Pecking order theory

Last updated

In corporate finance, the pecking order theory (or pecking order model) postulates that [1] "firms prefer to finance their investments internally, using retained earnings, before turning to external sources of financing such as debt or equity" - i.e. there is a "pecking order" when it comes to financing decisions. The theory was first suggested by Gordon Donaldson in 1961 [2] and was modified by Stewart C. Myers and Nicolas Majluf in 1984. [3]

Contents

Theory

The theory assumes asymmetric information, and that the firm's financing decision constitutes a signal to the market. Under the theory, managers know more about their company's prospects, risks and value than outside investors; see efficient market hypothesis. This asymmetry affects the choice between internal and external financing and between the issue of debt or equity: companies prioritize their sources of financing, first preferring internal financing, and then debt, with equity financing seen as a "last resort". Here, the issue of debt signals the board's confidence that an investment is profitable; further, the current stock price is undervalued, mitigating against issuing shares at these levels. The issue of equity, on the other hand, would signal some lack of confidence, or at least that the share is over-valued. An issue of equity may then lead to a drop in share price. (This does not however apply to high-tech industries where the issue of equity is preferable, due to the high cost of debt issue as assets are intangible. [4] ) Other more practical consderations include the fact that issue costs are least for internal funds, low for debt and highest for equity. [4] Further, issuing shares means "bringing external ownership" into the company, leading to stock dilution.

The pecking order theory may explain the inverse relationship between profitability and debt ratios, [4] and, in that dividends are a use of capital, the theory also links to the firm's dividend policy. [5] In general, internally generated cash flow may exceed required capital expenditures, and at other times will fall short. Thus when profitable, since firms prefer internal financing, the firm will pay off debt, leading to a reduction in the ratio. When profit or cashflow falls short, rather than relying on external financing, the firm first draws down its cash balance or sells its marketable securities. Coupled with this is the fact that the larger the dividend paid, the less funds are available for reinvestment, and the more the company will have to rely on external financing to fund its investments. Thus the dividend payout ratio may also "adapt" to the firm's investment opportunities and current cash levels.

Evidence

Tests of the pecking order theory have not been able to show that it is of first-order importance in determining a firm's capital structure. However, several authors have found that there are instances where it is a good approximation of reality. Zeidan, Galil and Shapir (2018) document that owners of private firms in Brazil follow the pecking order theory, [6] and also Myers and Shyam-Sunder (1999) [7] find that some features of the data are better explained by the pecking order than by the trade-off theory. Frank and Goyal show, among other things, that pecking order theory fails where it should hold, namely for small firms where information asymmetry is presumably an important problem. [8]

See also

Related Research Articles

The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is the rate that a company is expected to pay on average to all its security holders to finance its assets. The WACC is commonly referred to as the firm's cost of capital. Importantly, it is dictated by the external market and not by management. The WACC represents the minimum return that a company must earn on an existing asset base to satisfy its creditors, owners, and other providers of capital, or they will invest elsewhere.

The Modigliani–Miller theorem is an influential element of economic theory; it forms the basis for modern thinking on capital structure. The basic theorem states that in the absence of taxes, bankruptcy costs, agency costs, and asymmetric information, and in an efficient market, the enterprise value of a firm is unaffected by how that firm is financed. This is not to be confused with the value of the equity of the firm. Since the value of the firm depends neither on its dividend policy nor its decision to raise capital by issuing shares or selling debt, the Modigliani–Miller theorem is often called the capital structure irrelevance principle.

In economics and accounting, the cost of capital is the cost of a company's funds, or from an investor's point of view is "the required rate of return on a portfolio company's existing securities". It is used to evaluate new projects of a company. It is the minimum return that investors expect for providing capital to the company, thus setting a benchmark that a new project has to meet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital structure</span> Mix of funds used to start and sustain a business

In corporate finance, capital structure refers to the mix of various forms of external funds, known as capital, used to finance a business. It consists of shareholders' equity, debt, and preferred stock, and is detailed in the company's balance sheet. The larger the debt component is in relation to the other sources of capital, the greater financial leverage the firm is said to have. Too much debt can increase the risk of the company and reduce its financial flexibility, which at some point creates concern among investors and results in a greater cost of capital. Company management is responsible for establishing a capital structure for the corporation that makes optimal use of financial leverage and holds the cost of capital as low as possible.

In corporate finance, a leveraged recapitalization is a change of the company's capital structure, usually substitution of debt for equity.

Capital budgeting in corporate finance, corporate planning and accounting is an area of capital management that concerns the planning process used to determine whether an organization's long term capital investments such as new machinery, replacement of machinery, new plants, new products, and research development projects are worth the funding of cash through the firm's capitalization structures. It is the process of allocating resources for major capital, or investment, expenditures. An underlying goal, consistent with the overall approach in corporate finance, is to increase the value of the firm to the shareholders.

Michael Cole Jensen was an American economist who worked in the field of financial economics. From 1967-1988, he was on the University of Rochester's faculty. Between 2000 and 2009 he worked for the Monitor Company Group, a strategy-consulting firm which became "Monitor Deloitte" in 2013. Until 2000, he held the position of Jesse Isidor Straus Professor of Business Administration at Harvard University.

Debt overhang is the condition of an organization that has existing debt so great that it cannot easily borrow more money, even when that new borrowing is actually a good investment that would more than pay for itself.

Valuation using discounted cash flows is a method of estimating the current value of a company based on projected future cash flows adjusted for the time value of money. The cash flows are made up of those within the “explicit” forecast period, together with a continuing or terminal value that represents the cash flow stream after the forecast period. In several contexts, DCF valuation is referred to as the "income approach".

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to finance:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade-off theory of capital structure</span> Capital Structure theory

The trade-off theory of capital structure is the idea that a company chooses how much debt finance and how much equity finance to use by balancing the costs and benefits. The classical version of the hypothesis goes back to Kraus and Litzenberger who considered a balance between the dead-weight costs of bankruptcy and the tax saving benefits of debt. Often agency costs are also included in the balance. This theory is often set up as a competitor theory to the pecking order theory of capital structure. A review of the trade-off theory and its supporting evidence is provided by Ai, Frank, and Sanati.

The market timing hypothesis, in corporate finance, is a theory of how firms and corporations decide whether to finance their investment with equity or with debt instruments. Here, equity market timing refers to "the practice of issuing shares at high prices and repurchasing at low prices, [where] the intention is to exploit temporary fluctuations in the cost of equity relative to the cost of other forms of capital".

In the theory of capital structure, internal financing or self-financing is using its profits or assets of a company or organization as a source of capital to fund a new project or investment. Internal sources of finance contrast with external sources of finance. The main difference between the two is that internal financing refers to the business generating funds from activities and assets that already exist in the company whereas external financing requires the involvement of a third party. Internal financing is generally thought to be less expensive for the firm than external financing because the firm does not have to incur transaction costs to obtain it, nor does it have to pay the taxes associated with paying dividends. Many economists debate whether the availability of internal financing is an important determinant of firm investment or not. A related controversy is whether the fact that internal financing is empirically correlated with investment implies firms are credit constrained and therefore depend on internal financing for investment. Studies show that the availability of funds within a company is a major driver for investment decisions. However, the success and growth of a company is almost entirely dependant on the financial management and the use of internal financing does not explicitly mean success or growth for the firm. The financial manager can use a range of sources including but not limited to retained earnings, the sale of assets, and the reduction and control of working capital to drive expansion and better utilise funds. The availability of internal finance does not have a massive effect on firm growth.

Management is a type of labor with a special role of coordinating the activities of inputs and carrying out the contracts agreed among inputs, all of which can be characterized as "decision making". Managers usually face disciplinary forces by making themselves irreplaceable in a way that the company would lose without them. A manager has an incentive to invest the firm's resources in assets whose value is higher under him than under the best alternative manager, even when such investments are not value-maximizing.

Financial innovation is the act of creating new financial instruments as well as new financial technologies, institutions, and markets. Recent financial innovations include hedge funds, private equity, weather derivatives, retail-structured products, exchange-traded funds, multi-family offices, and Islamic bonds (Sukuk). The shadow banking system has spawned an array of financial innovations including mortgage-backed securities products and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).

In finance, the capital structure substitution theory (CSS) describes the relationship between earnings, stock price and capital structure of public companies. The CSS theory hypothesizes that managements of public companies manipulate capital structure such that earnings per share (EPS) are maximized. Managements have an incentive to do so because shareholders and analysts value EPS growth. The theory is used to explain trends in capital structure, stock market valuation, dividend policy, the monetary transmission mechanism, and stock volatility, and provides an alternative to the Modigliani–Miller theorem that has limited descriptive validity in real markets. The CSS theory is only applicable in markets where share repurchases are allowed. Investors can use the CSS theory to identify undervalued stocks.

Dividend policy, in financial management and corporate finance, is concerned with the policies regarding dividends; more specifically paying a cash dividend in the present, as opposed to, presumably, paying an increased dividend at a later stage. Practical and theoretical considerations will inform this thinking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate finance</span> Framework for corporate funding, capital structure, and investments

Corporate finance is an area of finance that deals with the sources of funding, and the capital structure of businesses, the actions that managers take to increase the value of the firm to the shareholders, and the tools and analysis used to allocate financial resources. The primary goal of corporate finance is to maximize or increase shareholder value.

Factor investing is an investment approach that involves targeting quantifiable firm characteristics or "factors" that can explain differences in stock returns. Security characteristics that may be included in a factor-based approach include size, low-volatility, value, momentum, asset growth, profitability, leverage, term and carry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of corporate finance</span> Overview of corporate finance and corporate finance-related topics

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to corporate finance:

References

  1. ↑ Pecking Order Theory: Explanation and Relevance in Corporate Finance, investmentguide.co.uk
  2. ↑ Donaldson, Gordon (1961). Corporate debt capacity: A study of corporate debt policy and the determination of corporate debt capacity.
  3. ↑ Myers, Stewart C.; Majluf, Nicholas S. (1984). "Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have" (PDF). Journal of Financial Economics. 13 (2): 187–221. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(84)90023-0. hdl: 1721.1/2068 .
  4. 1 2 3 Brealey RA, Myers SC, and Allen F (2008). Principles of Corporate Finance – 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York.
  5. ↑ Olatundun Adelegan (2002). "The Pecking Order Hypothesis and Corporate Dividend Pay Out: Nigerian Evidence". African Review of Money Finance and Banking.
  6. ↑ Zeidan, Rodrigo M.; Galil, Koresh; Shapir, Offer Moshe (1 November 2018). "Do Ultimate Owners Follow the Pecking Order Theory?". doi:10.2139/ssrn.2747749. S2CID   197773240. SSRN   2747749.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  7. ↑ Shyam-Sunder, Lakshmi; Myers, Steward C. (1999). "Testing static trade-off against pecking order models of capital structure". Journal of Financial Economics. 51 (2): 219–244. doi:10.1016/S0304-405X(98)00051-8.
  8. ↑ Frank, Murray Z.; Goyal, Vidhan K. (1 November 2018). "Testing the Pecking Order Theory of Capital Structure". CiteSeerX   10.1.1.8.7753 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.243138. S2CID   11413096. SSRN   243138.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.