Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

THE EFFECT OF CAPITAL

EXPENDITURE, COMPANY GROWTH
AND COMPANY SIZE ON FIRM VALUE
THROUGH FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
MODERATED BY CAPITAL STRUCTURE
Salimah *, Yudhi Herliansyah **
* Corresponding author, Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia
Contact details: Mercu Buana University, 11650, Jakarta, Indonesia
** Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Abstract

How to cite this paper: Salimah, & This study aims to examine the influence of capital expenditure
Herliansyah, Y. (2019). The effect of
variables, company growth, and company size on firm value through
capital expenditure, company growth
and company size on firm value financial performance is moderated by the capital structure of the
through financial performance company in LQ 45 companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange.
moderated by capital structure The research methodology uses quantitative methods, the number of
[Special issue]. Corporate Ownership
observations as many as 50 sourced from 45 companies over 5 annual
& Control, 17(1), 236-244.
http://doi.org/10.22495/cocv17i1siart6 periods. The results of this study found that: (1) Capital Expenditure
(Capex), Company Growth (Growth) and Company Size (Size) had no
Copyright © 2019 The Authors effect on Company Value (PBV), (2) Capital Expenditure (Capex) does
not affect Financial Performance (ROE), (3) Company Growth (Growth)
This work is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International and Company Size (Size) have a significant effect on ROE, (4) Financial
License (CC BY 4.0). Performance (ROE) has a significant positive effect on Value Company
https://creativecommons.org/licenses (PBV), (5) Financial Performance (ROE) does not mediate the effect of
/by/4.0/ Capital Expenditure (Capex), Company Growth (Growth) and Company
ISSN Online: 1810-3057
Size (Size) on Firm Value (PBV), (6) Capital Structure (DER) moderates
ISSN Print: 1727-9232 the influence of Financial Performance (ROE) to Company Value (PBV).

Received: 27.09.2019 Keywords: Capital Expenditure, Company Growth, Company Size,

Accepted: 12.12.2019
Financial Performance, Capital Structure, Firm Value
JEL Classification: G30, G32
DOI: 10.22495/cocv17i1siart6 Authors’ individual contribution: Conceptualization - S.; Methodology - S.;
Writing – S.; Investigation – S.; Funding – S.; Resources – S.;
Supervision – Y.H.

1. INTRODUCTION Profitability is the company’s ability to make a

profit in relation to sales, total assets and own
The existence of the capital market is very important capital. Thus for the long term, investors will be very
for investors as a place to see and assess the interested in this profitability analysis. For example,
performance of a company, so investors are shareholders will see profits that will actually be
interested in investing in companies that are received in the form of dividends (Sartono, 2010,
considered profitable and can provide value to the p. 123).
company. The purpose of the establishment of the A manager must be able to raise funds both
company is first to achieve optimal profits, second is sourced from within the company and from outside
to prosper the owner of the company or the company efficiently, in the sense that the
shareholders and third is to maximize the value of funding decision is a funding decision that is able to
the company that is reflected in the share price. The minimize the cost of capital that must be borne by
three goals of the company are actually substantially the company. Capital costs arising from the funding
not much different, it’s just that the emphasis to be decision are consequences that directly arise from
achieved by each company is different from one the decisions made by managers. When managers
company to another (Martono & Harjito, 2015). use debt, obviously the capital costs incurred in the
amount of interest costs charged by creditors,

236
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

whereas if the manager uses internal funds or his and firm performance is actually negative.
own funds will arise opportunity costs (opportunity Meanwhile Chen and Chen (2011) proved that
costs) that is the costs incurred when choosing an profitability has a positive effect on firm value, and
alternative investment from funds or own capital a negative effect on leverage, while leverage has a
used. Funding decisions made inaccurately will negative effect on value, and profitability has a
result in fixed costs in the form of high capital costs, significant mediating effect. Babalola (2013) also
which in turn can result in low profitability of the proved both in terms of total assets and in terms of
company. total sales, company size have a positive impact on
From the perspective of shareholders the the profitability of Nigerian manufacturing
profitability ratio used is return on equity (ROE), this companies.
ROE measures the ability of the company to obtain Myers (1997) and Hasnawati (2005) mention the
available profits for the company’s shareholders, the value of the company as the main goal depending on
higher the ROE value indicates a high level of the company’s expenses in the future. To reach
profitability, which means it will also provide higher investment decisions that produce positive net
profits to shareholders, so that shareholder present value (Modigliani & Miller, 1961; Brigham &
prosperity will increase. Houston, 2001). Fama (2001) and Delira (2007) state
The company size expressed by the total value the value of a company is solely determined by
of assets, according to Ferry and Jones (in Sujianto, investment decisions. Research conducted by
2001) states that the size of the company describes Hidayah (2015) suggests that CAPBVA has a positive
the size of a company as indicated by total assets. and significant effect on Price Book Value. Based on
So, the size of the company is the size of the assets the description above, the researcher makes the
owned by the company, larger size companies have following hypothesis.
greater access to get funding from various sources Capital expenditure is used by companies to
and have a greater probability to win the create benefits in the future; capital expenditure is
competition or survive in the industry. used to buy fixed assets in the form of property,
Company growth is the company’s ability to plants, equipment to add value to existing fixed
increase size. The company’s growth is basically assets with a useful life of more than one year. The
influenced by several factors, namely external, results of Wachanga (2014) mention that capital
internal, and the influence of the local industrial expenditure has a positive and significant effect on
climate. Company growth can be measured in financial performance.
several ways, for example by looking at sales growth. Based on research conducted by Fista and
The company’s sales growth has implications for the Widyawati (2017), sales growth has a significant and
profits derived by the company. The higher sales positive effect on firm value, while research
growth obtained by the company means that it will conducted by Mandalika (2016) states that sales
also provide higher profits to shareholders so that growth has no effect on firm value. Based on this
the prosperity of shareholders will also increase. explanation, the hypothesis can be formulated as
The literature, framework and hypotheses of follows:
the study are described in Section 2, while the The higher the company’s growth, the more the
design and methodology developed to analyze company will rely on capital. High sales growth
capital expenditure, growth and size of companies is shows an increase in revenue obtained by the
explained in Section 3. Section 4 describes the result company from product sales in the company's
and discussion. The study ends with conclusions operational activities. Sales growth from the previous
and an overview of future achievable research areas year on a regular basis can be used to predict sales
by applying the research method adopted in this growth in the coming year.
paper (Section 5). According to Mualifah, Oemar, and Hartono
(2017) revealed that sales growth had a positive and
2. LITERATURE, FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES significant effect on profitability. In contrast to
DEVELOPMENT research conducted by Rinny (2016) where sales
growth has no effect on profitability.
To measure the size of the company, Jogiyanto
Research on firm value was conducted by Pantow
(2013) suggests that the size of the asset is used to
(2015). The results of this study prove that sales
measure the size of the company; the size of the
growth, company size, ROA, and capital structure
asset is measured as a logarithm of total assets.
simultaneously have a significant effect on firm
Previous research conducted by Novari and Lestari
value in the company. In line with the research
(2017), Wahyuni (2013), Sofyaningsih and
results of Salim and Yadaf (2012) it is showed that
Hardiningsih (2011) stated that company size has a
company performance has a negative relationship
significant influence on firm value.
with short-term debt (STD), long-term debt (LTD), as
an independent variable. Sam and Hoshino (2013) In a study conducted by Kasih (2014) company
proved that Japan has a good performance in the size did not significantly influence company
level of sales growth compared to ASEAN, but performance. Because the greater the assets of the
experienced a decline in 2008 to 2010 due to company, the more complex the agency problems
economic recession and the effects of the faced. Based on research conducted by Theacini and
semiconductor industry. Cordis and Kirby (2015) Wisadha (2014), Novisari (2019) shows that company
prove that there is a negative correlation between size influences company performance, because a
investment and subsequent stock returns. Kodongo large size of the company will benefit the company
(2014) showed that tangibility of assets, sales more in the company’s financing activities in the
growth and company size are important capital market.
determinants of profitability. Iavorskyi (2013) Financial statements are records of a
results found that the relationship between leverage company’s financial information in an accounting
period that can describe the company’s performance

237
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

(Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia 2015, p. 4). Muliani, H8: Financial performance mediates the effect
Yuniarta and Sirnawati (2014) and Nuriwan (2018) of capital expenditure on firm value.
explained that financial performance had a positive H9: Financial performance mediates the effect
effect on firm value. of company growth on firm value.
Capital expenditure is the expenditure of H10: Financial performance mediates the effect
money for long-term capital financing, the results of of firm size on firm value.
which will only be obtained in a few years later. H11: Capital structure moderates the effect of
Research conducted by Andrian (2012), Cordis and financial performance on firm value.
Kirby (2014) stated that capital expenditure has a
positive effect on the profitability of manufacturing 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
companies listed on the IDX.
Sales growth reflects the company’s The method used in this study is to use a type of
achievements in the past, where sales growth is used causal research, namely research that aims to test
to predict the company’s achievement in the future. hypotheses about one or several variables
Investors use sales growth as an indicator to see the (independent variables) against other variables.
prospects of the company they will invest in later.
Based on research conducted by Fista and Widyawati 3.1. Sample and data collection
(2017), sales growth has a significant and positive
effect on firm value, while research conducted by
The population in this study is LQ-45 companies
Mandalika (2016) and Pantow (2015) states that sales
listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) for the
growth has no effect on firm value. However, this
period of 2013-2017 and publishes its report on
study contradicts the research conducted and
w.w.w.idx.co.id. Sample selection uses purpose
research conducted by Fista and Widyawati (2017)
sampling where the sample doesn’t have a public
which states that sales growth has a significant
ownership structure and financial statements in
effect on firm value.
rupiah.
The size of the company can be measured by
Hypotesis testing using the macro syntax
using the natural log of the total assets of the
command as follows:
company which is able to explain the effectiveness
of the company in utilizing working capital that
modmedvars = PBV ROE DER Capex/dv = PBV/med = ROE/d
comes from company assets to maximize the value
v model = ROE DER/mmode = Capex/jn = 1
of the company (Laksitaputri, 2012). According to
Fakhruddin (as cited in Marwah Noor, 2015), the
modmed vars = PBV ROE DER Growth/dv = PBV/
greater the company’s assets generally will attract
med = ROE/dv model = ROE DER/mmodel = Growth/jn = 1
more investors to own the company’s shares. The
results of research by Marwah Noor (2015) and
modmed vars = PBV ROE DER Size/dv = PBV/med = ROE/dv
Triyono, Raharjo, and Arifati (2015) show that
model = ROE DER/mmodel = Size/jn = 1
company size influences firm value. Similarly, the
results of the research by Dogan (2013) along with
Niresh and Velnampy (2014) show that there is an 3.2. Dependent variable
influence between company sizes on company
profitability, the study hypotheses are formed as According to Sugiyono (2016, p. 39), Dependent
follows: Variables/Bound Variables are: Variables that are
H1: Capital expenditure has a positive effect on affected or that are due, because of the independent
firm value. variables. The dependent variable in this study is the
H2: Capital expenditure has a positive effect on value of the company.
financial performance.
H3: Company growth has a positive effect on 3.3. Independent variables
firm value.
H4: Company growth has a positive effect on According to Sugiyono (2016, p. 39), Independent
financial performance. Variables are Variables that influence or are the
H5: Company size has a positive effect on firm cause of changes or the emergence of dependent
value. variables (bound). The independent variables in this
H6: Company size has a positive effect on study are capital structure, profitability, company
financial performance. size and company growth. The definitions and
H7: Financial performance has a positive effect operations of each variable are as follows:
on firm value.

Table 1. Definition and measurement of variables

No. Variable Definition Measurement

1. Capex Capital Expenditure Total Fixed Asset
2. Growth Company Growth Total Sales
3. Size Firm Size Total Asset
4. DER Capital Structure Total Debt/Total Equity
5. ROE Financial Performance Net Income After Tax/Total Equity
6. PBV Firm Value Market Price per Share/Book Value per Share

238
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 1. Test Modmed Effect of Capital Expenditure

(Capex) (X1) on Company Value (PBV) (Z) through
4.1. Descriptive statistics Financial Performance (ROE) (Y) moderated by
Capital Structure (DER) (M)
Table 2. Descriptive statistics
Table 4. Dependent variable model
Std.
Variable Minimum Maximum Mean Coeff SE t P>|t|
Deviation
Capex 13.29 17.7 15.8406 1.07059 Constant -3.2382 4.8146 -0.6726 0.5047
Growth 0,00 1.11 0.154 0.20385 Capex 0.0565 0.2466 0.2292 0.8198
Size 15.89 19.5 17.3374 0.9507 ROE 4.7895 1.9952 2.4005 0.0206
ROE 0.2 3.31 0.7896 0.55985 DER 38.8443 10.6007 3.6643 0.0007
DER 0.06 0.33 0.1592 0.05465 Inter2 -41.6667 15.7762 -2.6411 0.0113
PBV 0.51 8.95 2.854 1.85469 Note: Interaction Terms: Inter2: ROE * DER.
Valid N
(listwise) Table 5. Mediator variable model

Table 3. Correlations matrix Coeff SE t P>|t|

Constant 2.9881 1.1553 2.5864 0.0128
Pearson correlations matrix Capex -0.1388 0.0728 -1.9072 0.0625
Capex Growth Size ROE DER PBV
Capex 1 - .418** .643** - .265 .007 - .098 Table 6. Conditional indirect effect at specific
Growth - .418** 1 .035 .624** .026 - .117 value(s) of the moderator(s)
Size .643** .035 1 .467** - .255 - .248
ROE - .265 .624** .467** 1 -.375** - .218
DER Ind Eff SE Z P>|Z|
DER .007 .026 - .255 -.375** 1 .436**
0.1045 -0.0602 0.091 -0.6611 0.5085
PBV - .098 - .117 - .248 - .218 .436** 1
0.1592 0.2559 0.1766 1.4494 0.1472
Note: **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
0.2139 0.572 0.3815 1.4994 0.1338
Note: Moderator values listed are the sample mean and
Descriptive statistics provide a description of a +/- 1 SD.
data that is seen through the minimum/maximum
value, the mean (average) standard deviation 2. Modmed Test The Effect of Company
(Ghozali, 2016, p. 19). Table 3 presents descriptive Growth (X2) on Company Value (PBV) (Z) through
statistics for the full sample of 114 firm-year Financial Performance (ROE) (Y) moderated by
observations. The average value of capital Capital Structure (DER) (M).
expenditure (Capex) is 15.8406, the average growth
of the company (Growth) is 15.4%. The average value Table 7. Dependent variable model
of company size (Size) is 17.33374, the average value
of financial performance (ROE) is 0.7896, and the Coeff SE t P>|t|
average value of capital structure (DER) is 0.1592. Constant -2.7008 1.4560 -1.8550 0.0702
The average value of the firm’s value (PBV) of 2.8540 Growth -1.8159 1.5183 -1.1960 0.2380
indicates that the company that has become a ROE 5.1992 1.8065 2.8781 0.0061
sample in its investment activities can already DER 40.5493 9.7170 4.1730 0.0001
Inter2 -41.2933 14.0768 -2.9334 0.0053
generate profits that provide a higher value than
Note: Interaction Terms: Inter2: ROE * DER.
investment expenses.

Table 8. Mediator variable model

4.2. Testing hypotheses

Moderator and Mediator (Modmed) Variable Coeff SE t P>|t|

Analysis basically shows how far the influence of Constant 0.5259 0.0787 6.6846 0.000
independent variables on the dependent variable. Growth 1.7126 0.3099 5.5263 0.000
The result of modmed analysis is Capital
Expenditurem (Capex), Company Growth (Growth) Table 9. Conditional indirect effect at specific
and Company Size (Size) had no effect on Company value(s) of the moderator(s)
Value (PBV). It meant H1, H2, H3 rejected. Capital
Expenditure (Capex) does not affect financial
performance (ROE) H2 rejected, Company Growth DER Ind Eff SE Z P>|Z|
(Growth) and Company Size (Size) have a 0.1045 1.5108 1.1455 1.3189 0.1872
significant effect on ROE its mean Ha4 and Ha6 0.1592 -2.3543 1.4563 -1.6166 0.1060
accepted. Financial Performance (ROE) has a 0.2139 -6.2194 2.7375 -2.2719 0.0231
Note: Moderator values listed are the sample mean and
significant positive effect on Value Company (PBV) +/- 1 SD.
its mean H7 accepted. Financial Performance (ROE)
does not mediate the effect of Capital Expenditure
3. Modmed Test Effect of Company Size (X3) on
(Capex), Company Growth (Growth) and Company
Company Value (PBV) (Z) through Financial
Size (Size) on Firm Value (PBV) its mean H8, H9 and
Performance (ROE) (Y) moderated by Capital
H10 rejected. Capital Structure (DER) moderates
Structure (DER) (M).
the influence of Financial Performance (ROE) to
company value (PBV) its mean H11 accepted. The
results of the modmed analysis can be seen in the
in the groups of tables presented below:

239
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

Table 10. Dependent variable model Table 12 explains the indirect effect with a
moderator value of its mean, mean +1 std and mean
Coeff SE t P>|t| -1 std dev. With a mean DER moderator variable of
Constant -2.1606 5.6106 -0.3851 0.7020 0.1592, the magnitude of the indirect effect is -
Size -0.0012 0.2944 -0.0041 0.9967 0.4984 and significant at 0.0.0721. So it can be
ROE 4.5700 1.8151 2.5178 0.0154
DER 37.791 10.332 3.6577 0.0007
concluded H10 is rejected.
Inter2 -40.0943 15.3500 -2.6120 0.0122 The results of Table 4 explain the effect of
Note: Interaction Terms: Inter2: ROE * DER. mediator variable (ROE) on dependent variable (PBV)
depend on the moderator variable (DER) (interaction
Table 11. Mediator variable model coefficient of -41.66667 and significant at 0.0113.
Table 7 results. Explain the effect of mediator
Coeff SE t P>|t| variable (ROE) on dependent variable (PBV) depend
Constant -3.9765 1.3051 -3.0468 0.0038 on moderator variable (DER) (interaction coefficient
Size 0.2749 0.0752 3.6572 0.0006 of -41.2933 and significant at 0.00053). Results of
Table 10 explain the effect of mediator variable
Table 12. Conditional indirect effect at specific (ROE) on dependent variable (PBV) depend on the
value(s) of the moderator(s) moderator variable (DER) (interaction coefficient of -
40.0943 and significant at 0.0122. So it can be
DER Ind Eff SE Z P>|Z| concluded H11 received.
0.1045 0.1040 0.1469 0.7081 0.4789
0.1592 -0.4984 0.2772 -1.7982 0.0721
0.2139 -1.1008 0.5483 -2.0076 0.0447 5. CONCLUSION
Note: Moderator values listed are the sample mean and
+/- 1 SD. Capital Expenditure (Capex) doesn’t influence firm
value (PBV). This shows that the acceleration of
Table 4 shows that the Capital Expenditure changes in assets does not affect the size of the
(Capex) variable has no effect on the company value acceleration of changes in the value of the
(PBV) with a coefficient of 0.565 and is significant at company. The choice to accept investment means
0.8198 or greater than 0.05. So it can be concluded the manager must prepare funds to finance the
that H1 is rejected. investment. The expenditure of funds to finance
Table 5 shows that the Capital Expenditure this investment is part of capital expenditure
variable (Capex) does not have a significant effect on whose benefits will only be obtained after a few
Financial Performance (ROE) with a coefficient value years later. Regardless of the source of funds used
of -0,1386 and significant at 0.0625 or greater than to finance this capital expenditure, then if an
0.05 so it can be concluded that H2 is rejected. investment has been chosen it means that there is
Table 7 explain the Growth variable has no hope of the investment to increase the wealth of
influence on Company Value (PBV) with a coefficient the owner. This result is in line with research
value of -1.8159 and significant at 0.2380. So it can conducted by Lew (2015) and Andrian (2012) which
be concluded that H3 is rejected. states that Capex does not affect the value of the
Table 8 shows that the Growth variable has a company, especially in high-tech companies
significant effect on ROE with a coefficient value of compared to low-tech companies.
1.7126 and significant at 0,000. So it can be Capital Expenditure (Capex) does not affect
concluded that H4 is accepted. on Financial Performance (ROE). Capital
Table 10 shows that the Size variable has no Expenditure is part of the investment made by the
effect on PBV with a coefficient of -0.0012 and is company (Sudiyatno & Puspitasari, 2010). To
significant at 0.9967. So it can be concluded that H5 conduct daily operational activities, capital
is rejected. investment or capital expenditure is needed in the
Table 11 shows that the Size variable has an form of tangible assets such as factories,
influence on PBV with a coefficient value of 0.2749 machinery, equipment, supplies and other tangible
and significant at 0.0006. So it can be concluded that assets to produce each unit of sale in the long run
H6 is accepted. (Elmasry, 2004). The benefit of capital expenditure
Tables 4, 7 & 10 show that the Financial increase is obtained for the long term. A factor that
Performance (ROE) variable has a significant positive also contributes to this is management ability, and
effect on the coefficient values of 4.7895, 5.1992, most importantly not the amount of the value of
4.5700 and significant at 0.0206, 0.0061 and 0 .0154 investment capital (amount of capital expenditure)
or smaller than 0.05. So it can be concluded that H7 but how effective the investment is utilized.
is accepted. Company Growth has no effect on Firm Value
Table 6 above explains the indirect effect with a (PBV). Investors are still considering other factors
moderator value of its mean, mean +1 std and mean in determining the value of a company. High sales
-1 std dev. With a mean DER moderator variable of do not yet determine that a good company and low
0.1592, the magnitude of the indirect effect is sales do not determine that the company is not
0.2559 and significant at 0.1472. So it can be good for investment. This is because the
concluded that H8 is rejected. manufacturing sector always experiences ups and
Table 9 explains the indirect effect with a downs in sales and corporate profits. The results
moderator value of its mean, mean +1 std and mean are different from the research conducted by
-1 std dev. With a mean DER moderator variable of Aggarwal (2017). The findings of the study reveal a
0.1592, the magnitude of the indirect effect is - significant relationship between firm values with
2.3543 and significant at 0.1060. So it can be size.
concluded that H9 is rejected. Company Growth (Growth) affects the Financial
Performance (ROE). Growth affects ROE, through

240
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

assets owned so that it affects the productivity and impact on increasing PBV. This condition affects the
efficiency of the company which in turn affects the positive market perception of the value of the
Financial Performance (ROE). The faster the company. These results indicate that the increase in
company’s growth, the company’s ability to produce return on equity affects the value of the company.
higher profits, which means that the assessment of Investors invest because they think the company has
the Financial Performance ratio (ROE) is also high. good prospects in increasing long-term profits in the
Because sales growth has a positive effect on a form of dividends.
company’s financial performance, management Financial Performance (ROE) does not mediate
focusing on profits and reinvesting profits into the the influence of Capital Expenditure (Capex),
company may be a better strategy in the long run. Company Growth (Growth), and Company Size (Size)
Other possible strategies to increase sales include on firm value (PBV). Capital expenditure giveslong-
the use of resources to invest in new technology, term benefits for more than one year so it can not be
product diversification, diversification and directly enjoyed in the current year. Investor's
penetration in regional and international markets. decision to buy shares of a company does not
The results of this study are supported by research consider the amount of capital expenditure but
conducted by Kouser et al. (2012) and Odalo (2016) rather considers the company’s performance so that
which show that Growth has a positive effect on it is expected to provide profits for investors in the
ROE. form of dividends. The company in this study is a
Company Size (Size) has no influence on the large LQ 45 company whose sales value is more
value of the company (PBV). The results of this study stable so the decision to invest takes into account an
indicate that investors in making decisions for increase in growth that is balanced with an increase
investment do not make the size of the company as in financial performance. Investors in this study do
a weight in decision making, but rather choose the not make company size a factor in investment
profit that will be generated by the company. This is decisions. But it must also be supported by good
because the sample studied is companies listed as financial performance. The results are the same as a
LQ 45 on the Indonesia Stock Exchange which are study conducted by Sucuahi and Cambarihan (2016),
large category companies. Research Purwohandoko that profitability has a significant positive impact on
(2017) and Tui (2017) have different results the firm value.
company has an influence on company values. Large Capital Structure (DER) moderates the
companies have large market capitalization; book relationship between Financial Performance (ROE)
value is also big and big profit. Investors tend to be and Firm Value (PBV). A high DER value indicates
more interested in large-scale companies. This is that the company uses quite a lot for its operational
because large companies tend to have more stable activities. High debt will generate a net profit that
conditions. This stability attracts investors to own will receive the company because high debt will
shares in the company, and this will cause an provide high interest will also reduce the net profit
increase in share prices in the capital market. earned by the company, so that it will further
Company Size (Size) has an influence on weaken financial gain. From the results of data
Financial Performance (ROE). This is due to the processing, it can also be concluded that the DER
greater size of the company which is seen from the variable is a pseudo moderation variable (Quasi
total assets will encourage an increase in the portion Moderator). Quasi moderation is a variable that
of funds that the company uses to increase moderates the relationship between the independent
production activities. Like, doing innovation, variable and the dependent variable which also
business development and investing. The maximum becomes the independent variable. Hoque et al.
utilization of assets will bring opportunities for (2014) capital structure (CS), have influenced value
companies to earn profit and improve financial of the firm (VF) on Dhaka Stock Exchange.
performance. The results are the same as a study This study has limitations so that next research
conducted by Ruslan (2018) that Company Size has needs to consider a wider sample, using a longer
an influence on Financial Performance. study period of more than 5 years and adding back
Financial Performance (ROE) has a significant new variables that are thought to have an effect on
positive effect on Company Value (PBV). The relevant company value. This is so that the conclusions
ROE information gives a positive signal for investors drawn from the researchers have broader scope and
to react, the greater the ROE ratio produced, the are not only LQ 45 companies listed on the IDX but
better, because the company’s ability to achieve also need to cover all small and large companies
profits is considered high enough which will have an from various countries.

REFERENCES
1. Afrizal, A., & Rohman, A. (2012). Pengaruh keputusan investasi, keputusan pendanaan, dan kebijakan dividen
terhadap nilai perusahaan. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 1(2), 1-9.
2. Aggarwal, D. (2017). Impact of capital structure on firm value: evidence from Indian hospitality industry.
Theoretical Economics Letters, 7(4), 982-1000. https://doi.org/10.4236/tel.2017.74067
3. AlGhusin, N. (2015). The impact of financial leverage, growth, and size on profitability of Jordanian industrial
listed companies. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 6(16), 86-93. Retrieved from
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RJFA/article/view/24978
4. Andrian, J. (2012). Pengaruh Struktur Modal, Pertumbuhan Perusahaan, Capital Expenditure dan Insentif
Manager Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan Profitabilitas Sebagai Variabel Intervening. Jurnal Bisnis Strategi,
21(2), 18-45. https://doi.org/10.14710/jbs.21.2.18-45
5. Ayuba, H. (2019). Effects of financial performance, capital structure and firm size on firms’ value of insurance
companies in Nigeria. Kano, Nigeria: Department of Business Administration and Entrepreneurship Studies
Bayero University

241
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

6. Babalola, Y. A. (2013). The effect of firm size on firms’ profitability in Nigeria. Journal of Economics and
Sustainable Development, 4(5). Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4143/a1f3b174a5
1728d85901092b899047d97e6b.pdf
7. Belkaoui, A. R. (2010). Accounting Theory (Buku 2). Jakarta: Salemba Empat.
8. Besley, S., & Brigham, E. F. (2005). Essentials of managerial finance. Mason, the USA: Thompson South-Western.
9. Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. (2006). Dasar-dasar manajemen keuangan (10th ed.). Jakarta, Indonesia: Salemba Empat.
10. Bukit, R. (2012). Pengaruh struktur modal terhadap nilaiPerusahaan melalui profitabilitas: Analisis data panel
perusahaan manufaktur di bursa efek Indonesia. Jurnal Keuangan dan Bisnis, 4(3), 205-218.
11. Chaidir. (2015). Pengaruh struktur modal, profitabilitas, dan pertumbuhan perusahaan terhadap nilai
perusahaan pada perusahaan sub sektor transportasi yang tercacat di bursa efek Indonesia periode 2012-2014.
Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Fakultas Ekonomi, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.34203/jimfe.v1i2.557
12. Chen, L.-J., & Chen, S.-U. (2011). The influence of profitability on firm value with capital structure as the
mediator and firm size and industry as moderators. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 8(3).
13. Cordis, A. S., & Kirby, C. (2017) Capital expenditures and firm performance: Evidence from a cross‐sectional
analysis of stock returns. Accounting & Finance, 57(4), 1019-1042. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12193
14. Delira, N. (2007). Pengaruh IOS dan Manajemen Laba terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Skripsi, Padang: Unp
15. Devi, B., Khairunnisa, K., & Budiono, E. (2017). Pengaruh intellectual capital terhadap kinerja keuangan
perusahaan (studi kasus pada perusahaan elektronik, otomotif dan komponen yang terdaftar di bursa efek
Indonesia (BEI) periode 2011-2015). Proceedings of Management, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.31000/
competitive.v1i1.106
16. Dogan, M. (2013). Does firm size firm profitability affect? Evidence from Turkey. Research Journal of Finance
and Accounting, 4(4), 53-59. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/
5360/29a44ed8dd384cbcde67f9d60bc10cf5c775.pdf
17. Elmasry, H. (2007). Capital intensity and stock returns (Working Papers, Morgan Stanley Investment
Management).
18. Fachrudin, K. A. (2011). Analisis pengaruh struktur modal, ukuran perusahaan dan agency cost terhadap
kinerja perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 13(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.9744/jak.13.1.37-46
19. Fahmi, I. (2012). Pengantar manajemen keuangan.teori dan soal jawab. Bandung: Alfabeta. Retrieved from
http://wineebali.com/buku/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/IRHAM-FAHMI
20. Fakhruddin, H. M. (2008). Istilah pasar modal A-Z. Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo
21. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2001). Disappearing dividends: Changing firm characteristics or lower propensity to
pay? Journal of Financial Economics, 14(1), 67-79 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2001.tb00321.x
22. Fista, B. F., & Widyawati, D. (2017). Pengaruh Kebijakan Dividen, Pertumbuhan Penjualan, Profitabilitas Dan
Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Ilmu dan Riset Akuntansi, 6(5), 2051-2070.
23. Fitri, I. N. (2014). Analisis pengaruh tingkat kenaikan penggunaan capital expenditure terhadap kinerja
perusahaan (studi empiris pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia). Retrieved
from: https://jurnalmahasiswa.unesa.ac.id/index.php/jurnal-akuntansi/article/view/7076/3569
24. Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi analisis mulitivariet dengan program IBM SPSS 23. Jakarta, Indonesia: Badan Penerbit
Universitas Diponegoro.
25. Godfrey, J., Hodgson, A., & Holmes, S. (2010). Accounting theory. Queensland: John Wiley &Sons.
26. Gudono. (2014). Teori Organisasi. Yogyakarta: BPFE Universitas Gadjah Mada.
27. Gujarati, D. (2003). Ekonometrika Dasar (2nd ed.). Jakarta: Erlangga.
28. Gusaptono, H. (2010). Faktor-faktor yang mendorong penciptaan nilai perusahaan di BEI. Buletin Ekonomi,
8(2), 70-170. Retrieved from: http://repository.upnyk.ac.id/2434/1/hendri_g_sri_susilo082011juli.pdf
29. Hanafi, M. (2014). Manajemen Keuangan (1st ed.).Yogyakarta: BPFE.
30. Harjito, A., & Martono, A. (2015). Managemen Keuangan. Cetakan Ketiga. Penerbit: Ekonisia. Yogyakarta
31. Hasnawati, S. (2005). Dampak set peluang investasi terhadap nilai perusahaan publik di Bursa Efek Jakarta.
Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing Indonesia, 9(2), 117-126. Retrieved from https://journal.uii.ac.id/
JAAI/article/view/805/723
32. Hery (2012). Analisis laporan keuangan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
33. Hidayah, N. (2015). Pengaruh investment opportunity set (IOS) dab Kepemilikan Managerial Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan Pada Perusahaan Property Dan Real Estate Di Bursa Eefek Iindonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi, 19(3), 420-
432. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/76103-ID-none.pdf
34. Hoque, J., Hossain, A., & Hossain, K. (2014). Impact of capital structure policy on value of the firm – a study on
some selected corporate manufacturing firms under Dhaka stock exchange. Ecoforum, 3(2). Retrieved from
http://www.ecoforumjournal.ro/index.php/eco/article/view/84
35. Iavorskyi, M. (2013). The impact of capital structure on firm performance: Evidence from Ukraine. Retrived from
http://www.kse.org.ua/download.php?downloadid=306
36. Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI). (2013). Standar akuntansi keuangan entitas tanpa akuntabilitas public (3rd ed.).
Jakarta, Indonesia
37. Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI). (2015). Pernyataan standar akuntansi keuangan. Jakarta: Ikatan Akuntan
Indonesia.
38. Indriyani, E. (2017). Pengaruh ukuran perusahaan dan profitabilitas terhadap nilai perusahaan: Akuntabilitas.
Jurnal Ilmu Akuntansi, 10(2), 333-348. https://doi.org/10.15408/akt.v10i2.4649
39. Javed, T. (2014). Impact of capital structure on firm performance: Evidence from Pakistani firms. International
Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 3(5). https://doi.org/10.6007/
IJAREMS/v3-i5/1141
40. Jitaree, W. (2015). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and financial performance: Evidence from Thailand.
Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=5421&context=theses
41. Jogiyanto, & Hartono, M. (2013). Teori portofolio dan analisis investasi (8th ed.). Yogyakarta: BPFE.
42. Kartikasari, D., & Merianti, M. (2016). The effect of leverage and firm size to profitability of public
manufacturing companies in Indonesia. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(2), 409-413.
Retrieved from https://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/view/1763/pdf

242
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

43. Kasih, A. P. (2014). Pengaruh good corporate governance dan Ukuran Perusahaan terhadap Kinerja Perusahaan
(Thesis, Universitas Muhammadiah Surakarta). Retrieved from http://eprints.ums.ac.id/30365/
16/09_NASKAH_PUBLIKASI.pdf
44. Kodongo, O. (2014). Capital structure, profitability and firm value: panel evidence of listed firms in Kenya.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2465422
45. Kouser, R., Bano, T., Azeem, M., & Masood-ul-Hassan (2012). Inter-Relationship between Profitability, growth
and size : A Case of non-financial companies from Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences,
6(2), 405-419. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b58f/
3588101d12625d7b3fde16406cecece1bb60.pdf
46. Kusumajaya, D. K. O. (2011). Pengaruh struktur modal dan pertumbuhan perusahaan terhadap profitabilitas
dan nilai perusahaan pada perusahaan manufaktur di bursa efek Indonesia (Tesis Program Pascasarjana
Universitas Udayana, Denpasar, Indonesia). Retrived from: https://docplayer.info/30215886-Pengaruh-struktur-
modal-dan-pertumbuhan-perusahaan-terhadap-profitabilitas-dan-nilai-perusahaan-pada-perusahaan-
manufaktur-di-bursa-efek-indonesia.html
47. Laksitaputri, I. M. (2012). Analisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi nilai perusahaan dengan profitabilitas
sebagai variabel intervening (studi pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia periode
2008-2010). Jurnal Bisnis Strategi, 21(2), 1-17. Retrieved from https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/
jbs/article/view/14220/10813
48. Lew, S. H. (2015). Investment expenditures and firm value in Korea. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2695674
49. Mandalika, A. (2016). Pengaruh struktur aktiva, struktur modal, dan pertumbuhan penjualan terhadap nilai
perusahaan pada perusahaan publik yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia (studi pada sektor otomotif). Jurnal
Berkala Ilmiah Efisiensi, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.24964/ja.v1i2.15
50. Mardiyati, U. (2012). Pengaruh kebijakan dividen, kebijakan hutangdan profitabilitas terhadap nilai perusahaan
manufaktur yang terdaftardibursa efek Indonesia (BEI) periode 2005-2010. JurnalRiset Manajemen Sains
Indonesia (JRMSI), 3(1), 1-17. Retrieved from http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/jrmsi/article/view/770/679
51. Marwah Noor, F. (2015). Pengaruh profitabilitas dan ukuran perusahaan terhadap nilai perusahaan (studi kasus
pada perusahaan makanan dan minuman yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia periode tahun 2010-2014)
(Diploma work). Retrieved from: https://repository.unikom.ac.id/21354/
52. Meidiawati, K. (2016). Pengaruh size, growth, profitabilitas, struktur modal, kebijakan dividen terhadap nilai
perushaan. Jurnal Ilmu dan Riset Akuntansi, 5(2). Retrived from https://docplayer.info/36947222-Pengaruh-
size-growth-profitabilitas-struktur-modal-kebijakan-dividen-terhadap-nilai-perusahaan.html
53. Miller, M. H., & Modigliani, F. (1961). Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. The Journal of
Business, 34(4), 411-433. https://doi.org/10.1086/294442
54. Mualifah, S., Oemar, A., & Hartono, H. (2017). Pengaruh financial leverage, modal kerja, pertumbuhan penjualan,
ukuran perusahaan dan leverage terhadap profitabilitas pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di bursa
efek Indonesia (BEI) 2011-2015. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa S1 Akuntansi Universitas Pandanaran, 3(3). Retrieved
from: https://jurnal.unpand.ac.id/index.php/ AKS/article/view/811
55. Muliani, L. E., Yuniarta, G. A., & Sirnawati, K. (2014). Pengaruh kinerja keuangan terhadap nilai perusahaan
dengan pengungkapan corporate social responsibility dan good corporate governance sebagai variabel
pemoderasi (studi kasus di bursa efek Indonesia periode 2010-2012). E-journal S1 Ak Universitas Pendidikan
Ganesha Jurusan Akuntansi S1, 2(1). Retrieved from https://ejournal.undiksha.ac.id/index.php/S1ak/
article/view/3423/2784
56. Myers, S. C. (1997). Determinants of corporate borrowing. Journal of Financial Economics, 5, 147-175. Retrieved
from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/4379575.pdf
57. Nainggolan, N. E. (2015). Pengaruh struktur corporate governance terhadap pengungkapan lingkungan.
Semarang, Indonesia: Universitas Diponegoro. Retrieved from http://eprints.undip.ac.id/
45755/1/NAINGGOLAN.pdf
58. Nekhili, M., Boubaker, S., & Lakhal, F. (2012). Ownership structure, voluntary R&D siasclosure ANF market value
of firms the frech case. International Journal of Business, 17(2), 126-140.
59. Niresh, J., & Velnampy, T. (2014). Firm size and profitability: A study of listed manufacturing firms in Sri Lanka.
International Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 57-64. https://doi.org/10.5539/i jbm.v9n4p57
60. Novari, P. M., & Lestari, P. V. (2016). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Leverage, Dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan Pada Sektor Properti Dan Real Estate. E-Jurnal Manajemen, 5(9), 5671-5694. Retrieved from
https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/Manajemen/article/view/22690
61. Novisari (2019). Pengaruh struktur kepemilikan, struktur modal, dan ukuran perusahaan terhadap kinerja
perusahaan (studi empiris pada perusahaan manufaktur yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia periode 2013-
2017) (Thesis). Retrieved from https://repository.mercubuana.ac.id/48913/
62. Nuriwan (2018). Pengaruh kinerja keuangan terhadap nilai perusahaan yang dimoderasi oleh corporate social
responsibility (CSR) dan good corporate governance (GCG). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 6(1), 11-24.
Retrieved from https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/JRAK/article/view/10225
63. Nurminda, A., Deannes, I., & Annisa, N. (2017, April). Pengaruh profitabilitas, leverage dan ukuran perusahaan
terhadap nilai perusahaan. E-Proceesing of Management, 4(1).
64. Odalo, S. K. (2016). Relatirelating sales growth and financial performance in agricultural firms listed in the
Nairobi securities exchange in Kenya. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v8n9p34
65. Pantow, M. S. R. (2015). Analisa pertumbuhan penjualan, ukuran perusahaan, return on asset, dan struktur
modal terhadap nilai perusahaan yang tercatat di INDEX LQ 45. Jurnal Emba: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen,
Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 3(1). Retrieved from: https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/ index.php/emba/article/view/7801
66. Prasetyo, A. H. (2011). Evaluasi Perusahaan. Jakarta: PPM.
67. Purwohandoko. (2017). The influence of firm’s size, growth, and profitability on firm value with capital structure
as the mediator: A study on the agricultural firms listed in the Indonesian stock exchange. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/ index.php/ijef/article/download/69347/37713
68. Rinny, M. (2016). Pengaruh modal kerja, ukuran perusahaan, pertumbuhan penjualan dan likuiditas terhadap
profitabilitas pada perusahaa manufaktur sektor industri barang konsumsi yang terdaftar di bursa efek

243
 Corporate Ownership & Control / Volume 17, Issue 1, Autumn 2019 (Special Issue)

Indonesia (BEI) periode tahun 2010-2014. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Fe Universitas Budi Luhur, 5(2).
Retrieved from: https://journal.budiluhur.ac.id/index.php/akeu/article/view/405
69. Ruslan, S. M. (2018). Firm performance: Case of Malaysian logistics companies. Academy of Strategic
Management Journal, 17(4).
70. Salim, M., & Yadav, R. (2012). Capital structure and firm performance evidence from Malaysian listed
companies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65, 156-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.sbspro.2012.11.105
71. Sam, M. F. M., & Hoshino, Y. (2013). Sales growth, profitability and performance, empirical study of Japanese
ICT industries with three Asian countries. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(6).
72. Sartono, A. R. (2010). Manajemen Keuangan teori dan Aplikasi. Edisi Keempat. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
73. Sofyaningsih, S., & Hardiningsih, P. (2011). Pengaruh struktur kepemilikan, kebijakan dividen, kebijakan utang,
ukuran perusahaan, dan profitabilitas terhadap nilai perusahaan. Jurnal Dinamika Keuangan dan Perbankan,
3(5), 68-87. Retrieved from: https://www.unisbank.ac.id/ojs/index.php/fe1/article/view/195
74. Sucuahi, W., & Cambarihan, J. M. (2016). Influence of profitability to the firm value of diversified companies in
the Philippines. Sciedu Press, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.5430/afr.v5n2p149
75. Sudana, M. (2011). Manajemen keuangan perusahaan: Teori dan praktik. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.
76. Sudiyatno, B., & Puspitasari, E. (2010). Pengaruh Kebijakan Perusahaan Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan
Kinerja Perusahaan Sebagai Variabel Intervening. Dinamika Keuangan dan Perbankan, 2(1), 1-22. Retrived from
https://www.unisbank.ac.id/ojs/index.php/fe1/article/view/179
77. Suffah, R., & Riduwan, A. (2016). Pengaruh profitabilitas, leverage, ukuran perusahaan dan kebijakan deviden
pada nilai perusahaan. Jurnal ilmu dan riset akuntansi, 5(2), 1-17.
78. Sugiarto. (2013). Struktur modal, struktur kepemilikanperusahaan, permasalahan keagenan dan informasi
asimetri. Yogyakarta: GrahaIlmu.
79. Sugiyono. (2016). Metode penelitian bisnis. Bandung: Alfabeta.
80. Sujianto (2001). Analisis variabel-variabel yang mempengaruhi struktur Keuangan Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur
Yang go public di Bursa Efek Jakarta. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Manajemen, 2(2).
81. Sukirni, D. (2012). Kepemilikan manajerial, kepemilikan institusional, kebijakan deviden dan kebijakan hutang
analisis terhadap nilai perusahaan. Accounting Analysis Journal, 1(2), 1-12. Retrieved from
https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/ index.php/aaj/article/view/703
82. Taipi, E. (2017). Capital expenditure and firm performance evidence from Albanian construction sector.
European Scientific Journal, 13(28). https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2017.v13n28p231
83. Theacini, D. A. M., & Wisadha, I. G. S. (2014). Pengaruh good corporate governance, kualitas laba dan ukuran
perusahaan pada kinerja perusahaan. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 7(3), 733-746.
84. Torang, S. (2012). Metode riset struktur dan perilaku organisasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.
85. Triyono, Raharjo, K., & Arifati, R. (2015). Pengaruh kebijakan dividen, struktur kepemilikian, kebijakan hutang,
profitabilitas dan ukuran perusahaan terhadap nilai perusahaan pada perusahaan manufaktur di bursa efek
Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa S1 Akuntansi Universitas Pandanaran, 1(1). Retrieved from:
https://jurnal.unpand.ac.id/ index.php/AKS/ article/view/328
86. Tui, S. (2017). Determinants of profitability and firm value: evidence from Indonesian banks. IRA-International
Journal of Management & Social Sciences, 7(1), 84-95. https://doi.org/10.21013/ jmss.v7.n1.p10
87. Wachanga, M. R. (2014). The effect of capital expenditure on financial performance of firms listed at the Nairobi
securities exchange. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c00b/ddc42abaca6997fa 5b871053
f2684601a267.pdf
88. Wahyuni, T. (2013). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi nilai perusahaan di sector property, real estate &
building construction yang terdaftar di BEI periode 2008-2012. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Universitas Surabaya,
2(1), 1-18. Retrieved from http://journal.ubaya.ac.id/index.php/jimus/article/view/380
89. Wijayanti, P. (2013). Pengaruh intellectual capital terhadap harga saham melalui kinerja keuangan pada
perusahaan perbankan yang terdaftar di bursa efek Indonesia pada tahun 2009-2011. Jurnal Ekonomi
Universitas Brawijaya, 1(2). Retrieved from https://jimfeb.ub.ac.id/index.php/jimfeb/article/view/323
90. Winarto, J. (2015). The determinants of manufacturer firm value in Indonesia stock exchange. International
Journal of Information, Business and Management, 7(4), 323–349. Retrieved from https://ijibm.elitehall.com/
IJIBM_Vol7 No4_Nov2015.pdf
91. Website: http://idx.co.id
92. Website: http://wikipedia.com

244