Merton-type default risk and financial performance: the dynamic panel moderation of firm size

Abstract

Purpose

The main purpose of this study is to evaluate the probability of default and examine the relationship between default risk and financial performance, with dynamic panel moderation of firm size.

Design/methodology/approach

This study utilizes a total of 1,500 firm-year observations from 2013 to 2018 using dynamic panel data approach of generalized method of moments to test the relationship between default risk and financial performance with the moderation effect of the firm size.

Findings

This study establishes the findings that default risk significantly impacts the financial performance. The relationship between distance-to-default (DD) and financial performance is positive, which means the relationship of the independent and dependent variable is inverse. Moreover, this study finds that the firm size is a significant positive moderator between DD and financial performance.

Practical implications

This study provides new and useful insight into the literature on the relationship between default risk and financial performance. The results of this study provide investors and businesses related to nonfinancial firms in the Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) with significant default risk's impact on performance. This study finds, on average, the default probability in KSE ALL indexed companies is 6.12%.

Originality/value

The evidence of the default risk and financial performance on samples of nonfinancial firms has been minimal; mainly, it has been limited to the banking sector. Moreover, the existing studies have only catered the direct effect of only. This study fills that gap and evaluates this relationship in nonfinancial firms. This study also helps in the evaluation of Merton model's performance in the nonfinancial firms.

Citation

Mushafiq, M., Sami, S.A., Sohail, M.K. and Sindhu, M.I. (2024), "Merton-type default risk and financial performance: the dynamic panel moderation of firm size", Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 168-181. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-09-2021-0181