The approach of evaluating the final scores of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods according to the strength of association with real-life rankings is interesting for comparing MCDM methods. This approach has recently been applied mostly to financial data. In these studies, where it is emphasized that some methods show more stable success, it would be useful to see the results that will emerge by testing the approach on different data structures more comprehensively. Moreover, not only the final MCDM results but also the performance of normalization techniques and data types (fuzzy or crisp), which are components of MCDM, can be compared using the same approach. These components also have the potential to affect MCDM results directly. In this direction, in our study, the economic performances of G-20 (Group of 20) countries, which have different data structures, were calculated over ten different periodic decision matrices. Ten different crisp-based MCDM methods (COPRAS, CODAS, MOORA, TOPSIS, MABAC, VIKOR (S, R, Q), FUCA, and ELECTRE III) with different capabilities were used to better visualize the big picture. The relationships between two different real-life reference anchors and MCDM methods were used as a basis for comparison. The CODAS method develops a high correlation with both anchors in most periods. The most appropriate normalization technique for CODAS was identified using these two anchors. Interestingly, the maximum normalization technique was the most successful among the alternatives (max, min–max, vector, sum, and alternative ranking-based). Moreover, we compared the two main data types by comparing the correlation results of crisp-based and fuzzy-based CODAS. The results were very consistent, and the “Maximum normalization-based fuzzy integrated CODAS procedure” was proposed to decision-makers to measure the economic performance of the countries.

A major difficulty in comparing and even choosing MCDM methods is the uncertainty of information about the consistent and unique characteristics of the results produced. The objective information content of the final scores produced by MCDM methods and their relevance to real life can give us an important idea about them. In this study, first of all, seven MCDM methods with different methodologies were applied to evaluate companies’ financial performance. Then, the obtained MCDM scores were compared using two different objective verification mechanisms. The first validation criterion is the relationship of a MCDM method to real-life rankings (share price). The second criterion is the standard deviation (SD) technique used to discover the objective information content of MCDM final scores. According to the results of this study, PROMETHEE and FUCA definitely outperform other methods in terms of both SD values and strength of correlation with reference real-life rankings. Also, FUCA is methodologically simpler than other methods. However, it produced nearly identical results as the sophisticated PROMETHEE method.

Financial performance research with multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods, is a common subject of study not only for researchers in the finance literature but also in the applied sciences. Financial performance manifests itself in an internal universe that a firm can directly control, while the share return of the same firm is shaped synchronically in an external universe that cannot be controlled directly. On the other hand, preferring the most suitable MCDM and weighting method to use in measuring financial performance is often regarded as a source of uncertainty. In this study, the share price is used as an external proxy and a tool for comparing MCDM methods, completely different from the previously proposed approaches based on the superiority of internal features. This study was conducted on 131 manufacturing companies in Borsa Istanbul, covering entire 20-quarter period between 2014 and 2018. The experimental findings of the study provide valid solutions for the MCDM and weighting selection problem, that can be proposed as a practical and indirect solution. The results show that preference ranking organization method for enrichment of evaluations (PROMETHEE) method used with hybrid weighting technique produced by far the best performance rankings in 19 out of 20 quarterly periods when compared to the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) and weighted sum approach (WSA).

Sensitivity analyses are frequently performed to determine the robustness of MCDM methods, of which there are more than 200 types. In the past, rankings were compared to each other rather than to an external ranking. Thus, the direction and meaning of sensitivity can become unclear and complex. In addition, sensitivity analysis is usually performed only based on weight coefficients, but the effect of the normalization type is neglected. In this study, the most appropriate data conversion technique was investigated through an innovative sensitivity procedure to select the e-Small Van, which is an environmentally friendly logistics and transportation vehicle. Seven different normalization types based on the PROBID method (and two additional alternative MCDM methods) were used as parameters, resulting in 105 different MCDM rankings. According to the findings, MCDM rankings, which have low sensitivity, were also the performing methods that produced the highest correlation with price. What is striking is that careless choice of normalization type can be so effective as to manipulate the results. Although the most appropriate technique may vary depending on the data type, the fixed gold standard we recommend offers a flexible solution for all applications. A suitable data converter will result in the choice of a reliable electric vehicle.

This study examines the Logistics Performance Index (LPI) rankings developed by the World Bank from a methodological perspective and proposes an alternative decision support framework. LPI serves as an interactive tool that helps countries identify challenges, innovative solutions, and opportunities in their trade and logistics sectors. In this study, the efficiency of logistics operations in 118 countries was evaluated using an integrated multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model objectively weighted by the Entropy method. Countries were ranked using the MCRAT, SAW, TOPSIS, and FUCA methods. According to the findings, large datasets provide more robust insights for sensitivity analyses, and wider weighting coefficient combinations make the data more meaningful. In addition, it is suggested to use low-compensation methods instead of classical additive methods for LPI. Unlike other studies in literature, this research applied an innovative sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of the model and comprehensively examined the effects of weighting techniques based on over 2500 different MCDM results. The findings suggest that the FUCA method should be recommended to decision-makers for calculating LPI rankings due to its simplicity, practicality, low compensatory power, and low sensitivity. This study offers methodological improvements when evaluating logistics performance and provides significant contributions to decision-making processes. The findings are expected to provide a valuable resource for policymakers and businesses in understanding a country’s position in global competition, as well as serving as a reference for researchers evaluating the logistics performance of countries.