on specific topics such as global value chains, the role of transnational corporations in the food chain, the role of foreign versus domestic investment, the role of domestic versus foreign demand in economic growth the diffusion of environmental energy technology and the similarities, and the differences in industrial policies pursued in the five countries. The book contains a summary chapter that provides an integrated perspective of the various contributions from the point of view of poverty reduction and development. It asks, whether the patterns of structural change and industrial development that BRICS experienced, had an impact on poverty outcomes, and if so, what where the channels and the consequences?
This paper is concerned with stock liquidity as a factor in making capital structure decisions by managers of Russian firms. Although a big number of studies on capital structure occurred over the last few decades, stock liquidity has only recently attracted scholars’ attention as a possible driver for the choice of capital structure. Yet the existing papers are based on data from the developed capital markets. The latter differ substantially from the Russian market in terms of institutional environment and more liquid stocks. Against the background of revisions in the Russian clearing system that are expected to boost liquidity of stocks, this paper gains in currency.
The theoretic mechanisms behind the interplay of stock liquidity and capital structure are discussed in previous studies. Lower stock liquidity is associated with higher transaction costs and informational asymmetry, and thus with higher required return. Therefore it is assumed that the managers aiming at firm value maximization would prefer debt to equity financing in case if stock is not liquid enough. There are also theoretic grounds to expect an opposite impact of capital structure on stock liquidity.
The article discusses the impact of import tariff reductions, prescribed by the terms of Russia's accession to the WTO, on a number of industries based on the proposed concept of critical product analysis. We identify a number of changes in customs regulations, that create serious risks in such sectors as ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, chemical industry, timber industry complex, aerospace complex, engineering, that create an urgent need for the government to develop a plan of compensatory measures.
The chapter explores the structural change in Russian economy during the last 20 years since the beginning of transition from planned to market economy. We focus the study on the role and place of manufacturing industry in generation of jobs and incomes and on major internal and external factors responsible for those changes using mostly official data from the national statistical agency. We show that in general this period can be described as a period of deindustrialization and the share of manufacturing has been diminishing both in terms of its input in GDP and, in particular, in providing employment and incomes. We describe how various combinations of economic and political factors determined the manufacturing industry development at different sub-periods and argue that the domineering process was the passive adjustment of Russian enterprises to global competition by cutting down inefficient job-places and production lines. While this restructuring was accompanied by significant growth of labour productivity the rates of technological modernization were insufficient to increase competitiveness of majority of firms and to increase and diversify Russian manufacturing export due mostly to inefficient state policy for creating a favourable investment climate and to attract domestic and foreign direct investments to Russian manufacturing sector.
Russia, industrialization, manufacturing, economic policy, institutional development