Determinants of capital structure of listed firms in the pharmaceutical sector in vietnam

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY BUI THI MINH HUYEN DETERMINANTS OF CAPITAL STRUCTURE OF LISTED FIRMS IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR IN VIETNAM MAJOR: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION CODE: 8340101.01 RESEARCH SUPERVISORS: Prof Dr HIROSHI MORITA Assoc.Prof Dr NGUYEN VAN DINH Hanoi, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii STATUTORY DECLARATION iv LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Motivations 1.2 Research Objectives 1.3 Research Objects and Scope 1.4 Research Questions .4 1.5 Research Structure CHAPTER THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Definition relating to capital structure 2.2 The theories about capital structure 2.3 The determinants affecting capital structure .11 2.4 Literature review 16 2.5 Research gaps .21 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 23 3.1 Research methodology 23 3.2 Research Data 23 3.3 Research Model 24 3.4 Variables measurement .25 3.5 Hypothesis 26 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 31 4.1 Analyzing the pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam during the 10-year period .31 4.1.1 The characteristics of pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam .31 4.1.2 Current status of capital and capital structure of pharmaceutical listed firms 32 i 4.2 Descriptive statistics 35 4.2.1 Descriptive statistics of dependent variable 35 4.2.2 Descriptive statistics of independent variables .36 4.3 Testing the model 37 4.3.1 Original regression model .37 4.3.2 Correlation matrix and multicollinearity testing 38 4.3.3 Heteroskedasticity testing 40 4.3.4 Autocorrelation testing 41 4.3.5 Overcoming the Heteroskedasticity of the model 42 4.4 Result of the research and discussing them 43 4.5 Comparing factors affect to capital structure between companies listed on Hanoi Stock Exchange (HNX) and ones listed on Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange (HOSE) 46 CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 51 5.1 Research implications 51 5.2 Recommendations .51 5.2.1 Recommendations for the pharmaceutical listed companies in Vietnam 51 5.2.2 Recommendations for related parties 52 5.3 Limitation and the following research directions 53 CONCLUSION 55 REFERENCES 57 APPENDIX 63 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my sincere thanks to the Board of Management, professors, and teachers of Vietnam Japan University and Yokohama National University for facilitating and imparting knowledge to me to complete this graduation thesis as well as help me to have a solid portfolio for the future career And in particular, I would like to send my deepest gratitude to my supervisors Prof Hiroshi Morita and Assoc Prof Nguyen Van Dinh, who mentored, instructed, and imparted useful knowledge and ideas during the implementation and completion of this thesis Sincerely thanks to my family and friends for their support, convenience, and motivation in the past time Although many attempts have been made to implement the research in the most complete way, the limitations of knowledge and experience will inevitably lead to certain shortcomings I hope to receive more guidance and valuable comments from teachers to complete my thesis Sincerely, Bui Thi Minh Huyen iii STATUTORY DECLARATION I pledge that the thesis “Determinants of capital structure of listed firms in the pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam” is the work of the author The content is drawn from the learning process and the results of empirical research The data used in the study period are true and have a clear origin Research results have not been published in any previous scientific research The thesis is conducted under the guidance of Prof Hiroshi Morita and Assoc Prof Nguyen Van Dinh Sincerely, Bui Thi Minh Huyen iv LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Variables measurement 25 Table 4.1: Overview of asset structure of pharmaceutical firms 33 Table 4.2: Overview of capital structure of pharmaceutical firms 34 Table 4.3: Descriptive statistics of dependent variable 35 Table 4.4: Descriptive statistics of independent variables 36 Table 4.5:Requirements for companies listed on the HOSE and HNX stock exchanges 47 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Revenue of Vietnamese pharmaceutical sector (billion USD) Figure 4.1: Original regression model 37 Figure 4.2: Correlation matrix of research variables 38 Figure 4.3: Regression model without “SIZE” or “TANG” variable 39 Figure 4.4: Multicollinearity testing 40 Figure 4.5: Heteroskedasticity testing 41 Figure 4.6: Autocorrelation testing 42 Figure 4.7: Overcoming the Heteroskedasticity of the model 43 Figure 4.8: Regression model of firms listed on HNX and HOSE stock exchanges 48 vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviations Meaning AGE Firm age API Active Pharma Ingredient CA Current Assets CEO Chief Executive Officer CL Current Liabilities EBIT Earnings before interests and taxes GROW Growth opportunity HNX Hanoi Stock Exchange HOSE Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange LA Long-term Assets LD Long-term Debts LIQ Liquidity M&A Mergers and Acquisitions OLS Ordinary Least Square PLU Pluralist Executive PROF Profitability SIZE Firm size SMEs Small and Medium-sized enterprises TA Total Assets TANG Tangible Assets TC Total Capital TD Total Debt TE Total Equity USD United States Dollar VIF VND Variance – Inflation Factor Vietnam Dong vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This research aims to study the factors influencing the capital structure of pharmaceutical companies listed on stock exchanges in Vietnam This study uses data from financial statements, annual reports, management reports of listed companies that publish data on the stock market during the period 2010-2019 The study used the Ordinary Least Square method to estimate the parameters of the model The study used different independent variables including company characteristics (profitability, growth opportunity, tangible assets, liquidity, firm size, firm age) and corporate governance (pluralist executives) Research results show that profitability, tangible assets, and liquidity have a negative correlation with capital structure However, research also illustrates firm size, firm age and pluralist executives have a negative correlation with capital structure but they not have statistical significance In contrast, growth opportunities have a positive relationship with capital structure Generally, the results are most consistent with previous studies on capital structure In addition, the study also shows the direction and the level of the influence of the above independent variables on the capital structure of pharmaceutical companies listed on the Hanoi Stock Exchange and Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange are different Also, the study proposed some recommendations for pharmaceutical listed firms to get a reasonable capital structure as well as investors and related parties when they would like to invest in pharmaceutical listed firms in Vietnam viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Motivations Enterprises need capital to operate which may be retained earnings, debt, and equity The source of funds from debt can increase the value of the firm but using too much debt to finance investments, the company may have financial risks which can consequently lead the enterprise into bankruptcy Moreover, an ideal combination of capital structure including debt and equity can also minimize the cost of capital and maximize the firm’s value Therefore, “capital structure decision is an important corporate policy that deals with the firm’s activities, with debts and equity” (Brounen et al., 2006) In fact, the capital structure will change depending on the characteristics of the situation of each enterprise, the area in which it operates, as well as the effects of macroeconomic fluctuations of the economy, culture, and religion Rather than finding the optimal ratio of debt to equity, finance researchers are often interested in finding out the factors that influence the use of the financial leverage of the business From the relationship between these factors and the capital structure that we can assess whether the decision to use the loan or the equity of the business is reasonable or not, then propose solutions to improve the efficiency of using financial leverage, maximizing asset value for businesses In recent years, the theory of modern capital structure has only been studied in developed countries but has not been paid much attention in developing countries Mouamer (2011) also confirmed that “There is little work done on examining capital structure in emerging countries” In Vietnam, those studies are almost researched at the general level for businesses, but not research much for specific industries, especially pharmaceuticals Filatotchev, I., Toms, S., & Wright, M (2006) The firm's strategic dynamics and corporate governance life‐cycle International Journal of Managerial Finance, 2(4), 256-279 Fosberg, R H (2004) Agency problems and debt financing: leadership structure effects Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 4(1), 31-38 Frank, M Z., & Goyal, V K (2003) Testing the pecking order theory of capital structure Journal of financial economics, 67(2), 217-248 Friend, I., & Lang, L H (1988) An empirical test of the impact of managerial self‐ interest on corporate capital structure the Journal of Finance, 43(2), 271-281 Gujarati, D N., & Porter, D C (2012) Basic Econometrics McGraw-Hill Education Hall, G., Hutchinson, P., & Michaelas, N (2000) Industry effects of the determinants of unquoted SMEs' capital structure International Journal of the Economics of Business, 7(3), 297-312 Hall, R.E., Lieberman, M., (2012) Macroeconomics: Principles & Applications (sixth edition) USA: Joe Sabatino Huang, G & Song, F.M (2006) The determinants of capital structure: evidence from China China Economic Review, 17(1), 14-36 Imtiaz, F., Mahmud, K., & Mallik, A (2016) Determinants of capital structure and testing of applicable theories: Evidence from pharmaceutical firms of Bangladesh International Journal of Economics and Finance, 8(3), 23-32 J Roe (1990) Political and legal restraints on ownership and control of public companies Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 7-41 59 Jaradat, M S (2015) Corporate governance practices and capital structure: A study with special reference to board size, board gender, outside director, and CEO duality International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 3(5), 264-273 Jensen, M C and Meckling, W., 1976 Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure Journal of Finance Economics, 3(4), 305 360 Kaur, M., & Narang, S (2010) EVA disclosures in the annual reports of Indian companies: An empirical study Global Business Review, 11(3), 395–420 Kayo, E K., & Kimura, H (2011) Hierarchical determinants of capital structure Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(2), 358-371 Kieschnick, R., & Moussawi, R (2018) Firm age, corporate governance, and capital structure choices Journal of Corporate Finance, 48, 597-614 Le, T T., & Do, H.M (2017) Determinants of capital structure: An empirical study on Vietnamese listed firms Serbian Journal of Management, 12(1), 77 – 92 Modigliani, F., & Miller, M H (1958) The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and The Theory of Investment American Economic Review, 48(3), 261-297 Modigliani, F., & Miller, M H (1963) Corporate income taxes and the cost of capital: a correction The American economic review, 53(3), 433-443 Mouamer, F M A (2011) The determinants of capital structure of Palestine‐listed companies The Journal of Risk Finance, 12(3), 226-241 Myers, S C (1984) The capital structure puzzle The journal of finance, 39(3), 574592 Nazir, M S., Aslam, A., & Nawaz, M M (2012) The impact of CEO duality on capital structure: A case from non-financial sector of Pakistan American Journal of Scientific Research, 56(56), 5-12 60 Oliner, S D., & Rudebusch, G D (1992) Sources of the financing hierarchy for business investment The Review of Economics and Statistics, 643-654 Pham, M T., & Nguyen, D T (2015) Factors influencing capital structure of Vietnam’s real estate enterprises: a move from static to dynamic models Journal of Economic Development, 22 (4), 76-91 Pindado, J., & De La Torre, C (2011) Capital structure: New evidence from the ownership structure International Review of Finance, 11(2), 213-226 Ranti, U O (2013) The effects of board size and CEO duality on firms’capital structure: A study of selected listed firms in Nigeria Asian Economic and Financial Review, 3(8), 1033 Rajan, R G., & Zingales, L (1995) What we know about capital structure? Some evidence from international data The journal of Finance, 50(5), 1421-1460 Ross, S.A., Westerfield, R.W., & Jordan, B.D (2013) Fundamental of Corporate Finance (tenth edition) New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin Saeed, R., Munir, H M., Lodhi, R N., Riaz, A., & Iqbal, A (2014) Capital structure and its determinants: Empirical evidence from Pakistan’s pharmaceutical firms Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 4(2), 115-125 Saeedi, A., & Mahmoodi, I (2011) Capital structure and firm performance: Evidence from Iranian companies International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 70, 20-29 Sayilgan, G., Karabacak, H., & Kỹỗỹkkocaolu, G (2006) The firm-specific determinants of corporate capital structure: Evidence from Turkish panel data Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 3(3), 125-139 Serrasqueiro, Z M S., & Rogão, M C R (2009) Capital structure of listed Portuguese companies Review of Accounting and Finance, 8(1), 54-75 61 Sinha, S., & Samanta, P K (2014) Non-linearity in the determinants of capital structure: Evidence from Selected Indian pharmaceutical companies International Conference on Business and Information Management, 79-85 Titman, S., & Wessels, R (1988) The determinants of capital structure choice The Journal of finance, 43(1), 1-19 Tong, G., & Green, C J (2005) Pecking order or trade-off hypothesis? Evidence on the capital structure of Chinese companies Applied economics, 37(19), 2179-2189 Tran, N D K., & Ramachandran, N (2006) Capital structure in small and mediumsized enterprises: the case of Vietnam ASEAN Economic bulletin, 23(2), 192-211 Viviani, J L (2008) Capital structure determinants: an empirical study of French companies in the wine industry International journal of wine business research, 20(2), 171-194 Vo, X V (2017) Determinants of capital structure in emerging markets: Evidence from Vietnam Research in International Business and Finance, 40, 105-113 Wald, J K (1999) How firm characteristics affect capital structure: an international comparison Journal of Financial research, 22(2), 161-187 White, H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 817-838 Wen, Y., Rwegasira, K., & Bilderbeek, J (2002) Corporate governance and capital structure decisions of the Chinese listed firms Corporate Governance: An International Review, 10(2), 75-83 Zou, H., & Xiao, J Z (2006) The financing behaviour of listed Chinese firms The British Accounting Review, 38(3), 239-258 62 APPENDIX Appendix List of pharmaceutical listed firms in Vietnam (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 63 Appendix Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2019 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.0963 0.2679 0.2799 13.6341 0.0847 4.6161 10 DBD 0.4365 0.1107 0.1536 14.3191 0.1430 1.5611 DBT 0.6607 0.0643 0.1335 13.4586 0.1192 1.1658 10 DCL 0.4835 0.0831 -0.0107 14.3534 0.1862 4.2144 11 DHG 0.1855 0.1775 -0.0141 15.2379 0.2171 4.4459 13 DHT 0.5772 0.1725 0.1550 13.5120 0.1239 1.5149 11 DMC 0.1820 0.1908 0.0449 14.2414 0.1310 4.6731 13 DNM 0.5875 0.0740 0.4401 12.2643 0.2085 1.3556 DP3 0.1874 0.2823 0.5486 12.8249 0.2348 3.5895 10 IMP 0.1561 0.1116 0.0411 14.4292 0.2582 2.9710 13 11 LDP 0.6617 0.0708 0.0521 12.5486 0.3372 1.0466 12 MKV 0.4948 0.0610 -0.1827 11.5598 0.6169 1.0840 11 13 OPC 0.4168 0.1212 -0.0035 13.9854 0.2064 1.6943 11 14 PMC 0.1354 0.2433 0.0835 12.8587 0.1239 6.3193 10 15 PPP 0.3285 0.1125 0.0031 11.9700 0.5917 1.6592 16 PME 0.1509 0.1746 0.0790 14.6492 0.1295 3.7567 17 SPM 0.2592 0.0240 0.0508 13.8376 0.0593 3.4341 18 TRA 0.2885 0.1480 -0.0115 14.2675 0.3942 2.5856 11 19 VMD 0.9624 0.0073 -0.0743 16.0154 0.0147 1.0148 20 VDP 0.3862 0.0892 13.4462 0.1724 2.1206 0.1343 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 64 Appendix 3: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2018 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.1251 0.3406 0.5692 13.3873 0.1176 5.3583 DBD 0.3791 0.1460 -0.0711 14.1762 0.1526 2.0535 1 DBT 0.6116 0.0635 0.0006 13.3333 0.1449 1.1768 DCL 0.5349 0.0315 0.4175 14.3642 0.2517 3.6489 10 DHG 0.2524 0.1808 0.0290 15.2520 0.2322 3.1430 12 DHT 0.5682 0.1858 0.0070 13.3679 0.0998 1.5810 10 DMC 0.2290 0.1954 0.1223 14.1974 0.1267 3.6823 12 DNM 0.4650 0.0530 0.1002 11.8996 0.2460 1.6308 DP3 0.2458 0.4318 0.1172 12.3876 0.3956 2.5818 10 IMP 0.1520 0.0987 0.0003 14.3889 0.1777 3.5299 12 11 LDP 0.6822 -0.0571 -0.0300 12.4979 0.3172 1.0357 12 MKV 0.5964 0.0408 -0.0463 11.7616 0.5701 0.9351 10 13 OPC 0.4737 0.1143 0.1193 13.9890 0.2129 1.2428 10 14 PMC 0.1534 0.2611 0.0664 12.7785 0.1400 5.5684 15 PPP 0.3915 0.0795 0.0246 11.9668 0.6235 1.3273 16 PME 0.1630 0.1821 0.0907 14.5732 0.1443 5.4159 1 17 SPM 0.2309 0.0224 0.0226 13.7880 0.0684 3.1367 18 TRA 0.3036 0.1437 0.0531 14.2792 0.4126 2.7528 10 19 VMD 0.9650 0.0091 0.0279 16.0926 0.0109 1.0162 20 VDP 0.3200 0.1139 0.1731 13.3202 0.1921 2.4717 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 65 Appendix 4: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2017 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.1538 0.0968 19.3362 12.9367 0.0066 13.3278 DBD 0.4606 0.1363 0.0766 14.2500 0.1599 1.7008 DBT 0.6119 0.0745 0.1602 13.3327 0.1521 1.1916 DCL 0.3516 0.0941 0.4445 14.0153 0.2254 2.7363 DHG 0.3250 0.1820 0.0359 15.2234 0.2513 2.3236 11 DHT 0.5995 0.1675 0.2349 13.3609 0.0889 1.5154 DMC 0.2701 0.1989 0.2043 14.0821 0.1539 3.0672 11 DNM 0.3948 0.1124 -0.0089 11.8041 0.2844 1.7677 DP3 0.3205 0.2326 0.1033 12.2768 0.3966 2.0540 10 IMP 0.2133 0.0830 0.5345 14.3885 0.1508 2.8429 11 11 LDP 0.6116 0.0751 -0.0178 12.5283 0.3179 1.2315 12 MKV 0.6135 0.0376 0.0285 11.8090 0.5551 0.8945 13 OPC 0.4627 0.1105 0.3716 13.8763 0.1981 1.2428 14 PMC 0.1916 0.2753 0.1194 12.7142 0.1584 4.3537 15 PPP 0.5140 0.0730 0.1666 11.9425 0.6623 0.8866 16 PME 0.1771 0.1835 0.2065 14.4864 0.1462 5.2519 17 SPM 0.2103 0.0258 -0.2124 13.7657 0.0762 4.1435 18 TRA 0.2589 0.2154 0.0960 14.2274 0.4540 1.9589 19 VMD 0.9640 0.0119 0.2333 16.0651 0.0059 1.0234 20 VDP 0.2625 0.1449 0.0329 13.1606 0.2190 2.9366 0 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 66 Appendix 5: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2016 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.4101 0.0833 -0.0680 9.9243 0.4702 2.9883 DBD 0.4610 0.1258 0.3430 14.1762 0.1644 1.6714 DBT 0.7005 0.0759 0.1811 13.1841 0.1237 1.0319 DCL 0.2233 0.1430 0.0830 13.6476 0.2117 3.4877 DHG 0.2665 0.1949 0.1732 15.1881 0.2796 2.7640 10 DHT 0.6063 0.1567 0.1773 13.1499 0.1024 1.4696 DMC 0.1848 0.1998 0.0971 13.8962 0.2021 4.2213 10 DNM 0.4378 0.1503 -0.0057 11.8130 0.2605 1.6929 DP3 0.3296 0.1611 0.0955 12.1785 0.4711 1.8580 1 10 IMP 0.1903 0.1095 0.0578 13.9603 0.2336 3.6394 10 11 LDP 0.6585 0.0895 0.1138 12.5462 0.2867 1.1349 12 MKV 0.5925 0.0492 0.6677 11.7809 0.3392 1.0462 13 OPC 0.2974 0.1334 0.3095 13.5603 0.2720 2.3673 14 PMC 0.1975 0.3128 0.1367 12.6015 0.1482 4.2603 15 PPP 0.4388 0.0745 0.1217 11.7884 0.5347 1.0860 16 PME 0.1819 0.1897 0.1780 14.2986 0.1880 5.0963 17 SPM 0.4027 0.0161 0.0423 14.0045 0.0676 1.6133 18 TRA 0.2633 0.2062 0.0624 14.1357 0.1780 2.3723 19 VMD 0.9651 0.0169 0.2098 15.8554 0.0080 1.0259 20 VDP 0.2648 0.1524 0.1746 13.1282 0.1937 2.9188 0 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 67 Appendix 6: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2015 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE AMV 0.4872 0.0126 -0.1312 9.9947 DBD TANG LIQ AGE PLU 0.5033 2.4754 0.4811 0.2615 0.3410 13.8812 0.1576 1.6025 DBT 0.7472 0.0453 0.4235 13.0177 0.0608 1.0585 DCL 0.2730 0.1179 0.3156 13.5678 0.2375 2.8398 DHG 0.2503 0.2111 -0.0343 15.0284 0.3175 2.8493 DHT 0.6103 0.1358 0.1853 12.9867 0.1282 1.4133 7 DMC 0.1971 0.1854 0.0598 13.8035 0.2456 3.7165 DNM 0.4470 0.1508 -0.0760 11.8187 0.2651 1.6508 DP3 0.4217 0.1133 0.1697 12.0873 0.5361 1.3595 10 IMP 0.1701 0.1092 0.0614 13.9042 0.2410 4.7603 11 LDP 0.6458 0.0878 0.1899 12.4385 0.3174 1.1217 12 MKV 0.6419 0.0645 0.0044 11.2695 0.5390 0.9665 13 OPC 0.2283 0.1570 0.1099 13.2907 0.3252 2.7180 14 PMC 0.2108 0.3162 0.1151 12.4733 0.1450 4.0201 15 PPP 0.5377 0.0623 -0.0123 11.6735 0.6072 1.1162 16 PME 0.2091 0.1686 0.1867 14.1348 0.2379 4.0694 17 SPM 0.3843 0.0282 0.0004 13.9631 0.0787 3.2017 18 TRA 0.2543 0.1975 0.1453 14.0752 0.1815 2.8839 19 VMD 0.9706 0.0202 0.0931 15.6649 0.0049 1.0229 20 VDP 0.2530 0.1188 0.1106 12.9673 0.2491 2.9236 0 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 68 Appendix 7: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2014 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.5321 -0.3529 -0.0674 10.1354 0.5335 4.3167 DBD 0.6114 0.0794 0.0101 13.5878 0.1362 1.0317 DBT 0.7067 0.0780 0.1446 12.6645 0.0935 1.1887 DCL 0.4849 0.1045 -0.0299 13.2935 0.3248 1.3946 DHG 0.3414 0.2087 0.1305 15.0633 0.2767 2.1312 DHT 0.5556 0.1309 0.1341 12.8167 0.1550 1.4661 DMC 0.2257 0.1870 -0.0858 13.7454 0.2892 3.0457 8 DNM 0.4770 0.1997 0.0159 11.8978 0.2487 1.5632 DP3 0.3659 0.1360 0.0306 11.9306 0.5807 1.7667 10 IMP 0.2262 0.1071 0.1836 13.8446 0.2390 3.5905 11 LDP 0.5996 0.1157 0.1396 12.2646 0.3417 1.2408 12 MKV 0.6537 0.0813 0.1478 11.2651 0.5594 1.2616 13 OPC 0.2688 0.1674 -0.0101 13.1864 0.3612 2.2789 14 PMC 0.2233 0.3423 0.1215 12.3644 0.1603 3.7526 15 PPP 0.5777 0.0784 0.0871 11.6859 0.6258 2.2958 16 PME 0.2185 0.1680 0.0726 13.9636 0.1863 4.2689 17 SPM 0.4009 0.0470 0.0365 13.9627 0.3276 2.9226 18 TRA 0.2308 0.1900 0.0408 13.9395 0.2502 3.0768 19 VMD 0.9674 0.0196 0.1406 15.5759 0.0063 1.0128 20 VDP 0.2934 0.1034 0.1334 12.8624 0.2985 2.3498 0 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 69 Appendix 8: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2013 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.2233 0.0167 0.1271 10.2052 0.6224 2.0895 DBD 0.6601 0.0599 0.0742 13.5778 0.1183 1.0288 DBT 0.6898 0.1001 -0.1927 12.5295 0.1191 1.1963 4 DCL 0.5423 0.1219 -0.0814 13.3239 0.3473 1.2045 5 DHG 0.3510 0.2544 0.2953 14.9406 0.2594 2.1670 DHT 0.4830 0.1534 0.1083 12.6909 0.1875 1.6328 DMC 0.3817 0.1371 0.2012 13.8351 0.2780 1.8426 DNM 0.5828 0.2118 -0.0273 11.8820 0.2725 1.2766 DP3 0.3780 0.1151 0.4997 11.9004 0.4219 1.6898 10 IMP 0.1655 0.1099 0.0096 13.6761 0.2972 4.6793 11 LDP 0.5770 0.1312 0.1397 12.1339 0.2254 1.3879 12 MKV 0.6383 0.0539 2.6914 11.1272 0.6042 1.4051 13 OPC 0.3269 0.1661 0.0809 13.1965 0.3860 1.7657 14 PMC 0.2408 0.3558 0.2384 12.2497 0.1581 3.4968 15 PPP 0.7334 0.1008 -0.0612 11.6023 0.7364 1.4930 16 PME 0.3545 0.1949 0.0923 13.8935 0.1992 2.4001 17 SPM 0.4107 0.0331 0.0019 13.9269 0.3439 2.7933 18 TRA 0.3077 0.2312 0.1231 13.8996 0.2438 2.3197 19 VMD 0.9655 0.0196 0.1345 15.4443 0.0079 1.0542 20 VDP 0.2325 0.1043 -0.1547 12.7372 0.3619 2.8766 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 70 Appendix 9: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2012 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.1306 0.0156 -0.1462 10.0855 0.6772 3.1649 DBD 0.6340 0.0742 1.9300 13.5062 0.1139 1.0596 DBT 0.7262 0.1128 0.1705 12.7436 0.1477 1.1788 DCL 0.6250 0.1236 -0.2089 13.4089 0.3434 1.0962 DHG 0.2837 0.2470 0.1917 14.6819 0.2174 2.7813 6 DHT 0.5478 0.0662 -0.0364 12.5880 0.1543 1.5410 DMC 0.3273 0.1516 0.0179 13.6518 0.3366 1.9787 DNM 0.6533 0.1865 0.0620 11.9097 0.2842 1.1743 DP3 0.2853 0.0870 -0.0919 11.4952 0.4266 1.9407 10 IMP 0.1711 0.1209 0.0410 13.6666 0.3131 0.9063 11 LDP 0.5501 0.1483 0.1124 12.0031 0.1850 1.5452 12 MKV 0.4705 -0.0797 -0.0538 9.8212 0.4183 1.2724 13 OPC 0.3171 0.1772 0.0669 13.1187 0.4395 1.9084 14 PMC 0.2468 0.3509 0.1124 12.0359 0.1979 3.2500 15 PPP 0.7340 0.0312 0.5866 11.6655 0.6405 2.5326 16 PME 0.5164 0.1779 0.1647 13.8052 0.2195 1.4895 17 SPM 0.4127 0.0821 0.0695 13.9250 0.3572 1.3011 18 TRA 0.4712 0.2153 0.1551 13.7835 0.2260 1.5775 19 VMD 0.9613 0.0278 0.1133 15.3182 0.0056 1.0580 20 VDP 0.3768 0.0809 1.8409 12.9053 0.3334 1.6282 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 71 Appendix 10: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2011 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.2388 -0.0697 -0.0634 10.2436 0.5808 2.1730 2 DBD 0.2334 0.1965 0.1996 12.4312 0.2078 3.1061 DBT 0.7019 0.1446 0.1410 12.5862 0.1286 1.2257 DCL 0.7273 0.0530 0.0626 13.6433 0.2956 1.0173 DHG 0.3018 0.2460 0.0967 14.5065 0.2302 2.7401 DHT 0.6071 0.1521 0.1438 12.6251 0.1603 1.3861 DMC 0.3100 0.1547 0.0876 13.6340 0.3406 2.0563 DNM 0.6850 0.1033 0.1353 11.8495 0.3137 1.1239 DP3 0.3542 0.0835 0.3470 11.5915 0.4063 1.6225 0 10 IMP 0.1434 0.1344 0.1021 13.6264 0.2574 4.8589 11 LDP 0.5458 0.1878 0.2178 11.8966 0.1989 1.5301 1 12 MKV 0.3823 0.0562 -0.1770 9.8765 0.3458 1.8068 13 OPC 0.3446 0.1501 0.1644 13.0539 0.4925 2.2967 14 PMC 0.2158 0.3399 0.2194 11.9294 0.2465 3.4741 15 PPP 0.5783 0.0358 0.3661 11.2039 0.6691 5.0784 0 16 PME 0.5677 0.1285 0.1243 13.6528 0.2713 1.3442 17 SPM 0.4340 0.0590 0.0595 13.8577 0.3952 0.9926 18 TRA 0.4811 0.1741 0.4484 13.6393 0.2209 1.6791 19 VMD 0.9575 0.0274 0.4865 15.2109 0.0097 1.0659 1 20 VDP 0.3546 0.0972 0.2355 12.8440 0.3743 1.6522 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 72 Appendix 11: Statistic data of 20 listed pharmaceutical firms in Vietnam in 2010 No Securities TD PROF GROW SIZE TANG LIQ AGE PLU AMV 0.1904 0.0685 0.2734 10.3091 0.4847 2.5452 1 DBD 0.2545 0.1993 0.0790 12.2492 0.2746 2.2567 0 DBT 0.6722 0.1305 -0.0322 12.4543 0.1512 1.2682 DCL 0.6467 0.0676 0.2364 13.5825 0.3313 1.1709 DHG 0.2916 0.2386 0.5009 14.4142 0.1667 3.0580 DHT 0.6193 0.1306 0.0862 12.4907 0.1729 1.3611 DMC 0.2873 0.1662 0.0801 13.5500 0.3168 2.2385 DNM 0.6447 0.1021 0.2374 11.7227 0.2759 1.1712 DP3 0.1476 0.0784 0.1707 11.2936 0.4829 2.9276 0 10 IMP 0.2154 0.1339 0.0267 13.5292 0.2731 3.1099 11 LDP 0.5782 0.2067 0.4387 11.6996 0.2309 1.3578 12 MKV 0.4640 0.1135 0.1311 10.0713 0.1387 1.9643 13 OPC 0.2665 0.1659 0.0406 12.9017 0.3554 3.9641 14 PMC 0.1539 0.3351 0.1845 11.7310 0.3017 4.5373 15 PPP 0.4479 0.0289 0.1369 10.8919 0.5714 7.5446 0 16 PME 0.5848 0.1257 0.0432 13.5356 0.3119 1.3700 17 SPM 0.3884 0.1491 1.0582 13.8000 0.4308 1.1929 0 18 TRA 0.3969 0.1749 0.4210 13.2688 0.1484 2.1633 19 VMD 0.9476 0.0166 0.3363 14.8144 0.0136 1.0028 20 VDP 0.3451 0.1265 0.3000 12.6325 0.3370 2.7529 (Source: Author’s calculation from financial statements of pharmaceutical listed firms) 73 ... "Determinants of capital structure of listed firms in the pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam ", the author aims to provide significant information on the Vietnam pharmaceutical industry and define... of capital structure of listed firms in the pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam? ?? is the work of the author The content is drawn from the learning process and the results of empirical research The. .. FINDINGS 4.1 Analyzing the pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam during the 10-year period 4.1.1 The characteristics of pharmaceutical sector in Vietnam The pharmaceutical industry is one of the important