Dpto. Economía y Empresa

This paper investigates the influence of peer financial choices on the capital structure decisions of European and North American listed companies in the oil and gas sector. It also examines how commodity prices, particularly oil and natural gas prices, and their corporate hedging affect capital structure policies. The findings underscore the existence of peer effects in the oil and gas industry, indicating that companies consider their peers' financial decisions when determining their capital structure. Further analysis reveals that there is significant cross-country heterogeneity in capital structure peer effects conditional on financial and institutional development, and disclosure quality. Additionally, the research highlights that oil and natural gas prices, along with the hedging against these prices exposure, impact the capital structure of oil and gas companies, providing invaluable insights for industry practitioners and policymakers.

This paper explores the external financing–cash flow relationship in capital structure theory by comparing unlisted (financially constrained) and listed (financially unconstrained) companies. We postulate that investment is determined endogenously in the case of unlisted firms, as they are strongly dependent on internally generated funds (cash flow). Consequently, unlisted firms invest their cash flow in profitable projects, using any residual cash flow to increase their holdings of safe assets. In turn, listed companies determine their investment exogenously and may reduce leverage if they raise an excess of cash flow. As a result, listed companies would react more negatively to shocks in cash flow. Our findings reveal that both unlisted and listed companies show a negative external financing–cash flow relationship, that of the latter being clearly more intense.

In this paper, we explore two of the most relevant theories that explain financial policy in small and medium enterprises (SMEs): pecking order theory and trade-off theory. Panel data methodology is used to test the empirical hypotheses over a sample of 6482 Spanish SMEs during the five-year period 1994–1998. The results suggest that both theoretical approaches contribute to explain capital structure in SMEs. However, while we find evidence that SMEs attempt to achieve a target or optimum leverage (trade-off model), there is less support for the view that SMEs adjust their leverage level to their financing requirements (pecking order model).

The principal aim of this paper is to test how firm characteristics affect Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) capital structure. We carry out an empirical analysis over a panel data of 6482 non–financial Spanish SMEs along the five-year period 1994–1998, modelling the leverage ratio as a function of firm specific attributes hypothesized by capital structure theory. Our results suggest that non–debt tax shields and profitability are both negatively related to SME leverage, while size, growth options and asset structure influence positively on SME capital structure; they also confirm a maturity matching behaviour in this firm group.

Our evidence suggests that Spanish public firms adjust slowly toward their capital structure target, with the typical firm closing approximately one-fifth of the gap between its current and target debt ratios each year. This finding is in contrast with previous evidence; however, we employ econometric techniques specially designed for highly persistent dependent variables, like market debt ratios. Moreover, our evidence does not seem to indicate that macroeconomic conditions, at least under the conditions experienced by the Spanish economy during our sample period, affect the speed of adjustment. If anything, our results are consistent with faster adjustments during economic states in which the distance between the current and target leverage is the greatest.

This paper explores two of the most important theories behind financial policy in Smalland Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs), namely, the pecking order and the trade-off theories. Panel data methodology is used to test empirical hypotheses on a sample of 3,569 Spanish SMEs over a 10-year period dating from 1995 to 2004. Results suggest that both theoretical models help to explain SME capital structure. However, despite finding clear evidence that SMEs follow a funding source hierarchy (pecking order model), our results reveal that greater trust is placed in SMEs that aim to reach target or optimum leverage (trade-off model). This remains true even when SMEs take a long time to reach this level, due to the high transaction costs they have to face. Nondebt tax shields (NDTS), growth opportunities and internal resources all seem to play an important role in determining SME capital structure. Both size and age are also found to be significant factors. Moreover, the empirical evidence obtained confirms that SMEs clearly behave differently to large firms where financing is concerned.

The principal aim of this paper is to test how firm characteristics affect Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) capital structure. We carry out an empirical analysis of panel data of 6482 non-financial Spanish SMEs during the five years period 1994–1998, modelling the leverage ratio as a function of firm specific attributes hypothesized by capital structure theory. Our results suggest that non-debt tax shields and profitability are both negatively related to SME leverage, while size, growth options and asset structure influence positively SME capital structure; they also confirm a maturity matching behaviour in this firm group.

We analyze the relevance of adjustment costs in keeping Spanish public firms away from their target leverage. We argue that firm's cash flow outcomes determine the importance of the adjustment costs on capital structure changes. Then, we estimate capital structure adjustment speeds across three different cash flow realizations. We report that during years in which either over-levered or under-levered Spanish public firms make changes in their financing decisions, as a result of their high cash flow realizations, they close significantly more of the gap between current and target capital structure than those firms with intermediate and low cash flow observations. Moreover, independently of the cash flow level, we find that leverage adjusts more quickly for over-levered than for under-levered firms.