O presente estudo apresenta caráter descritivo e visa analisar o índice de eficiência e a evolução das receitas de prestação de serviços das cooperativas de crédito em comparação às instituições bancárias privadas e públicas. Segundo dados do Banco Central do Brasil, a relação PIB/crédito situou-se em 55,5% no ano de 2012, entretanto, ainda não se compara a países desenvolvidos, que atinge patamares acima de 100%. A amostra consiste nas maiores instituições bancárias e cooperativistas selecionadas de acordo com o critério "ativo total", totalizando uma média de 69,31% para as instituições bancárias e 61,33% para as cooperativas de crédito. Para análise das variáveis foram empregados índices de eficiência, análise vertical e horizontal das receitas de prestação de serviço no período entre 2002 e 2012. O índice de eficiência é um importante indicador, pois relaciona os insumos aplicados na produção e os produtos obtidos nesse processo. A análise das rendas com prestação de serviços é significativa, pois tem se mostrado cada vez mais relevante no desempenho financeiro das instituições financeiras. Os resultados obtidos demonstraram que os índices de eficiência dos bancos privados apresentaram os maiores níveis entre os segmentos analisados, seguidos pelos bancos públicos e, por fim, pelas cooperativas de crédito. A predominância dos bancos privados não foi abalada nos anos de crise, ao contrário dos bancos públicos, que foram ultrapassados pelo segmento cooperativista de crédito nos anos de 2008-2009 e 2012. Diante das contas que formam o índice, constatou-se que, até 2006, o comprometimento do RBIF com as despesas estruturais nas cooperativas foi semelhante ao verificado nos bancos públicos, porém maior do que o dos bancos privados. Tal comportamento se diferenciou entre os anos de 2007-2010 e 2012, quando esse indicador apresentou queda significativa no segmento cooperativista. Por fim, nas evoluções horizontal e vertical verificou-se que, apesar do crescimento significativo registrado pelas cooperativas de crédito e da convergência no grau de participação entre os segmentos, a participação das receitas de prestação de serviço ainda é maior no segmento bancário do que no cooperativista de crédito. Esse fato pode representar um elemento de potencialidade a ser explorado pelas cooperativas na busca pela eficiência.

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors that may explain the attribution of credit ratings to firms, focusing especially on the impact of derivatives. The gap explored by this research lies in the novelty of analyzing how rating agencies perceive the effects caused by information related to derivatives use by Brazilian publicly-traded companies. In addition, this study shifts the previous findings from stock analysts to rating agencies, reinforcing the discussion about the complexity of derivatives in the credit risk assessment process. This research topic is currently of interest due to the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 (Accounting Pronouncements Committee - CPC - 48), which came into effect in January of 2018. Based on these rules, the main novelty presented in this article was its verification of the effect of the derivatives used by companies in order to hedge their credit ratings, thus helping to fill the empirical gap that exists in the literature from the area. The results found challenge the theory that the use of hedge derivatives is viewed positively by investors. However, although no significant statistical impact was found on the ratings of companies that use derivatives, it was observed that the companies that use derivatives and have the highest notional values were those that received the best ratings from Moody’s. With this we broadened the debate about the complexity of the information linked to derivatives use. In the study, 2,090 ratings attributed to non-financial companies with stocks traded on the Brasil, Bolsa, Balcão [B]³ exchange were examined between 2010 and 2016 by using panel data analysis, which lends robustness to the analysis and findings. Contrary to the central hypothesis of this research, the results presented here show that, in Brazil, companies that use derivative financial instruments for hedging do not receive the best credit ratings from rating agencies. One of the main contributions of this study is the evidence that Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s were unable to consistently incorporate information related to derivatives use, thus broadening the discussion about the complexity of these financial instruments.

Purpose: This study aims to analyze the relationship between the abnormal return and R&D expenses in Brazilian public firms. Originality/value: The determinants of firms' abnormal return provide information relevant to investors' decision-making. In this context, we verified whether the innovation, measured by R&D expenses, could be a key factor for the abnormal returns in Brazilian firms. Design/methodology/approach: We analyzed Brazilian public firms, from 2009 to 2016, by panel data regressions, in a sample composed by 1,597 firm-year observations. We collected information about R&D expenses in the footnotes. When a firm only mentioned about R&D expenses but did not disclose spent value in the Income Statement, we consider that the firm did not invest in the period and we attribute zero as a value. We highlighted that few firms mentioned R&D expenses in their footnotes and/or declared that they invested in R&D, only 44 firms in all sample, pointing the importance of better disclosure practices of these investments. Findings: The results demonstrate a negative and statistically significant relationship between innovation and the abnormal return. That is, current R&D expenses lead to a lower current abnormal return. It could be linked with the fact that R&D expenses tend to produce returns just in longer periods, demanding more time to recover these investments, due to their complex characteristics related to accounting measurement of R&D expenses. Consequently, an abnormal return could be perceived only in subsequent periods.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to verify the financing decisions by Brazilian companies in the financial crises of 2002, 2008 and 2015, and to identify the impacts of these crises, as well as the influence of the funding sources - banking, subsidized sources and capital markets - on the leverage and maturity of companies' debts in these periods. Originality/value: Crises establish opportunities for the study of determining factors and their impacts on companies. There is no empirical evidence on the impacts of crises on the capital structure of Brazilian companies taking into account the comparison between the crises of 2002, 2008 and 2015, which motivated the present study. Design/methodology/approach: We performed descriptive analyzes and estimated regressions by panel data. Findings: The results showed a statistically positive relationship between financial crises and corporate leverage, as well as short and long-term debt. With regard to leverage, banking resources, resources from capital and subsidized markets showed a statistically positive relationship with the level of leverage of companies only in the 2008 crisis. Considering the maturity of debts, the 2002 crisis was an important determinant for companies' short-term debt decisions, in view of the predominant participation of banking resources at that time. Financing sources were important in determining companies' long-term indebtedness in the 2008 crisis.

This study examines how cumulative abnormal returns (CARs, the sum of abnormal returns over a period) and volatility behave around Bitcoin halving events, focusing on whether these patterns have evolved as the cryptocurrency market matures. Halvings are periodic events defined by Bitcoin’s algorithm, during which the reward—in the form of newly issued bitcoins—paid to miners for validating network transactions is reduced, impacting miners’ profitability and potentially influencing the asset’s price due to a decreased supply. To carry out the analysis, we collected data on returns and risk for the 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2024 halving events and compared abnormal returns before and around the event, focusing on the 2020 and 2024 halvings. The results reveal significant shifts in Bitcoin’s price behavior within the event window, with an increased occurrence of abnormal returns in 2020 and 2024, alongside variations in average return, volatility, and maximum drawdown across all events. These findings suggest that Bitcoin’s returns and volatility during halvings are decreasing as the cryptocurrency market becomes more regulated and attracts greater participation from institutional investors and governments.