Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No.

2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24

Journal homepage: www.ejournal.uksw.edu/jeb

ISSN 1979-6471 E-ISSN 2528-0147

Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, and activity ratios

on the stock price with dividend payout as moderating variable

Pardomuan Sihombinga*, Elia Zakchonab

a
Faculty of Economics and Business, Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia;
[email protected]*
b
PT Daksanaya Manajemen, Jakarta, Indonesia; [email protected]

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRAK

Article History: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh kinerja keuangan
Received 09-28-2023 yang diproksikan ke rasio profitabilitas, likuiditas, solvabilitas, dan
Revised 03-07-2024 aktivitas, yang kemudian dimoderasi oleh kebijakan dividen
Accepted 06-07-2024
terhadap harga saham perusahaan syariah di Bursa Efek Indonesia
Kata Kunci: (BEI). Data panel regresi multi-linear regresi dengan pendekatan
Profitabilitas, likuiditas, random effect digunakan untuk menyelidiki faktor-faktor yang
sovabilitas, rasio aktivitas, mempengaruhi harga saham yang terdaftar di indeks Jakarta
kebijakan dividen, harga Islamic Index (JII). Data sampel dipilih terbatas pada laporan
saham keuangan audit lengkap dan distribusi dividen yang konsisten yang
dipublish di BEI dari tahun 2016 sampai dengan tahun 2021. Data
Keywords:
cross-section yang diuji mencakup 15 perusahaan yang terdaftar
Profitability, liquidity,
solvency, activity ratio, dalam indeks JII. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa
dividend policy, stock price Profitabilitas, yang diproksikan pada Return-on-Equity (ROE),
berdampak positif terhadap harga saham yang terdaftar di indeks
JII. Sementara itu, Solvabilitas yang diproksikan oleh Debt to
Equity Ratio (DER) dan Activity Ratio yang diproksikan ke Total
Assets Turnover (TATO) memberikan pengaruh negatif terhadap
harga saham yang terdaftar di JII. Sedangkan, likuiditas yang
diproksikan ke Current Ratio (CR) dan Kebijakan Dividen yang
diproksikan ke Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR) tidak berpengaruh
terhadap harga saham yang terdaftar di indeks JII. Selain itu, DPR
tidak mampu memoderasi pengaruh ROE terhadap harga saham
yang terdaftar di indeks JII.

ABSTRACT
This study aimed to examine the impact of financial performance
proxied to profitability, liquidity, solvency, and activity ratio, as
well as the moderating influence of dividend policy on stock price
of Sharia-compliant companies in the Indonesia Stock (IDX)
market. Panel data multi-linear regression with the random effect
estimator was used to investigate the factors influencing the
Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) stock price. The sample data was
confined to complete audited financial reports and consistent

*Corresponding Author
2 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

dividend distribution to ensure the robustness of the findings. The

cross-section data included 15 listed companies in JII indices,
while the time series information spans financial reports published
from 2016 to 2021 in the IDX market. The results showed that
Profitability, represented by Return-On-Equity (ROE), positively
impacted the company’s stock price listed in the JII index.
Meanwhile, Solvency proxied by Debt-to-Equity Ratio (DER) and
Activity Ratio measured through Total Assets Turnover (TATO)
negatively affected the company’s stock price in the JII index. The
liquidity represented by the Current Ratio (CR) and the Dividend
Policy gauged by the Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR) also does not
affect the company’s stock listed in the JII index. Furthermore,
DPR did not moderate the effect of ROE on the company’s stock
price listed in JII indices.

INTRODUCTION
Indonesia's Sharia economy faced global economic uncertainties and strict
business competitiveness over time. As a developing country with a Muslim majority
spread, Indonesia has a strong presence in the Sharia financial sectors and is ranked
tenth in total assets at the global level. The Sharia financial sector is classified into the
Sharia effect list and is published by the financial service authority periodically. The
Sharia financial sector grew its asset value by 13.82 percent year on year (yoy) from
IDR 1.801.40 billion in 2019 to IDR 2,050,44 billion in 2021. Indonesia's Sharia
financial sector has three sub-sectors: Sharia bank, non-bank, and capital market. In
2021, Sharia market capitalization had a total asset value of 60.27 percent and a
significant growth value of 14.83 percent, Sharia bank had a market capitalization
value of 33.83 percent, and Sharia non-bank had a market capitalization value of 5.90
percent (Indonesia Financial Service Authority, 2022).
Sharia stock is traded as many as 495 stock shares in 2021 is represented by
Jakarta Islamic Index (JII), known as a primary Sharia product and contains four
indices, such as Indeks Saham Syariah Indonesia (ISSI), Jakarta Islamic Index 70
(JII70), and IDX-MES BUMN 17. JII is evaluated two times a year and was developed
to provide safe investment for conservative potential investors. The stock price
fluctuated during 2016-2021. Infobank15 recorded a high stock price performance at
78.20 percent, while a low stock price was recorded by the JII index, decreasing its
value by -4 percent. Next, the Jakarta Composite Index (JCI) increased its value by
39.50 percent, while SMinfra18 decreased its value by -1.90 percent. In 2016, JII
increased its performance by 15 percent. In 2017, JCI increased its performance by 30
percent, while JII decreased significantly by -37 percent. In 2018, JCI decreased by -
2.50 percent, and JII decreased by -9.70 percent. JCI increased by 1.70 percent, while
JII increased by 1.90 percent. During the Covid-19 pandemic, both significantly
reduced by -5.10 percent and -9.70 percent. Then, JCI performance recovered by 10.10
percent, while JII decreased by -10.90 percent. JII performance decline represents a
lousy signal of investment decision (Indonesia Stock Exchange, 2022).
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 3

The high stock price has good financial performance to increase returns
dividends, and investors can add more stock demand. Stock price determination is
caused by supply and demand volatility, which impacts the high stock price. There is
a positive correlation between the stock price and price indices. In contrast, a negative
correlation exists between the stock price and price indices (Mohamad, 2015). To
analyze the stock market performance, investors use fundamental analysis based on
the financial ratio (Herawati & Angger, 2018). The financial ratio is compared with
various company's data to describe a profit and loss and influence the stock price
development at a particular time (Rosdiana, 2021). The financial ratio contains
liquidity, solvency, profitability, and activity ratios (Devi & Sutrisno, 2015).
Theoretically, a company with profitable, liquidity, and asset management effectively
and efficiently creates high profit and solvency value, making a positive signal in
fundamental analysis and influencing the stock price.
One of the profitability ratios is proxied to return on equity (ROE) and had a
positive impact on the stock price (Anwar & Rahmalia, 2019; Gayatri & Thamrin,
2020; Puspita, 2017; Rasdayanti & Chaerudin, 2021; Satar & Jayanti, 2020), or had a
negative impact on the stock price in the Polish stock market (Megamawarni &
Pratiwi, 2021). In contrast, ROE did not affect the stock price in the Swiss stock
market (Ariesa et al., 2020; Kartika et al., 2017). Meanwhile, the liquidity ratio
proxied to the current ratio (CR) positively impacted the stock price (Gursida, 2017;
Mardianti & Dewi, 2021; Rasdayanti & Chaerudin, 2021). In contrast, CR had no impact
on the stock price in the stock market of Poland, Swiss, and Austria (Ariesa et al.,
2020; Ariyani et al., 2018; Gayatri & Thamrin, 2020; Herawati & Angger, 2018;
Imansyah & Mustafa, 2021; Ligocká & Stavárek, 2019; Olivia & Ovami, 2021;
Rosdiana, 2021; Samsuar, 2017).
Then, solvency ratio is proxied to debt-to-equity ratio (DER) had a negative
impact on the stock price (Ariyani et al., 2018; Devi & Sutrisno, 2015; Gayatri &
Thamrin, 2020; Megamawarni & Pratiwi, 2021; Rosdiana, 2021; Satar & Jayanti,
2020; Sri Oktaryani et al., 2016). In contrast, DER did not impact the stock price
(Gursida, 2017; Handayani et al., 2020; Ligocká & Stavárek, 2019; Rasdayanti &
Chaerudin, 2021). Next, the activity ratio is proxied to total asset turnover (TATO),
positively impacting the stock price (Anwar et al., 2021). In contrast, TATO did not
affect the stock price (Gursida, 2017). The stakeholders prefer to distribute the
dividend as a company's value description. They believed a dividend distribution could
attract potential investors and increase the stock price and return in the market.
According to previous research, a dividend regulation can moderate the return on
equity effect on the stock price (Mardianti & Dewi, 2021; Ramadhani et al., 2019;
Satar & Jayanti, 2020). It states that a dividend regulation can influence a relationship
between fundamental indicators and the stock price. Dividend regulation also
positively affected the stock price (Fitri & Purnamasari, 2018; Rahmawati & Suryono,
4 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

2017). In contrast, dividend regulation did not affect the stock price in Indonesia and
Malaysia.
The novelty of this research lies in including a moderating variable called
dividend payout ratio (DPR). Moderating variables can enhance or weaken the effect
of the profitability ratio on the stock price. In addition, the observation period was
from 2015 to 2020 to prove whether the results of previous research were situational
or not.

THEORETICAL REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

Signaling theory
Signaling theory explored the concept of asymmetric information in a
company, acknowledging potential investors having a limited perception of stock
quality (Akerlof, 1970). This theory integrated the ideology that financial information
showed both positive and negative investment signals, with the latter carrying more
weight (Spence, 1973). The theory insight prompted companies to lean towards
releasing incredible financial reports, while investment managers disclosed private
information to mitigate asymmetrical information (Ross, 1977). Building upon this
foundation, Ross (1977) extended the signaling theory by proposing that management
could release financial projections, anticipating specific dividends in the future. These
strategies were adopted to navigate the challenges of information asymmetry in the
stock market.
In contrast, an investment manager will expose private information to decrease
asymmetrical information to expect good news about the company's performance in
the market. Then, Ross (1977) continued developing Akerlof (1970) and Spence’s
(1973) research. Ross (1977) stated that management released good information about
their company to attract potential investors and increase the stock price. Signaling
theory states that management prefers publishing financial projections by releasing the
expected dividend in the future to attract potential investors. Signaling theory is
published by a company and is announced in the capital market. If a positive signal is
released, the market will react to this signal and change the stock price (Brigham &
Ehrhardt, 2019).
Stock Price
The stock price is determined by traders and referenced to the capital market's
supply and demand (Hartono, 2013). The stock price describes a company’s value and
is influenced by a company’s performance and achievement to increase a company’s
value in the future (Rahmawati & Suryono, 2017). Brigham & Ehrhardt (2014) stated
that stock price maximization is analyzed by financial reports to estimate the stock
price in the long term—management action to determine the stock price and the
dividend. If a manager decides to be good, it would increase the stock price, and vice
versa.
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 5

Fundamental Analysis
Fundamental analysis determines the stock price (Bodie et al., 2018), uses
income and dividend prospects for future interest rate expectations, and evaluates the
company’s risk to calculate stock intrinsic with financial data. Investment has solid
fundamentals and is determined by strict analysis of the current condition of
companies, even in the future. Fundamental analysis calculates the future stock price
by estimating fundamental value and implementing this relationship in the stock price
determination. The fundamental analysis started with the last income and checked the
balance sheet, management quality evaluation, the company’s market position, and
business projection overall. Identifying the fundamental factors is more accessible than
identifying a company’s performance management. Fundamental analysis is used to
find potential investments based on investors' calculations. A bad company can be used
as a reasonable offer, and vice versa. A company with a solid fundamental would
impact good financing and be referenced as an investment decision. The financial
performance can be analyzed by the financial ratio (Dewi, 2017), while the financial
ratio can determine the amount of dividends. Financial ratios are proxied to the
profitability (Trinh et al., 2020), liquidity (Jiang et al., 2017), solvency, activity, and
market ratios to describe the stock price determination per share (Zulkifli et al., 2017).
Profitability Ratio
The profitability ratio represents a group of liquidity, asset management, and
operational debts (Brigham & Ehrhardt, 2019). The profitability ratio is proxied to
return-on-equity (ROE), which measures the return of investors and can determine
income growth. ROE can determine financial policy by estimating the dividend policy
(Bodie et al., 2018) to assess the company's intrinsic value to increase profit. High
ROE represents the company’s efficiency in obtaining high net profit and announcing
the dividend distribution to affect high stock prices. ROE measures investor and
stakeholder profitability (Weygandt et al., 2015). High ROE represents a company that
succeeded in managing capital, while capital management can increase profit, create a
good signal of investment, and impact high stock prices. It states previous research
that ROE had a positive impact on the stock price (Anwar & Rahmalia, 2019; Gayatri
& Thamrin, 2020; Puspita, 2017; Rasdayanti & Chaerudin, 2021; Satar & Jayanti,
2020). Therefore, the first hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H1: Profitability has a positive impact on the stock price.

Liquidity Ratio
The liquidity ratio represents the relationship between cash and current assets
and liabilities. The liquidity ratio is proxied to the current ratio (CR), measures current
liability, and is covered by expected assets that can be converted into cash. A high
amount of current assets and liabilities represent a company's ability to cover its
liabilities (Pattiruhu & Paais, 2020). High CR has less impact on profitability because a
6 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

current asset creates a lower return than a fixed asset (Sihombing, 2018). Less CR represents
less capital capability to pay its liability, and management cannot manage cash on hand
carefully (Brigham & Ehrhardt, 2019). It performs well if a company can maximize
liquid assets into cash on hand to pay its current liability. A company can obtain high
net profit, creating an excellent signal to get dividends to the stakeholders depending
on the liquidity capability. High CR impacts the investor's trust in the company's
ability to obtain high profit and distribute as dividends, impacting high stock prices. It
states that in previous research, CR positively impacted the stock price (Gursida, 2017;
Mardianti & Dewi, 2021; Rasdayanti & Chaerudin, 2021). Therefore, the second
hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H2: The current ratio has a positive impact on the stock price.

Solvency Ratio
The solvency ratio measures how much a company’s asset is covered by total
liabilities in the short-term and long-term (Kasmir, 2018). If a company is liquidated,
the debt-to-equity ratio (DER), one of the liquidity ratios, is responsible for covering
total liabilities to pay its liabilities (Syarif, 2019). Low DER represents a capital structure
funded by low debt; then, most profit can be distributed to the dividend. A high dividend can
attract more potential investors to buy the company's stock and will impact the high stock price
(Nirmolo & Widjajanti, 2018). The solvency ratio is used to evaluate total liabilities and
equities, and this ratio helps to count how much money can be allocated to creditors.
High DER will impact the bad company's performance and decrease stock price
because high debts will impact the interest cost and decrease the profit. In contrast,
low DER represents a good company's performance and creates a good signal of
investment and impact on high stock prices. It states that previous research that DER had
a negative impact on the stock price (Ariyani et al., 2018; Devi & Sutrisno, 2015; Gayatri
& Thamrin, 2020; Megamawarni & Pratiwi, 2021; Rosdiana, 2021; Satar & Jayanti, 2020;
Oktaryani et al., 2016). Therefore, the third hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H3: Debt-to-equity ratio (DER) has a negative impact on the stock price.

Activity Ratio
The activity ratio measures how effectively and efficiently a company exploits
capital and assets into income (Sihombing, 2018). The activity ratio is proxied to total
asset turnover (TATO), which measures how effectively a company exploits asset
sources into production costs and increases net sales and profit. TATO represents asset
effectiveness in increasing sales and describes net sales that can be obtained from cash.
If TATO moves slowly, it describes a company with a fixed asset bigger than sales
capability. High TATO will impact on asset efficiency (Gursida, 2017). Asset
efficiency will impact the high profit and high dividend share. A high dividend will
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 7

impact the high stock price (Sutrisno, 2009). A company with a high TATO can obtain
more sales from asset allocation, while high sales can increase high profits and give a
positive signal for potential investors to buy this company’s stock. Based on previous
research, TATO positively impacted the stock price (Anwar et al., 2021). Therefore,
the fourth hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H4: Total asset turnover (TATO) positively impacts the stock price.

Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR)

Dividend refers to the cash paid to the profit (Ross, 1977). In general, direct
payment to the stakeholders is called a dividend, which is paid periodically and is part of
the dividend policy. A dividend is distributed to the stakeholders and can be measured as
the dividend payout ratio (DPR). A dividend policy determines return distribution to the
stakeholders as a dividend or distributed to the retained earnings. Suppose a company
distributes profit as a dividend that can decrease retained earnings, total capital structure,
and internal costs (Brigham & Ehrhardt, 2019). There are three alternative dividend
policies: stable dividend policy, unstable dividend policy, and low dividend
distribution with stock buyback (Brigham & Ehrhardt, 2019). Dividend explains that
the total dividend is distributed to the stakeholders based on current income and
previous dividends into stability (Lintner, 1956). A dividend is expected to attract
potential investors and increase a company’s value with a high stock price description.
Lintner explains that a company determines its DPR and adjusts its dividend policy
periodically to achieve its expected goals. In the end, a company should be able to
realize sustainable investment in the long term. A dividend policy theory should be
developed using the dividend irrelevance theory, which determines a company's value
with primary income power and business risk (Miller & Modigliani, 1961). In other
words, a company's value depends on asset exploitation or cannot be allocated from
dividends and retained earnings exploitation.
Gordon (1962) analyzed the dividend discount model, and part of fundamental
company analysis to connect the expected cash flow of dividend distribution is paid
by the company's stock. This model assumes the stock price can be influenced by
threading in indicators, dividend yearly, dividend growth, and expected return.
Investors use this analysis to predict the expected return. In this model, equity value
can be described by growing dividends periodically. Stock price means the expected
discounted value of predicted dividend in the future, while dividend is expected to
increase to the required return. The stock price should depend on the dividend policy
(Gordon, 1962). Investors prefer dividends with capital gain distribution in the future,
while stakeholders prefer high dividend distribution by buying back stock at a high
price. For investors, dividend payment is accepted with less risk compared to the
capital gain distribution, while capital gain gives a high return compared to the current
dividend. DPR measures the company's value and influences the stock price
8 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

(Rahmawati & Suryono, 2017). Profit can be distributed as dividends and invested in
the stock for future returns (Halim, 2015). Distributing dividends to the stakeholders
creates a positive signal to the prospective stock because the dividend amount
describes a company's capability to generate a profit. A company refusing to distribute
dividends is considered as bad news for the prospective company in the future, and it
will impact the investment decision and reduce the stock price (Bodie et al., 2018). A
high dividend distribution will impact less profit and is allocated to the retained
earnings, while less retained earnings will slow down income growth. In contrast, high
dividend distribution will impact the high stock price because its number will attract
potential investors. Previous research has shown that DPR positively impacts stock
prices (Fitri & Purnamasari, 2018; Rahmawati & Suryono, 2017). Therefore, the fifth
hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H5: The dividend payout ratio (DPR) positively impacts the stock price.

A company with high profitability can create a positive signal of investment

decisions, and investors believe it can influence high dividends. Investors decided to
buy back the stock and expect a high dividend distribution in the future. Based on
previous research, DPR can moderate the profitability effect on the stock price
(Mardianti & Dewi, 2021; Ramadhani et al., 2019; Satar & Jayanti, 2020). Therefore,
the sixth hypothesis that can be proposed is as follows:
H6: The dividend payout ratio (DPR) can moderate the effect of ROE on the
stock price.

According to those current hypotheses, a concept framework can be developed

as below:

DPR (Z)

H5
H1 H6
ROE (X1)

H2
CR (X2)
Stock Price (Y)

H3
DER (X3)

H4
TATO (X4)

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
 Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 9

METHODS
This study used quantitative data to investigate the impact of independent
variables on the dependent factors, including a moderating element. Error! Reference
source not found. provided an overview of the independent variables: Profitability
proxied by ROE, Liquidity index measured through CR, Solvency represented by
DER, and Activity Ratio proxied by TATO. The dependent variable was identified as
stock price, while the moderating factor was defined by dividend policy, measured
through DPR. Data on stock price using annual closed price accumulation is converted
into logarithm natural shape (ln) to decline heteroscedasticity data and convert it into
percentage change (Gujarati & Porter, 2020). Error! Reference source not found.
explains the formulation of each variable and hypothesis development as follows:
Table 1
Variable Operationalization and Hypothesis Developments
Variable Proxied Formulation Scale Hypothesis Development
Annual
Stock Price closed stock
Ln (HS) Ratio
(Y) price
accumulation
Dividend 𝑫𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒅 DPR positively affect the stock
Dividend
payout ratio 𝑫𝑷𝑹 = ( ) × 𝟏𝟎𝟎% Ratio price (Fitri & Purnamasari, 2018;
Policy (Z) 𝑵𝒆𝒕 𝑰𝒏𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆
(DPR) Rahmawati & Suryono, 2017).
ROE positively affect the stock
price (Anwar & Rahmalia, 2019;
Return-on- 𝑵𝒆𝒕 𝑰𝒏𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆
Profitability Gayatri & Thamrin, 2020;
equity 𝑹𝑶𝑬 = ( ) × 𝟏𝟎𝟎% Ratio
(X1)
(ROE) 𝑺𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔 𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚 Puspita, 2017; Rasdayanti &
Chaerudin, 2021; Satar &
Jayanti, 2020).
CR positively affect the stock
Liquidity Current ratio 𝑪𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝑨𝒔𝒔𝒆𝒕𝒔 price (Gursida, 2017; Mardianti &
𝑪𝑹 = ( ) × 𝟏𝟎𝟎% Ratio
(X2) (CR) 𝑵𝒆𝒕 𝑰𝒏𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆 Dewi, 2021; Rasdayanti &
Chaerudin, 2021)
DER positively affect the stock
price (Ariyani et al., 2018; Devi &
Debt-to- 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑳𝒊𝒂𝒃𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒆𝒔 Sutrisno, 2015; Gayatri &
Solvency
equity ratio 𝑫𝑬𝑹 = ( ) × 𝟏𝟎𝟎% Ratio Thamrin, 2020; Megamawarni &
(X3) 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚
(DER) Pratiwi, 2021; Rosdiana, 2021;
Satar & Jayanti, 2020; Sri
Oktaryani et al., 2016)
Total assets 𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒆𝒔
Activity TATO positively affect the stock
turnover 𝑻𝑨𝑻𝑶 = ( ) × 𝟏𝟎𝟎% Ratio
(X4) 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑨𝒔𝒔𝒆𝒕𝒔 price (Anwar et al., 2021).
(TATO)

Sample Data Selection

This study's sample population was comprised of 30 Indonesian companies
listed across various sectors on the JII index in 2016. A purposive sampling technique
was adopted, following specific criteria to ensure the selection of representative
sample companies (Saunder et al., 2019). To maintain a focused approach to dividend
distribution, the sampling data included companies with consistent and complete
audited financial reports from 2016 to 2021.
10 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

The sample data was limited to 15 companies, carefully selected from the
original 30 stock issuers in the population. These 15 companies represented various
sectors, including the energy field represented by Adaro Energy Corp (ADRO) and
Bukit Asam Corp (PTBA). At the same time, the primary consumer industry included
Charoen Pokphand Indonesia Corp (CPIN), Indofood CBP Sukses Makmur Corp
(ICBP), Indofood Sukses Makmur Corp (INDF), Japfa Comfeed Indonesia Corp
(JPFA), and Unilever Indonesia Corp (UNVR). The raw material sector comprised
Indah Kiat Pulp and Paper Corp (INKP), Indocement Tunggal Prakarsa Corp (INTP),
Semen Indonesia Corp (SMGR), Pabrik Kertas Tjiwi Kimia Corp (TKIM), and
Chandra Asri Petrochemical Corp (TPIA). The health industry featured Kalbe Farma
Corp (KLBF), and the infrastructure sector included Telkom Indonesia Corp (TLKM),
as well as the United Tractors Corp (UNTR).
Panel Data Regression
This study adopted a descriptive analysis and conducted a panel data multi-
regression analysis using datasets consisting of multiple observations for each
sampling unit. These data sets, called Panel data, were generated by pooling time series
observations across various cross-sectional units (Baltagi, 2014). The application of
panel data was primarily applied in finance, trading, microeconomics, and
macroeconomics (Baltagi, 2005). The panel data technique examined incomplete and
nonstationary panels, unrelated regressions, simultaneous equations, limited
dependent variables, dynamic models, heteroskedasticity, as well as serial and spatial
correlation (Baltagi, 2005). The adoption of panel data offered the advantage of
controlling individual heterogeneity. However, studies without control over time series
and cross-section analyses faced the risk of obtaining biased results (Hsiao, 2003).
This panel data led to more variability, less collinearity among variables, increased
degrees of freedom, a better ability to study the dynamics of adjustment, as well as the
identification and measurement of effects not detectable in cross-section or time-series
data (Baltagi, 2005).
This study explored three types of panel data multi-linear regression
approaches, namely Common Effect (CE), Fixed Effect (FE), and Random Effect (RE)
models. These models were examined through three statistical methods, namely the
Chow, Hausman, and Lagrange Multiplier (LM) tests. Most panel data applications
adopted a simple regression with ordinary least squares (OLS) that considered error
component disturbances and assumed cross-section data with consistent behavior. The
panel data was balanced, showing that all observations were present, either randomly
or non-randomly, despite attrition or sample selection (Baltagi, 2014). The equation of
the CE estimator was as follows:
yit =∝i + β1 X it + εit ......................................................................................................................... 1

The FE model adopted a binary indicator through the Least Squares Dummy
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 11

Variable (LSDV) to capture intercept differences, assuming that the coefficient (slope)
remained constant between cross-section and time series data (Baltagi, 2005),
expressed by the following formula.
yit = (∝i + μi ) + β1 Xit + εit ........................................................................................................... 2

RE estimator incorporated the interference variable related to constant

coefficient assumptions, sample error, and times. RE model could eliminate
heteroscedasticity and was formulated as follows:
yit =∝i + β1 X it + (εit − μi ) ............................................................................................................ 3

Testing for Individual Effect Using the Chow Test

The Chow test examined the FE model by comparing the Restricted Residual
Sums of Squares (RRSS), equivalent to the OLS on the pooled model, and the
Unrestricted Residual Sums of Squares (URSS) being that of the LSDV regression
(Baltagi, 2005; Toyoda, 1974). The significance test of variable dummies was tested
through an F-test with hypothesis H0: µ1 = µ2 =···= µN−1 = 0. For large N, the within
transformation was performed, and the residual sum of squares was used as the URSS
(Baltagi, 2005) or FE model, which was appropriate. The formula of the Chow test
was as follows:
(𝑅𝑅𝑆𝑆−𝑈𝑅𝑆𝑆)/(𝑁−1)
𝐹0 = 𝑈𝑅𝑆𝑆/(𝑁𝑇−𝑁−𝐾)
..................................................................................................................... 4

Testing for Endogeneity Using the Hausman Test

Hausman (1978) proposed a comparison between the OLS and 2SLS
estimatorsβ1 = (δ1 α1 ), suggesting that both estimators should differ by sampling
error to initiate an endogeneity examination known as the Hausman test. The null
hypothesis stated that the individual effects do not correlate with the explanatory
variable, or the RE model was rejected, and vice versa (Baltagi, 2014). The formula
for the Hausman test is shown as follows:
𝑑𝑖 = 𝛾𝑖 − 𝑋𝑖 𝛽𝐹𝐸 ................................................................................................................................. 5

Testing for Serial Correlation and Random Individual Effect Using LM Test
LM test played a crucial role in selecting a suitable model in random or
standard effect models, assessing the unbalanced nested error component model with
serially correlated disturbances (Breusch & Pagan, 1980). The hypothesis tested by the
LM test was H0: σνη = σµε = 0. This null hypothesis showed that the selection rule
was ignorable for the random effects model. The effectiveness of the LM test heavily
12 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

relied on the specification of the selectivity equation and the distributional assumptions
(Baltagi, 2005). The formula of the LM test is represented below:
𝑁𝑇 2
𝐿𝑀1 = [𝐴2 − 4𝐴𝐵 + 2𝑇𝐵2 ] ......................................................................................... 6
2(𝑇−1)(𝑇−2)

Classic Assumption Data

Adopting classic assumption data ensured that a regression model contained
unbiased linear estimation, often called BLUE (Best Linear Unbiased Estimator). Two
assumption data tests were applied in the regression model. The normality test
examined the residual data distribution in the regression model. The Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test was used for data distribution, examining the significance value, which
should be less than a 2-tailed or α value of 0.05 for the data to be considered normally
distributed and vice versa (Wooldridge, 2002). The multicollinearity test checked the
correlation among independent variables and evaluated a tolerance value known as
the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). The hypothesis stated no multicollinearity
pattern in the independent variable when the VIF value exceeded 0.10 or lower than
10 (Mansfield & Helms, 1982).
Hypothesis Testing F-Simultaneous, T-partial, and Coefficient Determination
The panel data regression examined an analysis of the F-test, t-test, and
coefficient determination result. The F-test evaluated the regression multiplier and
elucidated how all independent variables could collectively impact the output factors.
The t-partial tests were adopted to describe the influence of a predictor variable in
partially explaining an outcome element. Furthermore, the coefficient determination
(R2) value was used to depict the contribution of all explanatory variables in
influencing the determination of the dependent factor. In this study, the significance
level for hypothesis testing was 5 percent, showing an error tolerance of only 5 percent
(Gujarati, 2015). The panel data multi-regression model in this work is outlined as
follows:
𝐿𝑛(𝑆𝑃𝑖𝑡 ) = 𝛼0 + 𝛽1 𝑅𝑂𝐸𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽2 𝐶𝑅𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽3 𝐷𝐸𝑅𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽4 𝑇𝐴𝑇𝑂𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽5 𝐷𝑃𝑅𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽6 (𝐷𝑃𝑅 ∗
𝑅𝑂𝐸𝑖𝑡 ) + 𝜀𝑖𝑡 ................................................................................................................. 7
Where:
𝛼0 : Constant Parameter
𝛽1 − 𝛽6 : Regression Coefficients
SP : Annual closed stock price
ROE : Return on equity
CR : Current Ratio
DER : Debt to Equity Ratio
TATO : Total Asset Turnover
DPR : Dividend Payout Ratio
DPR*ROE: Dividend Payout Ratio Moderates Return-on-Equity
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 13

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To elaborate panel data multi-linear regression, this study is analyzed by
descriptive and inferential analysis to prove the current hypothesis as follows:

Descriptive Statistical Result

Table 2 provides insights into the stock price variable, showing an average
stock price reaching 8.177, and a standard deviation of 8.397, with the highest price
reaching 44.329 owned by UNVR in 2017, and the lowest price reaching 650 per share
owned by TKIM in 2016. The high-profit capability of JII, as represented by the ROE
variable, was outlined with a mean of 0.217, and a standard deviation of 0.312, ranging
from the lowest data point of 0.008 is owned by TKIM in 2016, and UNVR owns the
highest value at 1.450.
Table 2
Descriptive Statistical Result
SP ROE (%) CR (%) DER (%) TATO (%) DPR (%)
Mean 8.177 0.217 1.965 0.892 0.876 0.431
Maximum 44.329 1.450 4.657 3.412 2.391 2.248
Minimum 650 0.008 0.605 0.153 0.281 0.000
Std. Deviation 8.397 0.312 0.977 0.626 0.525 0.406
Source: Processed Data, 2023

The liquidity of JII, as shown by CR variable, was evident with a mean of

1.965, a standard deviation of 0.977, the lowest figure recorded at 0.605 is owned by
UNVR in 2016, and the highest the CR stated at 4.657 is owned by KLBF in 2018.
The solvency ratio proxied to DER showed a mean of 0.892, a standard deviation of
0.626, with the lowest value at 0.153 owned by INTP in 2016 and the highest value at
3.412 in UNVR in 2021. TATO showed a mean score of 0.876, with a standard
deviation 0.525. They ranged from the lowest value of 0.281 owned by TKIM in 2020
to the highest value at 2.391, owned by UNVR in 2016. As a moderating variable,
DPR has a mean of 0.431 with 0.4061 as the standard deviation, with the lowest data
of 0.000 at INTP in 2018, while the highest was 2.248 owned by TLKM in 2016.
Classic Assumption Statistical result
The analysis in Table 3 showed that the VIF values for ROE, CR, DER, TATO,
DPR, and DPR moderates ROE representing 3.396, 2.629, 2.469, 3.213, 1.954, and
2.853, respectively, were all below 10, showing the absence of multicollinearity.
Table 3
Classic Assumption Test
ROE CR DER TATO DPR
ROE*DPR Prob.
(VIF) (VIF) (VIF) (VIF) (VIF)
3.396 2.629 2.469 3.213 1.954 2.853 0.117
Source: Processed Data, 2023
14 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

Additionally, with a probability value of 0.117 exceeding 0.05, it was

confirmed that all sample data adhered to a normal distribution. These sample data
successfully passed the classic assumption test.
Panel Data Model Testing Result
Panel data regression analysis can be executed using three models called the
common effect, fixed effect, or random effect model estimation test. Each model was
tested to determine the most suitable model for the three-panel data models above.
Table 4
Comparison between Common, Fixed, and Random Effect Model
Significance Test Prob. Decisions
Chow Test Chi-square: 139.787 0.000 The fixed effect model is accepted
Hausmann Test Chi-square: 3.081 0.798 The random effect model is accepted
Lagrange Multiplier Test LM: 113.411 0.000 The random effect model is accepted
Source: Processed Data, 2023

From the results of the Chow test, the researcher found a chi-square probability
of 0.000, which is less than 0.05, so the fixed effect model is more appropriate to use.
Furthermore, the Hausman test was carried out, and a chi-square probability of 0.798
was obtained, which is greater than 0.05. So, the random effect model is more
appropriate. Then, the Lagrange Multiplier is tested to check for a suitable model
between random and common effect models. The result shows that a probability value
0.000 is lower than 0.05, and a random effect model was implemented in this study.
Table 5
Determination Coefficient Test Result
Coefficient Value Prob. Value
2
R 0.203 Adj. R2 0.146
Source: Processed Data, 2023

After determining the best model, it is necessary to test the hypothesis through
the R2 test, F test, and statistical t-test. Table 5 explains that the R-squared is 0.146,
meaning that the dependent variable in this study will be affected by the independent
variable of 14.63 percent. Meanwhile, the other 66.616 percent comes from the
influence of other variables.
Table 6
F-test Result using Panel Data Multi-Regression by Random Effect Model
Coefficient Significance
F-stat 3.543*** Prob. Value 0.003
Source: Processed Data, 2023

Table 6 explains that the F-test result has a probability value 0.003, which
is lower than 0.05. This means that all independent variables simultaneously
impact JII’s stock price.
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 15

Table 7
Partial Test Result using Panel Data Multi-regression by Random Effect Model
Variable Coefficient Standard Error t-statistic Prob. Decision
C 8.832 0.602 14.660 0.000
ROE 3.764 1.030 3.652 0.000 H1 is accepting
CR 0.103 0.150 0.688 0.493 H2 is rejecting
DER -0.619 0.257 -2.408 0.018 H3 is accepting
TATO -0.825 0.370 -2.229 0.028 H4 is accepting
DPR 0.349 0.241 1.449 0.150 H5 is rejecting
(ROExDPR) -1.795 1.194 -1.503 0.136 H6 is rejecting
Source: Processed Data, 2023

𝐻𝑆 = 8.832 + 3.764ROE + 0.103CR– 0.619DER– 0.825TATO + 0.349DPR −

1.795ROE × DPR.................................................................................................................... 8

According to Table 6
, a constant value of 8.832 with a significance value of 0.000 means JII's stock
price value of 8.832 or as much as Rp.6.851 without any contribution of ROE, CR,
DER, TATO, and DPR. ROE coefficient value of 3.764 with a significance value of
0.000 means ROE can increase by one and contribute to JII’s stock price value of 3.764
percent. CR coefficient value of 0.103 with a significance value of 0.493 means CR
has no impact on JII’s stock price. DER coefficient value of -0.619 with a significance
value of 0.018 means DER has a negative impact on JII's stock price while DER
increases 1, and it can decrease JII's stock price value of 0.619. TATO coefficient value
of -0.825 with a significance value of 0.028 means TATO has a negative impact on
JII's stock price. While TATO increases by 1, it can decrease JII's price value by 0.825.
DPR coefficient value of 0.349 with a significance value of 0.150 means DPR has no
impact on JII’s stock price. Interaction between DPR and ROE can result in a
regression coefficient value of -1.795 with a significance value of 0.136, which means
interaction between DPR and ROE has no impact on JII's stock price.
ROE positively impacts the company’s stock price listed in JII index.
ROE, measuring stakeholders' return, reflected the ability of the company to
generate profit from equity exploitation. The positive impact of ROE on stock price
implied that published financial reports could signal positive investment prospects
(Spence, 1973). Higher ROE showed the ability of the company to derive substantial
net profit from equity exploitation. Long-term investors opted to retain the company’s
stock price listed in JII index for increased dividends, while short-term shareholders
sold shares for higher returns. These outcomes affirmed previous findings that ROE
positively impacted stock prices (Mahirun et al., 2023; Sharma et al., 2023).
CR is positive and does not impact the company’s stock price listed in JII index.
CR assessed the liquidity of liquid assets to operating liabilities, where high
working capital, including accounts uncollectible, receivables, and unsold inventory,
could cover the payables (Brigham & Ehrhardt, 2019). A high CR suggested that the
16 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

company possessed more cash, receivables, and inventories than sales (Brigham &
Ehrhardt, 2019), mitigating financial distress. However, this result contradicted the
hypothesis that CR could not show an investment signal and did not impact the JII
stock price (Ligocká & Stavárek, 2019). According to Ross (1977), liquidity cannot
signal investment or influence stock price, as evidenced by thirteen stocks in the JII
index with CR less than 1, showing non-liquidity in financing. Investors analyzed
management inefficiencies, recognizing that internal factors cannot influence the
company’s stock price listed in JII index.

DER has a negative impact on the company’s stock price listed in JII index.
DER measured the ability of the company to cover its liabilities with capital
structure. In this study, DER had a negative impact on JII stock price, prompting
investors to analyze the increasing influence of DER on the business risk. Risk-averse
investors mitigated business risk by selling shares, leading to a reduction in stock price
(Graham & Dodd, 2023). High debts will impact the business risk potential, and
investors mitigate business risk by selling their company’s stock listed in JII’s index
and reducing their stock prices (Alim & Sihombing, 2022). This outcome correlated
with signaling theory, suggesting that high debts could increase financial risk, reduce
tax shields, and elevate the possibilities of financial distress, causing investors to
refrain from repurchasing stock. This result substantiated a previous study showing
that DER had a negative impact on stock prices (Bui et al., 2023; Rosdiana, 2021).
TATO negatively affects the company’s stock price listed in JII index.
TATO measured the effectiveness of the company in exploiting financial
sources. TATO represented asset effectiveness by allocating assets to obtain more
sales and sent a negative signal of investment due to inefficient operational cost
management, impacting profit and resulting in a reduction in stock price, influencing
business risk (Fridson & Alvarez, 2022). In this study, TATO negatively affected the
company’s stock price listed in JII index, with high TATO leading to a decrease in
shares. This result confirmed that TATO negatively influenced stock prices (Ahmad
et al., 2023). This result proves that TATO had a negative impact on the listed primary
industry and chemical prices in the stock market (Sari et al., 2021).
DPR does not affect the company’s stock price listed in JII index.
DPR is distributed to the stakeholders when the risk is lower than the capital
gain. DPR created a positive signal to attract investors to buy more stocks, thereby
increasing stock prices. However, the statistical result indicated that DPR did not
impact stock prices. Dividends typically cause a decrease in the stock price by the
amount of the dividend on the ex-dividend date. This reduction is offset by the
expectation of future dividends and other factors influencing investor sentiment. This
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 17

leads to a complex interplay of supply and demand instabilities that affect the stock
price.
The results also strengthened the dividend irrelevance theory, suggesting that
dividend policy did not affect the company's value compared to stock price. This
theory stated that the dividend policy was determined by the indices capability of JII
to increase profit and minimize business risk. Investors who bought JII stocks needed
to focus on the dividend distribution and allocate the dividends into cash or buy back
more shares. This result correlated with a previous study showing that the dividend
policy did not impact the company’s stock price (AlGhazali et al., 2023).
DPR cannot moderate the effect of ROE on the company’s stock price listed in
JII index.
Profitability proxied to ROE impacted the JII stock price, while DPR did not
influence the equities. DPR could not moderate the effect of ROE on stock price, and
this result rejected the current hypothesis while supporting the study form (AlGhazali
et al., 2023). Dividends and ROE serve different functions in evaluating a stock's
performance. Dividends can provide income to investors that do not directly influence
the effect of ROE or the company’s profitability efficiency on the stock price. Both
are independent factors in stock valuation models.
In this study, investors believed that dividends could not influence ROE to
increase the company’s stock price listed in JII index because shareholders prioritized
cash flow distribution over dividend distribution and preferred to sell stock rather than
hold shares. The dividend irrelevance theory was affirmed and implemented in
investment decisions.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

In conclusion, this study analyzed Sharia stock performance in Muslim-
majority countries, enabling IDX market players to compare determinants with
common equity. Future undervaluation of Sharia stocks was aimed to be potentially
addressed by the analysis. The empirical results showed that profitability, proxied to
ROE, positively impacted JII stock price, with a high indicator signaling positive
investment and increasing shares.
However, Leverage, proxied to DER, and the Activity Ratio, measured by
TATO, had a detrimental effect on JII stock price, signifying a negative investment
signal and leading to a decrease in share price. The liquidity ratio represented by CR
did not impact JII's stock price, and a specific CR amount did not provide an
investment signal to influence the equity. DPR did not affect JII stock price because
investors preferred obtaining profit through selling and buying stock rather than
accepting dividend distribution. This result suggested that DPR could not moderate the
effect of ROE on JII stock price.
18 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

Theoretically, this result proves the irrelevant theory that dividend policy did
not affect the company's value compared to stock price. Practically, investors prefer
accepting shareholder’s profit over dividends because ROE indicates efficiency in
capital utilization and potential for growth, whereas dividends represent only a portion
of profits distributed to shareholders, often seen as less indicative of future growth
potential. Management should also address the amount of DER and TATO, as many
of these variables could decrease JII stock price in the Indonesian capital market.
The analysis acknowledged certain limitations, particularly concerning the
number of independent variables. According to the coefficient determination result, all
independent variables contributed less to the determination of JII stock price by 14.6
percent, while other leading indicators influenced shares in the IDX market by 85.4
percent. This study recommended further investigation to add more variables, such as
Return on Asset (ROA), Quick Ratio (QR), Inventory Turnover, and Dividend Yield,
to explore other indicators contributing to the stock price determination of JII.

REFERENCES
Ahmad, N., Shah, F. N., Ijaz, F., & Ghouri, M. N. (2023). Corporate income tax, asset
turnover and Tobin’s Q as firm performance in Pakistan: Moderating role of
liquidity ratio. Cogent Business and Management, 10(1), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2167287
Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “Lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market
mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488–500.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431
AlGhazali, A., Al-Yahyaee, K. H., Fairchild, R., & Guney, Y. (2023). What do
dividend changes reveal? Theory and evidence from a unique environment.
Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 62, 499–552.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-023-01211-x
Alim, M. S., & Sihombing, P. (2022). The impact of financial performance on stock
return in the companies which issue sukuk in Indonesia. International Journal
of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 7(11), 256–262.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7349451
Anwar, S. F., Sutopo, & Bramastyo, R. (2021). Pengaruh return on assets, current ratio,
dan total asset turnover terhadap harga saham pada perusahaan kosmetik dan
peralatan rumah tangga yang terdaftar di BEI. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis,
1(3), 145–151.
Anwar, Y., & Rahmalia, L. (2019). The effect of return on equity, earning per share
and price earning ratio on stock prices. The Accounting Journal of Binaniaga,
4(1), 57–66.
Ariesa, Y., Tommy, T., Utami, J., Maharidha, I., Siahaan, N. C., & Nainggolan, N. B.
(2020). The effect of current ratio (CR), firm size (FS), return on equity (ROE),
and earning per share (EPS) on the stock prices of manufacturing companies
listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange in the 2014-2018 period. Budapest
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 19

International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and

Social Sciences, 3(4), 2759–2773. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v3i4.1286
Ariyani, L., Andini, R., & Santoso, E. B. (2018). Pengaruh EPS, CR, DER dan PBV
terhadap harga saham dengan kebijakan dividen sebagai variabel intervening
(Studi pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di BEI Tahun 2011-2015).
Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa S1 AkuntansiUniversitas Pandanaran, 1–20.
Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data. In Xenobiotica (3rd Edition,
Vol. 5, Issue 7). Jhon & Wiley Son, Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.3109/00498257509056115
Baltagi, B. H. (2014). Panel data and difference-in-differences estimation. In
Encyclopedia of Health Economics (Vol. 2). Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375678-7.00720-3
Bodie, Z., Kane, A., & Marcus, A. J. (2018). Investments. McGraw-Hill .
Breusch, T. ., & Pagan, A. . (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to
model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1),
239–253. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2019). Financial management: Theory and
practice: Vol. 15 edition. Cengage Learning.
Bui, T. N., Nguyen, X. H., & Pham, K. T. (2023). The effect of capital structure on
firm value: A Study of companies listed on the Vietnamese stock market.
International Journal of Financial Studies, 11(3), 1–20.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs11030100
Devi, I. N., & Sutrisno, T. (2015). Pengaruh PBV, EPS, dan DER terhadap harga
saham dengan kebijakan deviden sebagai variabel intervening: Studi pada
perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di BEI tahun 2009-2013. Jurnal Ilmiah
Mahasiswa FEB Universitas Brawijaya, 4(1), 1–21.
Dewi, M. (2017). Analisis rasio keuangan untuk mengukur kinerja keuangan PT
Smartfren Telecom, Tbk. Jurnal Penelitian Ekonomi Akuntansi, 1(1), 1–14.
Fitri, I. K., & Purnamasari, I. (2018). Pengaruh kebijakan dividen terhadap harga
saham (Studi pada perusahaan pertambangan di Bursa Efek Indonesia 2008-
2012). Jurnal Saintifik Manajemen Dan AKuntansi, 1(1), 9–14.
https://doi.org/10.35138/organu
Fridson, M. S., & Alvarez, F. (2022). Financial statement analysis: A practitioner’s
guide (5 Edition). Wiley Finance Series.
Gayatri, H. W., & Thamrin, H. (2020). Impact of fundamental factors and exchange
rate on the stock price of PT Garuda Indonesia (Persero) Tbk period of 2011-
2018. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology,
5(1), 1243–1250.
Gordon, M. J. (1962). The savings investment and valuation of a corporation. The
Review of Economics and Statistics, 44(1), 37.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1926621
Graham, B., & Dodd, D. L. (2023). Analysis principles and technique (7 edition).
20 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

McGraw Hill.
Gujarati, D. (2015). Econometrics by example second edition (M. Education (ed.);
Second Edition).
Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2020). Econometría (Quinta Edition). Mc Graw Hill.
Gursida, H. (2017). The Influence of fundamental and macroeconomic analysis on
stock price. Jurnal Terapan Manajemen Dan Bisnis, 3(2), 222–234.
Halim, A. (2015). Manajemen keuangan bisnis: Konsep dan aplikasinya. Mitra
Wacana Media.
Handayani, K. M., Indarti, I., & Listiyowati, L. (2020). Pengaruh kinerja keuangan
dan ukuran perusahaan terhadap harga saham dengan kebijakan dividen
sebagai variabel intervening pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di
Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Aset, 21(2), 93–105.
https://doi.org/10.37470/1.21.2.150
Hartono, J. (2013). Teori portofolio dan analisis investasi (edisi kedelapan). Badan
Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis UGM.
Hausman, J. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–
1271. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5466-2_5
Herawati, A., & Angger. (2018). The influence of fundamental analysis on stock
prices: The case of food and beverage industries. European Research Studies
Journal, 21(3), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1063
Hsiao, C. (2003). Analysis of panel data. In Journal of the Royal Statistical Society
Series A: Statistics in Society (Vol. 179, Issue 4).
https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12220
Imansyah, S., & Mustafa, M. H. (2021). The analysis of financial ratios effect on the
stock price of consumer goods sectors companies listed in KOMPAS100 index.
Dinasti International Journal of Digital Business Management, 2(2), 371–381.
https://doi.org/10.31933/dijdbm.v2i2
Indonesia Financial Service Authority. (2022). Indonesia’s sharia financing
development report.
Indonesia Stock Exchange. (2022). IDX yearly 2022: Maintaining resilience to
overcome challenges. Indonesia Stock Exchange, 454.
Jiang, F., Ma, Y., & Shi, B. (2017). Stock liquidity and dividend payouts. Journal of
Corporate Finance, 42(0), 295–314.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2016.12.005
Kartika, N. P., Putri, E., Bagus, I., Astika, P., & Dewi, A. A. (2017). Pengaruh tingkat
bunga pasar dan karakteristik obligasi pada imbal hasil obligasi yang tergolong
investment grade. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 19(3), 1774–1802.
Kasmir, K. (2018). Analisis laporan keuangan. PT Rajagrafindo Persada.
Ligocká, M., & Stavárek, D. (2019). The relationship between financial ratios and the
stock prices of selected European food companies listed on stock exchanges.
Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 67(1),
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 21

299–307. https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201967010299
Lintner, J. (1956). Distribution of incomes of corporations among dividends, retained
earnings, and taxes. The American Economic Review, 46(2), 97–113.
Mahirun, M., Jannati, A., Kushermanto, A., & Prasetiani, T. R. (2023). Impact of
dividend policy on stock prices. Acta Logistica, 10(2), 199–208.
https://doi.org/10.22306/al.v10i2.375
Mansfield, E. R., & Helms, B. P. (1982). Detecting multicollinearity. The American
Statistician, 36(3), 158–160. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2683167
Mardianti, A., & Dewi, S. R. (2021). The effect of liquidity and profitability on stock
prices with dividend policy as moderation in manufacturing companies listed
on the stock exchange in 2016-2018. Indonesian Journal of Innovation Studies,
16, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.21070/ijins.v16i.558
Megamawarni, M., & Pratiwi, A. (2021). Pengaruh rasio keuangan dan pertumbuhan
perusahaan terhadap dividend payout ratio (DPR) dan implikasinya pada harga
saham perusahaan perbankan yang listing di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI).
Jurnal Maksipreneur: Manajemen, Koperasi, Dan Entrepreneurship, 11(1),
47. https://doi.org/10.30588/jmp.v11i1.829
Miller, M. H., & Modigliani, F. (1961). Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of
shares. The Journal of Business, 34(4), 411–433.
Mohamad, S. (2015). Pasar modal dan manajemen portofolio (Edisi 2). Erlangga.
Nirmolo, D., & Widjajanti, K. (2018). Analisis faktor - faktor yang mempengaruhi
harga saham dengan nilai perusahaan sebagai variabel intervening. Jurnal
Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 11(1), 40–55.
Oktaryani, G. A. S., Sofiyah, S., Nugraha A.P, I. N., Gde Bisma, I. D., & Mandra, I.
G. (2016). Pengaruh free cash flow dan leverage terhadap harga saham dengan
kebijakan dividen sebagai variabel intervening. Distribusi - Journal of
Management and Business, 4(2), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.29303/distribusi.v4i2.10
Olivia, A., & Ovami, D. C. (2021). Pengaruh faktor fundamental dan teknikal terhadap
harga saham pada perusahaan property dan real estate yang terdaftar di Bursa
Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Multidisiplin Madani, 1(1), 19–30.
https://doi.org/10.55927/mudima.v1i1.12
Pattiruhu, J. R., & Paais, M. (2020). Effect of liquidity, profitability, leverage, and firm
size on dividend policy. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business,
7(10), 35–42.
Puspita, E. (2017). Pengaruh likuiditas, profitabilitas, leverage, dan market ratio
terhadap dividend payout ratio pada perusahaan manufaktur. Jurnal Bidang
Ilmu Ekonomi, 12(1), 17–35.
Rahmawati, D., & Suryono, B. (2017). Pengaruh DPR, EPS dan DER terhadap harga
saham. Jurnal Ilmu Dan Riset Akuntansi, 6(6), 1–17.
Ramadhani, J. B., Husnan, L. H., & AP, I. N. N. (2019). Pengaruh profitabilitas
terhadap harga saham dengan kebijakan dividen dan leverage sebagai variabel
22 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)

pemoderasi pada perusahaan sektor industri barang konsumsi yang terdaftar di

Bursa Efek Indonesia. JMM UNRAM - Master of Management Journal, 9(1),
42–52. https://doi.org/10.29303/jmm.v9i1.483
Rasdayanti, F., & Chaerudin, C. (2021). The role of return on equity, debt to equity
ratio and current ratio in revealing the stock prices (This research on
telecommunication sub sector companies which have been listed on the
Indonesia Stock Exchange 2012-2019). Dinasti International Journal of
Education Management And Social Science, 2(4), 717–727.
https://doi.org/10.31933/dijemss.v2i4.841
Rosdiana, R. (2021). Analysis of the effect of stock prices on coal sub- sector on the
Indonesia Stock Exchange 2014-2019. Dinasti International Journal of
Economics, Finance & Accounting, 2(5), 528–539.
https://doi.org/10.38035/dijefa.v2i5.1106
Ross, S. A. (1977). The determination of financial structure: The incentive-signalling
approach. The Bell Journal of Economics, 8(1), 23–40.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3003485
Samsuar, T. (2017). Pengaruh faktor fundamental dan teknikal terhadap harga saham
industri perhotelan yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi,
Keuangan, Dan Perbankan Syariah, 1(1), 116–131.
Sari, R. P., Sihombing, M. T., Manurung, R. D., & Aruan, D. A. (2021). Pengaruh
current ratio, ROA, total assset turnover dan debt to equity ratio terhadap harga
saham pada perusahaan sektor industri dasar dan kimia yang terdaftar di BEI.
Journal of Economic, Bussines and Accounting, 5(1), 621–626.
https://doi.org/10.31539/costing.v5i1.2447
Satar, A., & Jayanti, S. D. (2020). Pengaruh profitabilitas dan leverage terhadap harga
saham dengan kebijakan dividen sebagai variabel moderating pada perusahaan
manufaktur yang terdaftar di Indeks Saham Syariah Indonesia (ISSI) tahun
2014 – 2018. I-Finance: A Research Journal on Islamic Finance, 6(2), 148–
167. https://doi.org/10.19109/ifinance.v6i2.6679
Saunder, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business
studies. In Pearson Education Limited (8th editio).
https://doi.org/10.1093/oed/7394538181
Sharma, S., Bhardwaj, I., & Kishore, K. (2023). Capturing the impact of accounting
and regulatory variables on stock prices of banks – An empirical study of
Indian banks in panel data modeling. Asian Journal of Accounting Research,
8(2), 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-11-2020-0110
Sihombing, P. (2018). Corporate financial management (IPB Press).
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signalling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64(4),
419. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-820924
Sutrisno, S. (2009). Manajemen keuangan teori konsep dan aplikasi. Ekoisia.
Syarif, A. D. (2019). Fundamental factors and stock prices: Evidence from Indonesia
oil and gas companies. 5(8), 444–451. https://doi.org/10.21276/sb.2019.5.8.6
Toyoda, T. (1974). Use of the chow test under heteroscedasticity. Econometrica,
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 27 No. 2 Oktober 2024, 1 - 24 23

42(3), 601–608. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/1911796

Trinh, Q. T., Nguyen, A. P., Nguyen, H. A., & Ngo, P. T. (2020). Determinants of
Vietnam government bond yield volatility: A GARCH approach. The Journal
of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(7), 15–25.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no7.015
Weygandt, J., Kimmel, P., & Kieso, D. (2015). Financial accounting. John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. In
Insect Pathology. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-092625-
4.50001-7
Zulkifli, Z., Endri, E., & Kurniasih, A. (2017). Determinan internal dividend payout
ratio perusahaan farmasi terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Keuangan
Dan Perbankan, 21(2), 238–252. https://doi.org/10.26905/jkdp.v21i2.311
24 Determinants of profitability, liquidity, solvency, activity (Sihombing, Zakchona)