The impact of customer capital on company's market value: An empirical study from 100 U.S. stock market leaders

Lehenchuk, Serhii; Zavalii, Tetiana

doi:10.2478/ijme-2021-0025

Figures & Tables

Correlation matrix of Model 2. GW, goodwill; IAcust, intangible assets that characterize customer capital.

Correlation matrix of Model 3. FinLev, financial leverage; GW, goodwill; IAcust, intangible assets that characterize customer capital; Int, intensity of research & development.

The variants of regression models of the impact of customer capital on company's MV

Model 1		Model 2		Model 3

Dependent variable

MV

Independent variable		Independent variables		Independent variables
IAcust	Intangible assets that characterize customer capital	IAcust	Intangible assets that characterize customer capital	IAcust	Intangible assets that characterize customer capital
		IAother	Other intangible assets	IAother	Other intangible assets
		GW	Goodwill	GW	Goodwill
		RD	Research and development costs	RD	Research and development costs
				TA	Total assets
				Int	Research and development intensity
				FinLev	Financial leverage

Examples of articles on the impact of customer capital on company's MV

Year of publication	Author/Authors	Findings/results

		Regarding all intangible assets	Regarding customer (relational, relationship) capital
2005	M.C. Chen, S.J. Cheng, and Y. Hwang	The firms’ intellectual capital has a positive impact on MV and financial performance, and may be an indicator for future financial performance	The object–advertising expenditure.The authors suggested that companies with greater advertising expenditure tend to have higher market-to-book value ratios, but according to the results of correlation analysis it was found that the coefficient on advertising expenditure is not significant
2005	C.-Y. Tseng and Y.-J.J. Goo	The results generally support the hypothesis regarding the relationship between intellectual capital and corporate value	The object–relationship capital.The findings of this study suggest that relationship capital directly influence corporate value
2013	M.B. Taghieh, S. Taghieh, and Z. Poorzamani	It can be concluded that customer capital, which is considered as bridge or catalyst in intellectual capital activities, is the dominant and determining factor to change intellectual capital to the MV, accordingly, the company's business performance	The object–relational capital.Based on the results of testing hypotheses, relational capital has significant and positive effect on firm value
2015	B. Bchini	Based on the survey data in Tunisia, the authors find that the link between intellectual capital and value creation is linear and positive in manufacturing companies	The object–relational capital.The results of these regressions are presented that the relationship between relational capital and value creation in the Tunisian manufacturing companies is statistically significant
2017	F. Sardo and Z. Serrasqueiro	Concerning firms’ MV, the current study shows that human capital and structural capital have higher contribution to firm's MV. Therefore, human capital can be seen as the main driver of firms’ future growth and innovativeness	The object–relational (or customer) capital.As a result of the regression analysis, it was found that the hypothesis that relational capital has a positive effect on firms’ MV was rejected
2018	I. Yilmaz and G. Acar	Amongst the components of multiple factors model, the most influential explanatory variable was capital employed, then comes human capital, and relational capital. Structural capital has the lowest effect on explaining both company's value and performance	The object–relational capital.The relational capital has positive and significant effect on M/B ratio

Summary statistics, using the observations 1–100 (Model 3)

Variable	Mean	Median	Standard deviation	Min	Max
MV	1,40,107	92,998	1.65e+0.05	26,262	9,56,625
IAcust	3,481	432	7,537	0	45,358
IAother	8,461	1,367	20,395	0	1,38,005
GW	17,092	8,801	21,745	0	1,46,370
RD	2,480	915	3,858	0	21,419
TA (log)	10.95	10.93	0.96	8.55	13.18
Int	1.92	2.00	0.88	1.00	3.00
FinLev	14.53	1.69	85.12	−8.03	805.6

Summary statistics, using the observations 1–100 (Model 2)

Variable	Mean	Median	Standard deviation	Min	Max
MV	1,40,107	92,998	1.65e + 0.05	26,262	9,56,625
IAcust	3,481	432	7,537	0	45,358
IAother	8,461	1,367	20,395	0	1,38,005
GW	17,092	8,801	21,745	0	1,46,370
RD	2,480	915	3,858	0	21,419

Correlation coefficients for independent variables of Model 3, using the observations 1–100

IAcust	IAother	GW	RD	TA	Int	FinLev	Variables
1.0000	0.3239	0.6493	0.0127	0.3903	−0.0998	−0.0621	IAcust
	1.0000	0.6346	−0.0696	0.4128	−0.0884	−0.0571	IAother
		1.0000	0.0985	0.5850	0.0021	−0.0962	GW
			1.0000	0.3290	0.4661	0.0176	RD
				1.0000	−0.0794	−0.1267	TA
					1.0000	−0.0585	Int
						1.0000	FinLev

Coefficients of determination

R²	IAcust	0.45
	IAother	0.45
	GW	0.68
	RD	0.40
	TA	0.49
	Int	0.31
	FinLev	0.03

100 U_S_ stock market leaders (the list was relevant as of January 10, 2020)

No	Company	No	Company
1	3M Co.	51	Illinois Tool Works Inc.
2	Abbott Laboratories	52	Intel Corp.
3	AbbVie Inc.	53	International Business Machines Corp.
4	Accenture PLC	54	Intuit Inc.
5	Adobe Inc.	55	Intuitive Surgical Inc.
6	Allergan PLC	56	Johnson & Johnson
7	Alphabet Inc.	57	Kimberly-Clark Corp.
8	Altria Group Inc.	58	Kinder Morgan Inc.
9	Amazon.com Inc.	59	Kraft Heinz Co.
10	Amgen Inc.	60	Linde plc
11	Apple Inc.	61	Lockheed Martin Corp.
12	Applied Materials Inc.	62	Lowe's Cos. Inc.
13	AT&T Inc.	63	Marriott International Inc.
14	Automatic Data Processing Inc.	64	McDonald's Corp.
15	Becton, Dickinson & Co.	65	Medtronic PLC
16	Biogen Inc.	66	Merck & Co. Inc.
17	Boeing Co.	67	Microsoft Corp.
18	Booking Holdings Inc.	68	Mondelēz International Inc.
19	Boston Scientific Corp.	69	Netflix Inc.
20	Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.	70	Nike Inc.
21	Broadcom Inc.	71	Northrop Grumman Corp.
22	Caterpillar Inc.	72	NVIDIA Corp.
23	Charter Communications Inc.	73	Occidental Petroleum Corp.
24	Chevron Corp.	74	Oracle Corp.
25	Cisco Systems Inc.	75	PepsiCo Inc.
26	Coca-Cola Co.	76	Pfizer Inc.
27	Colgate-Palmolive Co.	77	Philip Morris International Inc.
28	Comcast Corp.	78	Phillips 66
29	ConocoPhillips	79	Procter & Gamble Co.
30	Costco Wholesale Corp.	80	Qualcomm Inc.
31	CSX Corp.	81	Raytheon Co.
32	CVS Health Corp.	82	Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.
33	Danaher Corp.	83	salesforce.com Inc.
34	Delta Air Lines Inc.	84	Schlumberger Ltd.
35	DuPont de Nemours Inc.	85	Starbucks Corp.
36	Eli Lilly & Co.	86	Stryker Corp.
37	Emerson Electric Co.	87	Target Corp.
38	EOG Resources Inc.	88	Texas Instruments Inc.
39	Estée Lauder Cos. Inc.	89	Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
40	Exxon Mobil Corp.	90	TJX Cos. Inc.
41	Facebook Inc.	91	T-Mobile US Inc.
42	FedEx Corp.	92	Union Pacific Corp.
43	Ford Motor Co.	93	United Parcel Service Inc.
44	General Dynamics Corp.	94	United Technologies Corp.
45	General Electric Co.	95	UnitedHealth Group Inc.
46	General Mills Inc.	96	Verizon Communications Inc.
47	General Motors Co.	97	Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc.
48	Gilead Sciences Inc.	98	Walmart Inc.
49	Home Depot Inc.	99	Walt Disney Co.
50	Honeywell International Inc.	100	Zoetis Inc.

Correlation coefficients for independent variables of Model 2 using the observations 1–100

IAcust	IAother	GW	RD	Variables
1.0000	0.3239	0.6493	0.0127	IAcust
	1.0000	0.6346	−0.0696	IAother
		1.0000	0.0985	GW
			1.0000	RD

The impact of customer capital on company's market value: An empirical study from 100 U.S. stock market leaders

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Figure 2

The variants of regression models of the impact of customer capital on company's MV

Examples of articles on the impact of customer capital on company's MV

Summary statistics, using the observations 1–100 (Model 3)

Summary statistics, using the observations 1–100 (Model 2)

Correlation coefficients for independent variables of Model 3, using the observations 1–100

Coefficients of determination

100 U_S_ stock market leaders (the list was relevant as of January 10, 2020)

Correlation coefficients for independent variables of Model 2 using the observations 1–100

Paradigm

My account