Comparing Aras and Copras Methods to Evaluate Firms By Using Fundamental Analysis
Keywords:ARAS, COPRAS, Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods, Fundamental Analysis
Decision making process is a though process not only for the management decisions but also for daily decisions. Multicriteria decision making methods were developed to make this process easier. There are many multicriteria decision making methods used in many areas at the present. In this study two of these methods were used, namely ARAS (Additive Ratio Assessment) and COPRAS (Complex Proportional Assessment), for fundamental analysis in investment decisions. Aim of this study is to implement and compare methods on fundamental analysis of firms to make an investment decision. In the study financial ratios of 20 firms from 5 different sectors and 4 different countries, sectoral data and country indicators were used. According to these data, ARAS and COPRAS methods were implemented and although exactly same results were not found, approximately similar results were obtained. The best and the worst companies were same for both methods, even though other rankings differed slightly. Also, same sector selected as best for both methods to invest in.
Balezentiene, L., & Kusta, A. (2012). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in grassland ecosystems of the central Lithuania: multi-criteria evaluation on a basis of the ARAS method. The Scientific World Journal, 2012.
Baležentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2017). Multi-criteria ranking of energy generation scenarios with Monte Carlo simulation. Applied energy, 185, 862-871.
Chatterjee, K., Kar, S. (2018). Supplier selection in Telecom supply chain management: a Fuzzy-Rasch based COPRAS-G method. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), 765-791.
Chatterjee, P., & Chakraborty, S. (2013). Gear material selection using complex proportional assessment and additive ratio assessment-based approaches: a comparative study. International Journal of Materials Science and Engineering, 1(2), 104-111.
Chatterjee, P., Athawale, V. M., & Chakraborty, S. (2011). Materials selection using complex proportional assessment and evaluation of mixed data methods. Materials & Design, 32(2), 851-860.
Dahooie, J. H., Zavadskas, E. K., Abolhasani, M., Vanaki, A., & Turskis, Z. (2018). A Novel Approach for Evaluation of Projects Using an Interval-Valued Fuzzy Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method: A Case Study of Oil and Gas Well Drilling Projects. Symmetry, 10(2), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10020045
Darji, V. P., & Rao, R. V. (2014). Intelligent multi criteria decision making methods for material selection in sugar industry. Procedia Materials Science, 5, 2585-2594.
Ecer, F. (2018). An integrated Fuzzy AHP and ARAS model to evaluate mobile banking services. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), 670-695.
Kaklauskas, A., Tupenaite, L., Kanapeckiene, L., & Naimaviciene, J. (2013). Knowledge-based model for standard housing renovation. Procedia Engineering, 57, 497-503.
Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Naimavicienė, J., Krutinis, M., Plakys, V., & Venskus, D. (2010). Model for a complex analysis of intelligent built environment. Automation in construction, 19(3), 326-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.12.006
Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Raslanas, S., Ginevicius, R., Komka, A., & Malinauskas, P. (2006). Selection of low-e windows in retrofit of public buildings by applying multiple criteria method COPRAS: A Lithuanian case. Energy and buildings, 38(5), 454-462.
Kaplanoğlu, E. (2018). Aras ve Copras Yöntemleriyle Nakit Akışına Dayalı Performans Ölçümü: Bist Kimya, Petrol, Kauçuk ve Plastik Ürünler Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamalari Dergisi (MUVU)/Journal of Accounting & Taxation Studies (JATS), 11(2). https://doi.org/10.29067/muvu.340614
Keršulienė, V., & Turskis, Z. (2014). An integrated multi-criteria group decision making process: selection of the chief accountant. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 897-904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.935
Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Lazauskas, M. (2013). Assessment of priority options for preservation of historic city centre buildings using MCDM (ARAS). Procedia Engineering, 57, 657-661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.083
Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Lazauskas, M. (2014). Assessment of priority alternatives for preservation of historic buildings using model based on ARAS and AHP methods. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 14(2), 287-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2013.10.007
Maharaja, T., & Saravanakumar, M. (2016). Fundamental Analysis for Investment Decisions on Five Major Banks. Purushartha: A Journal of Management Ethics and Spirituality, 7(2).
Maity, S. R., Chatterjee, P., & Chakraborty, S. (2012). Cutting tool material selection using grey complex proportional assessment method. Materials & Design (1980-2015), 36, 372-378.
Medineckiene, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Björk, F., & Turskis, Z. (2015). Multi-criteria decision-making system for sustainable building assessment/certification. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 15(1), 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2014.09.001
Ömürbek, V., Aksoy, E., & Akçakanat, Ö. (2017). Bankaların Sürdürülebilirlik Performanslarinin ARAS, MOOSRA ve COPRAS Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi. Visionary E-Journal/Vizyoner Dergisi, 8(19). https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.329346
Özdağoğlu, A. (2013). İmalat işletmeleri için eksantrik pres alternatiflerinin COPRAS yöntemi ile karşılaştırılması. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(8).
Peng, X., Dai, J. (2017). Hesitant fuzzy soft decision making methods based on WASPAS, MABAC and COPRAS with combined weights. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 33(2), 1313-1325. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-17124
Shariati, S., Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Salsani, A., & Tamosaitiene, J. (2014). Proposing a new model for waste dump site selection: Case study of Ayerma Phosphate Mine. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 25(4), 410-419. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.25.4.6262
Sliogeriene, J., Turskis, Z., & Streimikiene, D. (2013). Analysis and choice of energy generation technologies: The multiple criteria assessment on the case study of Lithuania. Energy Procedia, 32, 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2013.05.003
Stanujkić, D., Đorđević, B., & Đorđević, M. (2013). Comparative analysis of some prominent MCDM methods: A case of ranking Serbian banks. Serbian Journal of Management, 8(2), 213-241. https://doi.org/10.5937/sjm8-3774
Štreimikienė, D., & Baležentis, A. (2013). Integrated sustainability index: the case study of Lithuania. Intellectual Economics, 7(3), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.13165/IE-13-7-3-02
Štreimikienė, D., Šliogerienė, J., & Turskis, Z. (2016). Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation technologies in Lithuania. Renewable Energy, 85, 148-156.
Thomsett, M. C. (1998). Mastering fundamental analysis. Dearborn Trade Publishing.
Uyar, A. (2001). Temel Analiz, Bilanço Okuma Teknikleri. Beta Yayınları.
Yıldırım, B. F. (2015). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Problemlerinde ARAS Yöntemi. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(9), 285-296.
Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 159-172. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.10
Zavadskas, E. K., Kaklauskas, A., & Sarka, V. (1994). The new method of multicriteria complex proportional assessment of projects. The technological and economic development of the economy, 1(3), 131-139.
Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Bagočius, V. (2015). Multi-criteria selection of a deep-water port in the Eastern Baltic Sea. Applied Soft Computing, 26, 180-192.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 International Journal of Social, Political and Economic Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.