Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,022

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights

Deng, Hepu, Yeh, Chung-Hsing, Willis, Robert J.·2000·Computers & Operations Research

Abstract

Abstract Simultaneous consideration of multiple financial ratios is required to adequately evaluate and rank the relative performance of competing companies. This paper formulates the inter-company comparison process as a multi-criteria analysis model, and presents an effective approach by modifying TOPSIS for solving the problem. The modified TOPSIS approach can identify the relevance of the financial ratios to the evaluation result, and indicate the performance difference between companies on each financial ratio. To ensure that the evaluation result is not affected by the inter-dependence of the financial ratios, objective weights are used. As a result, the comparison process is conducted on a commonly accepted basis and is independent of subjective preferences of various stakeholders. An empirical study of a real case in China is conducted to illustrate how the approach is used for the inter-company comparison problem. The result shows that the approach can reflect the decision information emitted by the financial ratios used. The comparison of objective weighting methods suggests that, with the modified TOPSIS approach, the entropy measure compares favourably with other methods for the case study conducted. Scope and purpose The performance evaluation and ranking of modern enterprises is a complex process, in which multiple financial ratios are required to be considered simultaneously. The purpose of this paper is to apply the framework of multi-criteria analysis to the inter-company comparison problem. An effective approach based on the concept used by the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) is developed to rank competing companies in terms of their overall performance on multiple financial ratios. The approach modifies the TOPSIS method by using weighted Euclidean distances to ensure a meaningful interpretation of the evaluation result. The use of objective weights for financial ratios based on Shannon's entropy concept reflects the context-dependent concept of informational importance. This ensures that the evaluation result is not affected by the inter-dependency of criteria and inconsistency of subjective weights. This approach is particularly applicable for situations where reliable subjective weights cannot be obtained. With its simplicity in both concept and computation, the approach can readily be incorporated into a computer-based system.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0305-0548(99)00069-6

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,022

Metadata

Authors
Deng, H., Yeh, C.-H., & Willis, R. J.
Venue
Computers & Operations Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-09
Volume
27
Issue
10
Pages
963-973
ISSN
0305-0548 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090818178
Cited by
1,022
References
0
FWCI
2.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0305-0548(99)00069-6
The paper
Deng, H., Yeh, C.-H., & Willis, R. J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0305-0548(99)00069-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.