Article Sidebar

Download
Download PDF

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to predict the bankruptcy potential of Plantation Sub-Sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) during the critical downturn cycle of 2017-2019. This period serves as a stress-test window following the commodity boom. Employing a descriptive quantitative approach, the research analyzes secondary data from 10 companies selected through purposive sampling. The primary analytical tool is the Modified Altman Z-Score model. The results indicate severe financial distress within the sector due to price volatility and aggressive downstreaming policies. Specifically, out of the 10 sampled companies, only 1 company was classified as "Healthy" (Z > 2.60), 1 company was identified as "Vulnerable" or in the grey area (1.10 < Z < 2.60), and 8 companies were predicted to be "Bankrupt" (Z < 1.10). These empirical findings suggest a critical vulnerability in the plantation sector, highlighting an urgent need for financial restructuring and strategic management improvements to navigate post-boom challenges and ensure long-term sustainability.


 


Keywords: Bankruptcy Prediction, Modified Altman Z-Score, Plantation Sub-Sector, Financial Distress.  

Keywords

Bankruptcy Prediction Modified Altman Z-Score Plantation Sub-Sector Financial Distress

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Polii, H. R. L., Kainde, S. J., & Pangemanan, R. R. (2026). Financial Stress-Test of the Palm Oil Industry: Bankruptcy Prediction Using the Modified Altman Z-Score During the Downturn Phase. Economics and Digital Business Review, 7(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.37531/ecotal.v7i1.3605
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. 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/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00843.x
  2. Altman, E. I. (2000). Predicting financial distress of companies: revisiting the Z-Score and ZETA® Models. New York: Stern School of Business, New York University.
  3. Arikunto, S. (2013). Prosedur penelitian: suatu pendekatan praktik (Edisi revisi). Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
  4. Batubara, R. H. (2019). Analisis perlakuan akuntansi aset biologis berdasarkan Pernyataan Standar Akuntansi Keuangan (PSAK) No. 69 tentang agrikultur pada PT. Perkebunan Nusantara III Medan. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Kontemporer (JAKK), 2(2), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.30596/jakk.v2i2.4762
  5. Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. F. (2019). Fundamentals of financial management (15th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  6. Bursa Efek Indonesia. (2019). Laporan keuangan tahunan perusahaan sub-sektor perkebunan periode 2017-2019. Diakses dari www.idx.co.id.
  7. CNN Indonesia. (2018, November 1). Harga CPO anjlok, pemerintah kaji ulang pungutan sawit. CNN Indonesia. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/ekonomi/20181101145435-532-343235/harga-cpo-anjlok-pemerintah-kaji-ulang-pungutan-sawit
  8. Gabungan Pengusaha Kelapa Sawit Indonesia (GAPKI). (2023). Refleksi industri sawit dan prospek ekonomi sawit. Jakarta: GAPKI.
  9. Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. (2018). Laporan kinerja badan usaha milik negara (bumn) sektor pertanian. Jakarta: Kemenkeu.
  10. Myers, S. C. (2001). Capital structure. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(2), 81–102.
  11. Natsir, K., Bangun, N. ., & Waani, A. M. (2023). Analisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi likuiditas pasar saham. jurnal ekonomi, 28(2), 155–176. https://doi.org/10.24912/je.v28i2.1414
  12. Platt, H. D., & Platt, M. B. (2002). Predicting corporate financial distress: reflections on choice-based sample bias. Journal of Economics and Finance, 26(2), 184-199. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02755985
  13. Puspitasari, W., Syaukat, Y., & Irawan, T. (2019). The influence of macroeconomic factors on agricultural sector stock price in indonesia stock exchange. International Journal of Research and Review, 6(8), 332–339.
  14. Ryandiansyah, Nabil Rizky (2019) "Structural change, productivity, and the shift to services: the case of Indonesia," Economics and Finance in Indonesia: Vol. 64: No. 2. https://doi.org/10.47291/efi.v64i2.593
  15. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: a skill-building approach (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  16. Saputra, D., & Nur Daluh Arisyah, F. (2024). Analisis perbandingan ketepatan prediksi kebangkrutan antara altman dan model spring gate di perusahaan yang delisting di BEI. Jurnal GeoEkonomi, 15(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.36277/geoekonomi.v15i1.301
  17. Sari, D. M., & Mislinawati, M. (2024). Navigating financial distress: Altman Z-Score predictive power on stock performance. Jurnal Sains Riset, 14(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.47647/jsr.v14i1.2086
  18. Sibarani, R. Y., Irawati, N., & Muda, I. (2021). Analysis of financial ratio to predict financial distress in the sub sector of plantation company on indonesia stock exchange period 2010–2018. International Journal of Research and Review, 8(1), 36–46
  19. Spence, M. (1973). Job Market Signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010
  20. Sugiyono. (2016). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
  21. Supitriyani, S., Astuti, A., & Azwar, K. (2024). The implementation of springate, altman, grover and zmijewski models in measuring financial distress. International Journal Of Trends In Accounting Research, 3(1), 001-008. https://doi.org/10.54951/ijtar.v3i1.169
  22. Wijayanti, M. O., & Ratih, S. (2022). Prediksi financial distress model Altman Z″-Score (studi pada perusahaan pelayaran yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia periode 2019–2021). Prosiding Seminar Nasional Ilmu Terapan (SNITER), 6(1), 1–8.
  23. Wahyuni, S. F., & Rubiyah, R. (2021). Analisis financial distress menggunakan metode Altman Z-Score, Springate, Zmijewski dan Grover pada perusahaan sektor perkebunan. Maneggio: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Manajemen, 4(1), 62–75. https://doi.org/10.30596/maneggio.v4i1.6714