SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

TRADE WORKING CAPITAL INTENSITY AND THE MARGIN-TURNOVER TRADE-OFF: PANEL DATA EVIDENCE FROM BIST FIRMS

TİCARİ İŞLETME SERMAYESİ YOĞUNLUĞU VE MARJ-DEVİR HIZI DENGESİ: BİST FİRMALARINDAN PANEL VERİ BULGULARI

Tunakan Duran(Serbest Akademisyen)0000-0001-5377-1253
Pages
191–206
Publication Date
2026-10-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results suggest that trade working capital intensity should be evaluated not only as a liquidity or financing issue, but also as part of a margin-turnover trade-off.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the relationship between trade working capital intensity and subsequent financial performance indicators using quarterly financial statements of 55 firms listed on Borsa Istanbul for the period 2005Q1-2025Q3.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Trade working capital intensity is defined as quarter-end net trade working capital, measured as trade receivables plus inventories minus trade payables, divided by the trailing four-quarter sum of sales.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results suggest that trade working capital intensity should be evaluated not only as a liquidity or financing issue, but also as part of a margin-turnover trade-off.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:işletme sermayesi · brüt marj · aktif devir hızı

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between trade working capital intensity and subsequent financial performance indicators using quarterly financial statements of 55 firms listed on Borsa Istanbul for the period 2005Q1-2025Q3. Trade working capital intensity is defined as quarter-end net trade working capital, measured as trade receivables plus inventories minus trade payables, divided by the trailing four-quarter sum of sales. The analysis uses firm and quarter fixed-effects panel models. The findings show that trade working capital intensity is strongly and negatively associated with next-quarter quarterly asset turnover. This result remains stable across alternative specifications, including trailing four-quarter outcomes, two-quarter-ahead outcomes, crisis-window exclusions, alternative winsorization, a dynamic control specification, and Driscoll-Kraay standard errors. The evidence for gross margin is positive but weaker, while the finance burden channel is not statistically supported. The results suggest that trade working capital intensity should be evaluated not only as a liquidity or financing issue, but also as part of a margin-turnover trade-off. The findings are interpreted as panel associations rather than causal effects.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Borsa İstanbul’da işlem gören 55 firmanın 2005Ç1-2025Ç3 dönemine ait çeyreklik finansal tablolarını kullanarak ticari işletme sermayesi yoğunluğu ile sonraki dönem finansal performans göstergeleri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Çalışmada ticari işletme sermayesi yoğunluğu, çeyrek sonu ticari alacaklar ve stoklar toplamından ticari borçların çıkarılmasıyla elde edilen net ticari işletme sermayesinin son dört çeyrek satış toplamına oranı olarak tanımlanmıştır. Bağımlı değişkenler bir sonraki çeyreğe ait finansman yükü, brüt marj ve çeyreklik aktif devir hızıdır. Firma ve çeyrek sabit etkilerini içeren panel regresyon sonuçları, ticari işletme sermayesi yoğunluğu ile sonraki dönem aktif devir hızı arasında güçlü ve tutarlı negatif bir ilişki bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Brüt marj tarafında pozitif fakat daha kırılgan bir ilişki gözlenirken, finansman yükü açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki elde edilememiştir. Sağlamlık analizlerinde aktif devir hızı bulgusunun TTM bağımlı değişken, iki çeyrek ileri sonuç değişkeni, kriz dönemlerinin dışlanması, alternatif uç değer düzeltmesi, dinamik kontrol ve Driscoll-Kraay standart hataları altında da korunduğu görülmektedir. Bulgular, ticari işletme sermayesinin yalnızca likidite veya finansman yükü problemi olarak değil, firmaların brüt marj ile varlık devir hızı arasındaki dengeyi yönetme biçimi olarak da değerlendirilmesi gerektiğine işaret etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Duran, T. (2026). TRADE WORKING CAPITAL INTENSITY AND THE MARGIN-TURNOVER TRADE-OFF: PANEL DATA EVIDENCE FROM BIST FIRMS. Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 191–206. https://doi.org/10.32951/mufider.1954050

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (27)

  1. Aktas, N., Croci, E. and Petmezas, D. (2015). Is Working Capital Management Value-Enhancing? Evidence From Firm Performance and Investments. Journal of Corporate Finance, 30, 98-113.
  2. Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  3. Baños-Caballero, S., García-Teruel, P. J. and Martínez-Solano, P. (2012). How Does Working Capital Management Affect the Profitability of Spanish Smes? Small Business Economics, 39(2), 517-529.
  4. Baños-Caballero, S., García-Teruel, P. J. and Martínez-Solano, P. (2014). Working Capital Management, Corporate Performance, and Financial Constraints. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 332-338.
  5. Breusch, T. S. and Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.
  6. Deloof, M. (2003). Does Working Capital Management Affect Profitability of Belgian Firms? Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 30(3-4), 573-588.
  7. Driscoll, J. C. and Kraay, A. C. (1998). Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially Dependent Panel Data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 549-560.
  8. Emery, G. W. (1984). A Pure Financial Explanation For Trade Credit. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 19(3), 271-285.
  9. Erdoğan, E. Z. and Yılmaz Türkmen, S. (2021). The Effect of Working Capital Management on Profitability: Evidence from The Borsa Istanbul Manufacturing Sector. Journal of Finance, Economics and Social Research, 6(4), 886-896.
  10. Ferris, J. S. (1981). A transactions theory of trade credit use. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 96(2), 243-270.
  11. García-Teruel, P. J. and Martínez-Solano, P. (2007). Effects Of Working Capital Management on SME Profitability. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 3(2), 164-177.
  12. Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification Tests in Econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251-1271.
  13. Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust Standard Errors for Panel Regressions with Cross-Sectional Dependence. The Stata Journal, 7(3), 281-312.
  14. Jose, M. L., Lancaster, C. and Stevens, J. L. (1996). Corporate Returns and Cash Conversion Cycles. Journal of Economics and Finance, 20(1), 33-46.
  15. Kaplanoğlu, E. and Yükçü, C. (2019). The Relationship Between Working Capital and Economic Value Added: A Research in Borsa İstanbul. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 12(1), 107-128.
  16. Kaya, E., Konuk, F. and Kaya, Ö. (2021). The relationship between working capital and firm performance: A heterogeneous panel application. Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi, 4(2), 151-164.
  17. Maddala, G. S. and Wu, S. (1999). A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and A New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 631-652.
  18. Öztürk, E. and Kaba, F. (2021). The Effect of Working Capital Management on Profitability: Evidence from Borsa Istanbul. Kırklareli University Journal of Social Sciences Vocational School, 2(2), 27-38.
  19. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels. CESifo Working Paper No. 1229.
  20. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in The Presence of Cross-Section Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
  21. Petersen, M. A. and Rajan, R. G. (1997). Trade Credit: Theories and Evidence. The Review of Financial Studies, 10(3), 661-691.
  22. Shin, H. H. and Soenen, L. (1998). Efficiency of Working Capital Management and Corporate Profitability. Financial Practice and Education, 8(2), 37-45.
  23. Şahin, A. (2018). Firmalar Arası Ticari Alacak Kredisini Açıklayan Teoriler: Borsa İstanbul’da Bir Uygulama. Maliye ve Finans Yazıları, 110, 37-70.
  24. Turan, S. and Bilgin, R. (2021). Türkiye’deki Halka Açık Firmaların Net İşletme Sermayesi Yönetiminin Firma Değerine Etkisi. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(40), 437-458.
  25. Vural, G., Sökmen, A. G. and Çetenak, E. H. (2012). Effects of Working Capital Management on Firm’s Performance: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 2(4), 488-495.
  26. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press.
  27. Yücel, T. and Kurt, G. (2002). Cash Conversion Cycle, Cash Management and Profitability: An Empirical Study on The ISE Traded Companies. Istanbul Stock Exchange Review, 6(22), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1109/Blockchain57800.2023.00054