Determinants of small and medium-sized enterprises performance: The evidence from Vietnam

Figures & data

Table 1. Variables in the model

No.	Variable(s)	Index	Explanation	Sources
Dependent variable
1	Return on equity	roe	$\mathrm{n}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{t}/\mathrm{t}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{k}\mathrm{h}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{r}{\mathrm{s}}^{\prime }\mathrm{e}\mathrm{q}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{y}$.
Independent variables
1	Lagged (return on equity)	lroe		McDonald (1999); Stierwald (2009); Vijayakumar (2011); Salman and Yazdanfar (2012); Yazdanfar (2013); Margaretha and Supartika (2016)
2	firm age	age	Age is calculated as Logarithm the difference between the investigation year and the firm’s birth year.	Stierwald (2009); Salman and Yazdanfar (2012); Mehari & Aemiro (2013); Tunyi et al. (2019)
3	firm size	size	The Logarithm of the firm’s assets.	Lee (2009); Vijayakumar & Tamizhselvan (2010); Tunyi et al. (2019)
4	leverage ratio	lev	$\mathrm{T}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{T}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}$	Booth et al. (2001); Onaolapo and Kajola (2010); Tan (2012); Salim and Yadav (2012); Iavorskyi (2013); Matar et al. (2018); Vaidya and Patel (2019); Ho and Mohd-Raff (2019)
5	liquidity ratio	liq	Measured by current ratio ($\mathrm{c}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{c}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{s}$)	Fama and Jensen (1983); Myers and Rajan (1995), Ang (1991); Honjo and Harada (2006); Deloof (2003); Yang et al. (2019); French & Taborda, (2017); Matar et al. (2018); Tunyi et al. (2019)
6	Investment on fixed assets	ppe	$\mathrm{C}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{h}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{w}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{v}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{x}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{T}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{s}$	Beneish et al. (2001); Fairfield et al. (2003); Gautam (2008); Khalid (2012); Matar et al. (2018); Tunyi et al. (2019),
7	Revenue growth of firm	rev	Logarithm differences of firm’s sales revenues between last year and current year	Khatab et al. (2011); Bseides, Lechner et al. (2016); Parida (2016); Feng et al. (2017); Ghozali et al. (2018); Matar et al. (2018); Hang and Thuy Linh (2020)
8	gross domestic product growth	gdp	$\mathrm{g}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{p}=\frac{\mathrm{g}\mathrm{d}{\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{t}}-\mathrm{g}\mathrm{d}{\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{t}-1}}{\mathrm{g}\mathrm{d}{\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{t}-1}}$	Matar et al. (2018); Tunyi et al. (2019); Hailegebreal (2016); Pham Anh Tuyet (2017); Hang and Thuy Linh (2020)
9	inflation rate	inf	$\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{f}=\frac{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}{\mathrm{f}}_{\mathrm{t}}-\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}{\mathrm{f}}_{\mathrm{t}-1}}{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}{\mathrm{f}}_{\mathrm{t}-1}}$	Matar et al. (2018); Tunyi et al. (2019); Ho and Mohd-Raff (2019); Sitharam and Hoque (2016) and Ipinnaiye et al. (2017)
10	interest rate spread	interest	Logarithm difference between lending rate and borrowing rate	Bekeris (2012); Nyumba et al. (2015), Abdullahi and Sulaiman (2015); Ozgur and Gorus (2016); Matar et al. (2018)
11	national governance quality	pic	Provincial Competitiveness Index (PCI)	Davidsson and Henrekson (2002); Stenholm et al. (2013); Charron and Lapuente (2013); J. Du and Mickiewicz (2016); Nguyen et al. (2017); Tunyi et al. (2019)

Source: Author’s collection

Table 2. Statistics descriptive

Variable	Obs	Mean	Std. Dev.	Min	Max
roe	1,715	0.07	1.25	−14.81	25.72
age	1,715	1.91	0.62	0.00	3.83
size	1,715	25.88	1.19	20.04	30.03
lev	1,715	0.48	0.86	0.00	16.49
liq	1,715	18.09	169.16	0.00	4230.00
ppe	1,715	0.17	0.20	0.00	0.95
rev	1,715	0.44	9.35	−182.08	228.66
gdp	1,715	0.06	0.01	0.05	0.07
inf	1,715	0.06	0.05	0.01	0.19
interest	1,715	0.03	0.00	0.02	0.03
pci	1,715	4.14	0.04	4.09	4.21

Source: results from Stata

Table 3. VIF

Variable	VIF	1/VIF
age	2.08	0.48
inf	1.73	0.58
gdp	1.65	0.60
interest	1.35	0.74
ppe	1.03	0.97
lev	1.03	0.97
size	1.02	0.98
liq	1.02	0.98
pci	1.01	0.99
rev	1.01	0.99
Mean VIF	1.29

Source: results from Stata

Table 4. Test for heteroskedasticity

Breusch-Pagan/Cook-Weisberg test for heteroskedasticity
Ho: Constant variance
Variables: fitted values of roe
chi2(1) = 18,893.58
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000

Source: results from Stata

Table 5. Test for autocorrelation

Wooldridge test for autocorrelation in panel data
H0: no first-order autocorrelation
F(1, 171) = 2547.396
Prob > F = 0.0000

Source: results from Stata

Table 6. Regression results by GMM estimation

Dynamic panel-data estimation, two-step system GMM
Group variable: FIRM				Number of obs =		1560
Time variable: year				Number of groups =		173
Number of instruments = 55				Obs per group: min =		2
Wald chi2(11) = 30.86				avg =		9.02
Prob > chi2 = 0.001				max =		11
roe	Coef.	Corrected	z	P > z	[95% Conf.	Interval]
		Std. Err.
lroe	0.6972	0.2962	2.3500	0.0190	0.1167	1.2777
age	0.0882	0.1765	0.5000	0.6170	−0.2578	0.4342
size	8.1791	3.2629	2.5100	0.0120	1.7838	14.5744
lev	−1.4934	0.4117	−3.6300	0.0000	−2.3004	−0.6865
liq	−0.0043	0.0133	−0.3200	0.7470	−0.0304	0.0218
ppe	0.0769	0.0237	3.2400	0.0010	0.0304	0.1234
rev	1.2763	0.4429	2.8800	0.0040	0.4082	2.1443
gdp	6.4723	1.8825	3.4400	0.0010	2.7826	10.1620
inf	−0.2560	0.4353	−0.5900	0.5560	−1.1092	0.5972
pci	8.3174	2.7199	3.0600	0.0020	2.9866	13.6482
interest	0.0151	0.0160	0.9500	0.3430	−0.0161	0.0464
_cons	−2.7250	9.3701	−0.2900	0.7710	−21.0900	15.6400
Arellano-Bond test for AR(1) in first differences: z = −1.76 Pr > z = 0.079
Arellano-Bond test for AR(2) in first differences: z = 0.99 Pr > z = 0.321
Sargan test of overid. restrictions: chi2(43) = 0.28 Prob > chi2 = 1.000
(Not robust, but not weakened by many instruments.)
Hansen test of overid. restrictions: chi2(43) = 18.95 Prob > chi2 = 0.999
(Robust, but weakened by many instruments.)
Difference-in-Hansen tests of exogeneity of instrument subsets:
GMM instruments for levels
Hansen test excluding group: chi2(26) = 2.34 Prob > chi2 = 1.000
Difference (null H = exogenous): chi2(17) = 16.61 Prob > chi2 = 0.481
iv(lroe)
Hansen test excluding group: chi2(42) = 18.42 Prob > chi2 = 0.999
Difference (null H = exogenous): chi2(1) = 0.54 Prob > chi2 = 0.464
iv(pci)
Hansen test excluding group: chi2(42) = 18.86 Prob > chi2 = 0.999
Difference (null H = exogenous): chi2(1) = 0.09 Prob > chi2 = 0.766
iv(size)
Hansen test excluding group: chi2(42) = 18.45 Prob > chi2 = 0.999
Difference (null H = exogenous): chi2(1) = 0.50 Prob > chi2 = 0.479

Source: results from Stata

McDonald, J. (1999). The determinants of firm profitability in Australian manufacturing. The Economic Record, 75(229), 115–126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1999.tb02440.x

 Google Scholar

Stierwald, A. (2009). Determinants of firm profitability- The effect of productivity and its persistence. In Melbourne institute of applied economic and social research (pp. 1–25). https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.361.1327&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 Google Scholar

Vijayakumar, A. (2011). An empirical study of firm structure and profitability relationship: The case of Indian automobile firms. International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management, 1(2), 100–108. https://ijrcm.org.in/article_info.php?article_id=615

 Google Scholar

Salman, A. K., & Yazdanfar, D. (2012). Profitability in Swedish SME firms: A quantile regression approach. International Business Research, 5(8), 94–106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v5n8p94

 Google Scholar

Yazdanfar, D. (2013). Profitability determinants among micro firms: Evidence from Swedish data. The International Journal of Managerial Finance, 9(2), 150–160. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/17439131311307565

 Google Scholar

Margaretha, F., & Supartika, N. (2016). Factors affecting profitability of small medium enterprises (SMEs) firm listed in indonesia stock exchange. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 4(2), 132–137. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7763/JOEBM.2016.V4.379

 Google Scholar

Mehari, D., & Aemiro, T. (2013). Firm specific factors that determine insurance companies performance in Ethiopia. European Scientific Journal, 9(10), 245–255.

 Google Scholar

Tunyi, A. A., Agyei-Boapeah, H., Areneke, G., & Agyemang, J. (2019). Internal capabilities, national governance and performance in African firms. Research in International Business and Finance, 50(C), 1–54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2019.04.009

 Google Scholar

Lee, J. (2009). Does size matter in firm performance? Evidence from US public firms. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 16(2), 89–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/13571510902917400

 Google Scholar

Vijayakumar, A., & Tamizhselvan, P. (2010). Corporate size and profitability: An empirical analysis. Journal for Bloomers of Research, 3(1), 44–53.

 Google Scholar

Booth, L., Aivazian, V., Demirguc-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2001). Capital structures in developing countries. The Journal of Finance, 56(1), 87–130. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jofi.2001.56.issue-1

 Google Scholar

Onaolapo, A. A., & Kajola, S. O. (2010). Capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Nigeria. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 25(October 2010), 70–82.

 Google Scholar

Tan, T. K. (2012). Financial distress and firm performance: Evidence from the Asian financial crisis. Journal of Finance and Accountancy, 11, 1–11. https://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/121199.pdf

 Google Scholar

Salim, M., & Yadav, R. (2012). Capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from malaysian listed companies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65(2012), 156–166. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.105

 Google Scholar

Iavorskyi, M. (2013). The impact of capital structure on firm performance: evidence from ukraine. Thesis. Kyiv School of Economics.

 Google Scholar

Matar, A., Al-Rdaydeh, M., & Odeh, M. (2018). Factors affecting the corporate performance: Panel data analysis for listed firms in Jordan. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 22(6), 1–10. http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-85061846283&partnerID=MN8TOARS

 Google Scholar

Vaidya, R., & Patel, P. (2019). Determinants of profitability of capital-intensive firms in the indian capital market: A static and dynamic panel approach. IUP Journal of Accounting Research & Audit Practices, 18(4), 33–51. https://www.proquest.com/openview/f0183abe1857f14581820fc980c3ec80/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=54439

 Google Scholar

Ho, C. S. F., & Mohd-Raff, N. E. N. (2019). External and internal determinants of performances of Shariah and non-Shariah compliant firms. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 12(2), 236–253. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-08-2017-0202

 Google Scholar

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency problems and residual claims. The Journal of Law & Economics, 26(2), 327. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/467038

 Google Scholar

Myers, S., & Rajan, R. (1995). Liquidity and the rise of financial intermediation. Proceedings(May), 427–446. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(77)90015-0

 Google Scholar

Ang, J. S. (1991). Small business uniqueness and the theory of financial management. Journal of Small Business Finance, 1(1), 1–13.

 Google Scholar

Honjo, Y., & Harada, N. (2006). SME policy, financial structure and firm growth: Evidence from Japan. Small Business Economics, 27(4–5), 289–300. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-6703-0

 Google Scholar

Deloof, M. (2003). Does working capital management affect profitability of Belgian firms. Journal of Business Finance Accounting, 30(3–4), 573–588. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5957.00008

 Google Scholar

Yang, J., Guariglia, A., & Guo, J. (Michael). (2019). To what extent does corporate liquidity affect M&A decisions, method of payment and performance? Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 54(2019), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.09.012

 Google Scholar

French, J. J., & Taborda, R. (2017). Disentangling the relationship between liquidity and returns in Latin America. Global Finance Journal, 2017, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.10.006

 Google Scholar

Beneish, M., Lee, C., & Tarpley, R. (2001). Contextual fundamental analysis in the prediction of extreme returns. Review of Accounting Studies, 2(3), 165–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011654624255

 Google Scholar

Fairfield, P. M., Whisenant, J. S., & Yohn, T. L. (2003). The differential persistence of accruals and cash flows for future operating income versus future profitability. Review of Accounting Studies, 8(2/3), 221–243. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024413412176

 Google Scholar

Gautam, K. (2008). Important tips for stock market investors’ outlook money. Rediff Indian.

 Google Scholar

Khalid, A. (2012). The impact of asset quality on profitability of private banks in India: A case study of JK, ICICI, HDFC & YES Banks. Journal of African Macroeconomic Review of Accounting Studies, 2(1), 127–143.

 Google Scholar

Khatab, H., Masood, M., Zaman, K., Saleem, S., & Saeed, B. (2011). Corporate governance and firm performance: A case study of karachi stock market. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 2(1), 39–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7763/IJTEF.2011.V2.76

 Google Scholar

Lechner, C., Soppe, B., & Dowling, M. (2016). Vertical coopetition and the sales growth of young and small firms. J Small Bus Manag, 54(1), 67–84. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12131

 Google Scholar

Parida, V. P. (2016). Network partner diversity, network capability, and sales growth in small firms. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2113–2117. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.017

 Google Scholar

Feng, H., Morgan, N. A., & Rego, L. L. (2017). Firm capabilities and growth: The moderating role of market conditions. J Acad Mark Sci, 45(1), 76–92. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-016-0472-y

 Google Scholar

Ghozali, I., Eka, H., & Hersugondo, A. (2018). The role of sales growth to increase firm performance in Indonesia. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 9 (7), 1822–1830. http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=7

 Google Scholar

Hang, N. T., & Thuy Linh, N. T. (2020). Factors affecting profitability of vietnamese real estate firms: Employing fixed effect and random effect model. Banking Science & Training Review, 223(12/2020), 13–25. https://hvnh.edu.vn/medias/tapchi/vi/12.2020/system/archivedate/13c7e1af_B%C3%A0i%20c%E1%BB%A7a%20Ng%C3%B4%20Th%E1%BB%8B%20H%E1%BA%B1ng,%20Nguy%E1%BB%85n%20Th%E1%BB%8B%20Th%C3%B9y%20Linh.pdf

 Google Scholar

Hailegebreal, D. (2016). Macroeconomic and Firm Specific Determinants of Profitability of Insurance Industry in Ethiopia. Global Journal of Management and Business Research: C Finance, 16(7), 27–36. https://globaljournals.org/GJMBR_Volume16/4-Macroeconomic-and-Firm-Specific.pdf

 Google Scholar

Tuyet, P. A. (2017). Analysis of factors affecting the business performance of joint stock commercial banks in Vietnam. Journal Of Asian Business And Economic Studies, 1. https://digital.lib.ueh.edu.vn/handle/UEH/56770

 Google Scholar

Sitharam, S., & Hoque, M. (2016). Factors affecting the performance of small and medium enterprises in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 14(2), 277–288. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.14(2-2).2016.03

 Google Scholar

Ipinnaiye, O., Dineen, D., & Lenihan, H. (2017). Drivers of SME performance: A holistic and multivariate approach. Small Business Economics, 48(4), 883–911. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9819-5

 Google Scholar

Bekeris, R. (2012). The impact of macroeconomic indicators upon SME’s profitability. Ekonomika, 91(3), 117–128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15388/Ekon.2012.0.883

 Google Scholar

Nyumba, E. O., Muganda, M., Musiega, D., & Masinde, S. W. (2015). Loan interest rate and performance of small and medium enterprises in Kenya. International Journal of Management Research & Review, 5(10), 712–728. http://ijmrr.com/admin/upload_data/journal_Otieno%20Nyumba%20%20Evans%20%201oct15mrr.pdf

 Google Scholar

Abdullahi, I. I., & Sulaiman, C. (2015). The determinants of small and medium-sized enterprises performance in Nigeria. Advances in Economics and Business, 3(5), 184–189. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.13189/aeb.2015.030504

 Google Scholar

Ozgur, O., & Gorus, M. S. (2016). Determinants of deposit bank profitability: Evidence from Turkey. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 6(3), 218–231.

 Google Scholar

Davidsson, P., & Henrekson, M. (2002). Determinants of the prevalence of start-ups and high-growth firms. Small Business Economics, 19(2), 81–104. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016264116508

 Google Scholar

Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 176–193. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.11.002

 Google Scholar

Charron, N., & Lapuente, V. (2013). Why do some regions in Europe have a higher quality of government? Journal of Politics, 75(3), 567–582. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613000510

 Google Scholar

Du, J., & Mickiewicz, T. (2016). Subsidies, rent seeking and performance: Being young, small or private in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.09.001

 Google Scholar

Nguyen, B., Mickiewicz, T., & Du, J. (2017). Local governance and business performance in Vietnam: The transaction costs’ perspective. Regional Studies, 52(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2017.1341625

 Google Scholar