IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uta/papers/2021_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Not your average firm: a quantile regression approach to the firm level investment

Author

Listed:
  • Doguhan Sundal

Abstract

The large majority of the work published on firm investment is done in the neoclassical frame of a rational optimizing firm attempting to achieve optimal size. While this frame addresses one important consideration in firm investment, it has two important shortcomings that this paper will address. First, it doesn’t have a clear interpretation of how the cash-flows are affecting the firm investment decisions. Second, the standard approach operates on an “average firm,” which in fact is significantly different from a firm with modal investment behavior. This study employs a Bayesian quantile regression model that yields two significant results. First concerning the relative responsiveness of these two neglected factors, it determines that the firms with higher investment rates have higher responsiveness to the valuation ratio and lower responsiveness to the profit rate. Second and of broader political economic note, it finds a decline in the responsiveness of firm investment to these factors that is consistent with the widely discussed macroeconomic “secular stagnation” of the US economy, and within that consistency, that the decline varies across sectors, and is more pronounced in firms with higher investment rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Doguhan Sundal, 2021. "Not your average firm: a quantile regression approach to the firm level investment," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2021_02, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:uta:papers:2021_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.utah.edu/research/publications/2021_02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilchrist, Simon & Himmelberg, Charles P., 1995. "Evidence on the role of cash flow for investment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 541-572, December.
    2. Coad, Alex, 2010. "Neoclassical vs evolutionary theories of financial constraints: Critique and prospectus," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 206-218, August.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    4. Steven N. Kaplan & Luigi Zingales, 2000. "Investment-Cash Flow Sensitivities Are Not Valid Measures of Financing Constraints," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(2), pages 707-712.
    5. Foley, Duncan K & Sidrauski, Miguel, 1970. "Portfolio Choice, Investment and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(1), pages 44-63, March.
    6. Abel, Andrew B & Blanchard, Olivier J, 1986. "The Present Value of Profits and Cyclical Movements in Investment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(2), pages 249-273, March.
    7. Andrei, Daniel & Mann, William & Moyen, Nathalie, 2019. "Why did the q theory of investment start working?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 251-272.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 1958- & Teruel, Mercedes, 2010. "Are small firms more sensitive to financial variables?," Working Papers 2072/151623, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    2. Beck, Thorsten & Demirguc-Kunt, Asli & Laeven, Luc & Maksimovic, Vojislav, 2006. "The determinants of financing obstacles," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 932-952, October.
    3. Jason G. Cummins & Kevin A. Hassett & Stephen D. Oliner, 2006. "Investment Behavior, Observable Expectations, and Internal Funds," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 796-810, June.
    4. Giovanni Cerulli & Bianca Poti', 2016. "Explaining firm sensitivity to R&D subsidies within a dose-response model: The role of financial constraints, real cost of investment, and strategic value of R&D," DEM Working Papers 2016/09, Department of Economics and Management.
    5. Kim, Jounghyeon & McCullough, Jeffrey S. & Lee, Jinhyung, 2022. "Do liquidity constraints affect the investment decisions of California hospitals?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    6. Robert S. Chirinko & Huntley Schaller, 2011. "Fundamentals, Misvaluation, and Business Investment," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(7), pages 1423-1442, October.
    7. Klaus Gugler & Dennis C. Mueller & B. Burcin Yurtoglu, 2004. "Marginal q, Tobin's q, Cash Flow, and Investment," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(3), pages 512-531, January.
    8. Behr Andreas, 2005. "Investment, Q and Liquidity / Investitionen, Q und Liquidität: Evidence for Germany Using Firm Level Balance Sheet Data / Empirische Ergebnisse auf Basis von Unternehmensdaten," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(1), pages 2-21, February.
    9. Paul Mizen & Cihan Yalcin, 2006. "Monetary Policy, Corporate Financial Composition and Real Activity," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 52(1), pages 177-213, March.
    10. Caggese, Andrea, 2007. "Testing financing constraints on firm investment using variable capital," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 683-723, December.
    11. Gül, Selçuk & Taştan, Hüseyin, 2020. "The impact of monetary policy stance, financial conditions, and the GFC on investment-cash flow sensitivity," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 692-707.
    12. Gaurav Gupta & Jitendra Mahakud, 2019. "Alternative measure of financial development and investment-cash flow sensitivity: evidence from an emerging economy," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 5(1), pages 1-28, December.
    13. Jean-Bernard Chatelain, 2002. "Structural modelling of investment and financial constraints: Where do we stand?," Working Paper Research 28, National Bank of Belgium.
    14. Carter Bloch, 2005. "R&D investment and internal finance: the cash flow effect," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 213-223.
    15. Sapienza, Paola & Polk, Christopher, 2003. "The Real Effects of Investor Sentiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 3826, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Patrick Francois & Huw Lloyd-Ellis, 2005. "I - Q Cycles," Working Paper 1040, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    17. Ruhollah Eskandari & Morteza Zamanian, 2023. "Heterogeneous responses to corporate marginal tax rates: Evidence from small and large firms," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(7), pages 1018-1047, November.
    18. Simon Gilchrist & Charles Himmelberg, 1999. "Investment: Fundamentals and Finance," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998, volume 13, pages 223-274, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Fabio Bertoni & Massimo G. Colombo & Annalisa Croce, 2010. "The Effect of Venture Capital Financing on the Sensitivity to Cash Flow of Firm's Investments," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 16(4), pages 528-551, September.
    20. Jean-Bernard Chatelain, 2003. "Structural modelling of financial constraints on investment: where do we stand?," Chapters, in: Paul Butzen & Catherine Fuss (ed.), Firms’ Investment and Finance Decisions, chapter 2, pages 40-58, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tobin’s Q; Investment Rate; Profit Rate; Finance Constraint; Secular Stagnation; Bayesian Econometrics; Bayesian Quantile Regression JEL Classification: D22; D24; E12; E22; G11;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • E12 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Keynes; Keynesian; Post-Keynesian; Modern Monetary Theory
    • E22 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Investment; Capital; Intangible Capital; Capacity
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uta:papers:2021_02. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuutus.html .

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

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