The Effect of ESG Score on Financial Performance and Financial Distress with ESG Controversies as a Moderating Variable in ASEAN and Indian Emerging Markets
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/dijefa.v7i4.7407Keywords:
ESG Score, ESG Controversies, Financial Performance, Financial Health, Altman Z″-ScoreAbstract
This study examines the association between ESG Score and two financial outcomes, namely financial performance and financial health, and the moderating role of ESG Controversies in both relationships. Prior studies report mixed findings and rarely examine the two outcomes within a single framework in Asian emerging markets. The sample consists of 1,168 firm-year observations from 146 non-financial firms in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and India over the period 2017–2024, obtained from LSEG Workspace. Financial performance is proxied by return on equity (ROE) and financial health by the Altman Z″-Score, for which a higher value indicates lower distress risk. The data are analysed using panel regression with firm fixed effects, year fixed effects, and standard errors clustered at the firm level, and all inference is two-tailed. ESG Score shows no significant association with either ROE (β = 0.00051; p = 0.984) or the Z″-Score (β = −0.01100; p = 0.457), so the first and second hypotheses are not supported. The ESG × Controversies interaction is negative and significant for ROE (β = −0.001316; p = 0.009) and positive and significant for the Z″-Score (β = 0.000899; p < 0.001), supporting the third and fourth hypotheses. Robustness tests that hold the estimator fixed and vary one element at a time show that the two results are not equally secure: the positive interaction on the Z″-Score survives the exclusion of ROA, country × year fixed effects, a one-year lag, random effects, and the restoration of firms removed by an extreme-value screen, whereas the negative interaction on ROE keeps its direction but loses significance without ROA and reverses when those firms are restored. Marginal-effects analysis locates the sign change at a controversy level of 8.5 for ROE and 20.3 for the Z″-Score. The contribution of this study lies in the evidence that a single moderating construct is associated with opposite interaction signs across two financial outcomes, which suggests that ESG Score and controversy information should be assessed jointly rather than separately. Because the design is observational, the findings should be interpreted as conditional associations rather than as causal effects.
References
Alareeni, B. A., & Hamdan, A. (2020). ESG impact on performance of US S&P 500-listed firms. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 20(7), 1409–1428. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2020-0258
Altman, E. I. (1968). Financial ratios, discriminant analysis and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy. The Journal of Finance, 23(4), 589–609. https://doi.org/10.2307/2978933
Altman, E. I. (2000). Predicting financial distress of companies: Revisiting the Z-score and ZETA models [Working paper]. Stern School of Business, New York University.
Boubaker, S., Cellier, A., Manita, R., & Saeed, A. (2020). Does corporate social responsibility reduce financial distress risk? Economic Modelling, 91, 835–851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2020.05.012
Broadstock, D. C., Chan, K., Cheng, L. T. W., & Wang, X. (2021). The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance Research Letters, 38, Article 101716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716
Buallay, A. (2019). Is sustainability reporting (ESG) associated with performance? Evidence from the European banking sector. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 30(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2017-0149
Chiaramonte, L., Dreassi, A., Girardone, C., & Piserà, S. (2022). Do ESG strategies enhance bank stability during financial turmoil? Evidence from Europe. The European Journal of Finance, 28(12), 1173–1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/1351847X.2021.1964556
Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310388419
Darsono, D., Ratmono, D., Tujori, A., & Clarisa, T. Y. (2025). The relationship between ESG, financial performance, and cost of debt: The role of independent assurance. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1), Article 2437137. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2437137
Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures – A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852
Deegan, C. M. (2019). Legitimacy theory: Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(8), 2307–2329. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3638
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992
Elamer, A. A., & Boulhaga, M. (2024). ESG controversies and corporate performance: The moderating effect of governance mechanisms and ESG practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(4), 3312–3327. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2749
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Jensen, M. C. (2001). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14(3), 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2001.tb00434.x
Landi, G. C., Iandolo, F., Renzi, A., & Rey, A. (2022). Embedding sustainability in risk management: The impact of environmental, social, and governance ratings on corporate financial risk. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(4), 1096–1107. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2256
Le, L. T. (2024). Impact of environmental, social and governance practices on financial performance: Evidence from listed companies in Southeast Asia. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), Article 2379568. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2379568
LSEG. (2024). Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG. London Stock Exchange Group. https://www.lseg.com/en/data-analytics/sustainable-finance/esg-scores
Lohmann, C., Möllenhoff, S., & Lehner, S. (2025). On the relationship between financial distress and ESG scores. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 32(5), 6377–6401. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.70033
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
Narula, R., Rao, P., Kumar, S., & Matta, R. (2024). ESG scores and firm performance: Evidence from emerging market. International Review of Economics & Finance, 89(Part A), 1170–1184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2023.08.024
Nirino, N., Santoro, G., Miglietta, N., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Corporate controversies and company’s financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of ESG practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, Article 120341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120341
Purnanandam, A. (2008). Financial distress and corporate risk management: Theory and evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(3), 706–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2007.04.003
Rahmadini, S., & Hartanti, D. (2025). ESG, financial performance, and the moderating role of ESG controversies. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 17(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v17i1.17301
Rao, A., Dagar, V., Sohag, K., Dagher, L., & Tanin, T. I. (2023). Good for the planet, good for the wallet: The ESG impact on financial performance in India. Finance Research Letters, 56, Article 104093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104093
Ross, S. A. (1977). The determination of financial structure: The incentive-signalling approach. The Bell Journal of Economics, 8(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003485
Shi, Y., Li, X., & Asal, M. (2023). Impact of sustainability on financial distress in the air transport industry: The moderating effect of Asia–Pacific. Financial Innovation, 9(1), Article 97. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-023-00506-1
Sihotang, D. G., & Siregar, S. V. (2025). The effect of ESG performance on firm value and financial distress with ESG controversies as a moderating variable. Petra International Journal of Business Studies, 8(2), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.9744/petraijbs.8.2.257-270
Song, Y., Li, R., Zhang, Z., & Sahut, J.-M. (2024). ESG performance and financial distress prediction of energy enterprises. Finance Research Letters, 65, Article 105546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105546
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D (2nd ed.). Alfabeta.
Yadav, A., & Asongu, S. A. (2025). The role of ESG performance in moderating the impact of financial distress on company value: Evidence of wavelet-enhanced quantile regression with Indian companies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(3), 2782–2798. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4118
Zheng, C., Khan, M. A. M., Rahman, M. M., Moudud-Ul-Huq, S., & Rahman, M. S. (2025). ESG performance and financial stability: A bibliometric and meta-analysis. SAGE Open, 15(4), Article 21582440251381772. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251381772
Zhou, F., Chen, H., Tang, S., Lee, C., & Lin, C.-T. (2025). Integrating ESG into financial distress models: The role of financial report quality and innovation in the Chinese market. International Review of Economics & Finance, 101, Article 104135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104135
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Stefanus Dimas R. Saputro, Enrique Griffin Imanuel Marbun, Elfriana Nely Royana Situmorang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish their manuscripts in this journal agree to the following conditions:
- The copyright on each article belongs to the author(s).
- The author acknowledges that the Dinasti International Journal of Economics, Finance & Accounting (DIJEFA) has the right to be the first to publish with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors can submit articles separately, arrange for the non-exclusive distribution of manuscripts that have been published in this journal into other versions (e.g., sent to the author's institutional repository, publication into books, etc.), by acknowledging that the manuscript has been published for the first time in the Dinasti International Journal of Economics, Finance & Accounting (DIJEFA).
