The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore

Studies Management and Finance Economics, of Journal 0504-2644 (online): ISSN 0490,-2644 (print): ISSN 5202 November 11 Issue 80 Volume 8.317 Factor: Impact ,34-i11-10.47191/jefms/v8 DOI: Article 9745-7451 No: Page JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7451 The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore Cindy Dwi Andini Putri1, Isni Andriana2, Muizzuddin3 1,2,3Department of Management, Faculty of Economics, Sriwijaya University, Palembang, Indonesia ABSTRACT: This study aims to examine the variation in the influence of the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS), Intellectual Capital (IC), and Cash Holding (CH) on firm value within the food and beverage sub-sector across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. The research employs quantitative secondary data and utilized a sample of 122 companies selected through purposive sampling. The analytical methods include panel data regression and a Test for the Equality of Regression Coefficients (or coefficient comparison test). The findings reveal a heterogeneous influence of the variables on firm value across the three nations. Specifically, IOS significantly affects firm value in Indonesian and Singaporean companies, while this relationship is absent in Malaysia. Conversely, IC did not significantly affect firm value in any of the three observed countries. The CH variable, notably, consistently and significantly impacts firm value across all three countries. Furthermore, subsequent difference tests showed that the cross-country impact of both IOS and IC on firm value is statistically similar, but the influence of CH on firm value differs significantly among the three nations. KEYWORDS: Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital, Cash Holding, Firm Value INTRODUCTION The food and beverage (F&B) sub-sector is characterized by sustained growth and expansion, playing a crucial role in the global and regional economies, including in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Indonesia, leveraging its large population, possesses massive domestic market potential and high consumption growth. Furthermore, the F&B sub-sector in Indonesia is a major economic engine, contributing substantially to government revenue (Ahmad et al., 2022). Conversely, Malaysia and Singapore represent more mature markets and serve as regional logistics hubs, exhibiting rapid adoption of lifestyle trends and innovations. Malaysia's F&B manufacturing industry is a rapidly growing component with a substantial export market, positioning it as one of the world's top two exporters of oils and fats, particularly palm oil-based products (Yunus et al., 2024). Similarly, Singapore, being one of the wealthiest countries globally with a very high GDP per capita, is driven by a highly developed and open market-based economy that prioritizes the trade sector and relies heavily on export and import activities (Ahmad et al., 2022). Firm value serves as a key reflection of a company's existence and longevity. A stable or increasing value trajectory tends to attract investors who seek to maximize their personal wealth. High firm valuation, in turn, signifies an enhancement in the company's reputation, quality, and overall performance (Tabe et al., 2022). Furthermore, prioritizing the maximization of firm value not only benefits investors through the potential for increased returns but also strengthens the company's standing within its industry and society. Investors are more inclined to commit capital to firms that demonstrate a proven ability to maximize value, as this signals superior management quality and robustness in a competitive market (Hoang et al., 2024). Sustained growth in firm value can also attract a wider pool of investors, which is crucial for securing greater access to resources and funding necessary for future growth and expansion (Ibrahim & Isiaka, 2020). Firm value is determined by various internal and external factors, including the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS), Intellectual Capital, and Cash Holding. The Investment Opportunity Set itself is an essential determinant of corporate value, as it shapes the perceptions of managers, owners, investors, and creditors (Serna, 2023). An attractive IOS typically reflects the potential for higher future returns, leading investors to seek out firms that offer strong investment growth prospects (Al-Gamrh et al., 2020). The scope of a firm's IOS is defined by the future expenditures management has planned, which are viewed as current investment The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7452 choices expected to generate greater returns (Ogunsola, 2024). Furthermore, a company’s IOS is often signaled through its profit growth. Robust profit growth conveys a positive signal to the market and stakeholders, particularly investors (Christianty & Latuconsina, 2023). This positive signaling is crucial; it influences investor reactions, ultimately boosting confidence and facilitating easier access to external financing (such as equity or debt issuance) to fund the opportunities within the IOS (Naveed et al., 2020). Crucially, strong profit growth strengthens a company's ability to capitalize on its existing IOS and generate new opportunities, thereby impacting the firm's future value (Dang et al., 2018). Intellectual Capital (IC) is intrinsically linked to organizational success. Enhancing IC management efficiency is recognized as the most strategic means to ensure a company's sustainable and competitive operational functions. Competitive advantages stemming from IC, such as specialized employee knowledge and skills, are key factors that attract investors. Indeed, the strong link between increasing firm value and IC performance demonstrates that effective IC management is crucial for value maximization (Opazo & Gonzalez, 2021). Cash Holding (CH) is also vital; companies must accurately estimate and maintain appropriate levels of cash reserves to meet daily operational needs without compromising liquidity, which ultimately impacts firm value (Feng et al., 2022). CH is typically measured by the average cash and cash equivalents a company holds. These holdings represent the liquid assets intentionally maintained for various strategic purposes, including investment, dividend payouts, or as precautionary reserves against unforeseen circumstances (Jabbouri & Almustafa, 2021). A firm that maintains adequate cash holdings signals management's competence in cash flow management and its commitment to financial stability, thereby increasing its appeal to investors and ultimately boosting its value (Yudhyani et al., 2022). Prior studies yield contradictory results regarding the influence of the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS), Intellectual Capital (IC), and Cash Holding (CH) on firm value. Regarding the IOS, several studies—including those by Adam et al. (2020), Chabachib et al. (2020),(Tabe et al., 2022),(Tangngisalu et al., 2023), and Afridi et al. (2022) (which examined banking companies on the Pakistan Stock Exchange)—found that IOS has a positive effect on firm value. This contrasts with the findings of Al-Gamrh et al., (2020) and Bon & Hartoko (2022), which suggest that IOS does not affect firm value. Similarly, the literature on Intellectual Capital (IC) is mixed. Research on international companies adopting integrated reporting at the IIRC (Salvi et al., 2020) demonstrated a significant positive relationship between IC and firm value. These findings align with those from Nguyen & Doan (2020) on Vietnamese manufacturing firms, Ni et al. (2020) on the Taiwan Stock Exchange, Necib et al. (2025) on the London Stock Exchange, Ousama et al. (2020) on the Qatar Stock Exchange (QSE), Hussaini et al. (2025) on Nigerian companies, and Schiuma et al. (2024), all of which indicated a positive influence of IC on firm value. However, these results are contradicted by studies conducted by (Castro et al., 2021),(Bala et al., 2024), and (Inrico et al., 2023), which conclude that IC does not influence firm value. Finally, studies focusing on Cash Holding (CH) have also provided varied outcomes. Research conducted by (Jaradat et al., 2021) (on Jordanian manufacturing firms listed on the Amman Stock Exchange (ASE)), (Feng et al., 2022) and (Shubita, 2020) (on Chinese companies), (Hamad et al., 2021) (on ASE companies), and (Abdullah, 2025) (on Saudi companies) all established a positive effect of CH on firm value. Conversely, (Irawan et al., 2022), and (Afifa et al., 2021), studying Jordanian firms, found that cash holdings have no effect on firm value. The research problem is: Does the influence of the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS), Intellectual Capital (IC), and Cash Holding (CH) on firm value differ significantly across the food and beverage sub-sector in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore? The objective is to analyze the influence of IOS, IC, and CH on firm value, and to test for significant differences in this influence across the food and beverage sub-sector in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. LITERATURE REVIEW Company Values Firm value represents the investors' perception of a company's financial condition, and this perception is directly correlated with its share price (Bardos et al., 2020). A primary method for measuring firm value is using the Tobin's Q ratio, which was developed by James Tobin and is widely considered to provide superior information. Companies are required to implement policies aimed at increasing their value so that investors, shareholders, creditors, and other stakeholders are assured of the firm's strong performance. The value of assets, stock prices, or projected future cash flows serve as sources (or proxies) of a company's value (Pangestuti et al., 2022). The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7453 Investment Opportunity Set Tabe et al. (2022) state that the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS) comprises the various assets a company currently possesses alongside the investment options it may consider for future deployment. Each existing asset functions as a foundation for evaluating and planning diverse investment opportunities that can be implemented later. By effectively leveraging current assets and exploring various investment avenues, a company can enhance its growth potential and overall value. Through appropriate investment selection and management, a firm holds the potential to strengthen its market position and sustain long-term, superior periodic development. Intellectual Capital Intellectual Capital (IC) is defined as an intangible asset owned by a company, encompassing the knowledge and information that can contribute to its future success (Soewarno & Ramadhan, 2020). This intangible asset holds significant potential to provide a sustainable competitive advantage. IC comprises the company's collective knowledge, expertise, and innovation, along with its strong relationships with suppliers, customers, and business partners. Cash Holding Cash holdings represent the amount of readily available cash a company maintains to cover its daily operational needs. Managers utilize these highly liquid reserves to conduct various business activities, ensuring the firm has sufficient funds to meet short-term obligations and providing financial flexibility in the face of market uncertainty. In this study, cash holdings are quantified as the ratio of cash and cash equivalents to total assets (Houqe et al., 2023). Research Conceptual Framework Based on the theoretical and empirical literature reviewed, the conceptual framework illustrating the relationship among the variables is presented below: Figure 1. Research Conceptual Framework Hypothesis The Investment Opportunity Set (IOS) provides guidance as a benchmark, where the firm's primary objective—maximizing its value—is dependent on its capital expenditure (Afridi et al., 2022). Firms that optimally manage their resources in operational activities can enhance their investment opportunities, which is often reflected by rising stock market prices. A company's decision to capitalize on existing opportunities is crucial, as it directly impacts firm value (Bon & Hartoko, 2022). Research by (Adam et al., 2020) and (Tabe et al., 2022) established that a decrease in the IOS level results in a decline in firm value; conversely, an increase in the IOS is expected to boost value. Firms that consistently engage in heavy investment tend to demonstrate superior capital management. Such firms typically experience continuous growth in assets over time or accumulate significant wealth, which subsequently exerts a positive impact on firm value (Chabachib et al., 2020). H1 : Investment opportunity set influence on company value Based on Signaling Theory, intellectual capital (IC) is viewed as crucial information used by firms to signal their innovation capacity, competitive advantage, and prospects for business sustainability. The disclosure of IC assures investors that a company is capable of creating sustainable added value, thereby reinforcing market confidence and boosting firm value. Therefore, IC functions as a The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7454 signal that effectively reduces information asymmetry between management and investors, helping firms achieve more optimal valuations (Xu & Liu, 2020). To expand their business, companies must intensify efforts in developing intellectual capital (Ni et al., 2020). IC is essential for firms to create wealth, maximize value, and secure a competitive advantage (Ousama et al., 2020). Consequently, companies aiming to increase their corporate value must prioritize intellectual capital. Strong IC is a critical element that fosters business competitiveness, which is fundamental to increasing firm value (Salvi et al., 2020;,Hussaini et al., 2025). H2 : Intellectual capital influence on company value From a Signaling Theory perspective, cash holdings are regarded as a crucial indicator that firms utilize to communicate their financial condition to external stakeholders, particularly investors. Cash, being the most liquid asset, functions not only as an operational tool supporting daily business activities but also as a signal of management's capability to maintain financial stability. A firm's disclosure of its cash holdings can be interpreted as a signal of its readiness to confront uncertainty, its capacity to fund investment opportunities, and its short-term liquidity resilience. However, excessive cash holdings can simultaneously raise stakeholder concerns, potentially encouraging inefficient managerial practices, such as income smoothing or the allocation of funds for non-productive purposes. Consequently, corporate cash disclosures act as a vital signaling mechanism, requiring management to balance investors' positive perceptions of liquidity with minimizing apprehension about surplus cash accumulation (Musyafa & Kholilah, 2023). Previous research by Jaradat et al. (2021) suggests that firms strategically employ cash holdings for value-enhancing investments. By maintaining greater cash reserves, companies mitigate their reliance on external financing, thereby lowering transaction costs and enhancing their ability to invest in profitable projects. Therefore, at optimal levels, cash holdings can contribute positively to firm value (Hamad et al., 2021; Abdullah, 2025). These findings consistently support the view that strategically managed cash holdings underpin a company's growth and stability objectives. H3 : Cash holding influence on company value Firm value is frequently employed as the primary indicator for assessing the success of a business entity, as it reflects the market's perception of a company's future prospects, performance, and governance (Pangestuti et al., 2022). Factors such as the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS), Intellectual Capital (IC), and Cash Holdings (CH) play a significant role in shaping these perceptions. The influence of these three variables on firm value tends to exhibit a consistent trend across countries, suggesting a uniform market valuation pattern for a company’s fundamental factors. Previous research supports this notion: Hermawan et al. (2025) found that the IOS has a positive effect on firm value in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Similarly, (Susila et al., 2023) demonstrated that IC positively affects firm value across ASEAN nations, including Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Furthermore, cash holdings have consistently been shown to significantly impact firm value. (Anandita & Septiani, 2023) found that CH affects the value of companies in Indonesia, while international research by (Feng et al., 2022) revealed a positive relationship between CH and firm value. This evidence confirms that cash holdings are a vital indicator considered by investors when assessing firm value, and its effect is theoretically expected to be consistent across diverse markets. H4 : There are no differences in the influence of Investment opportunity set, Intellectual capital and Cash holding on company value in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The study’s population was defined as manufacturing companies in the food and beverage sub-sector listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX), Bursa Malaysia, and the Singapore Exchange (SGX) over the three-year period from 2022 to 2024. Data compiled from these exchanges yielded a total population of 179 companies: 98 on the IDX, 48 on Bursa Malaysia, and 33 on the SGX. A purposive sampling method was employed to select the sample, resulting in 366 qualified observations, broken down into 204 samples from the IDX, 93 from Bursa Malaysia, and 69 from the SGX. The data were analyzed using a panel data regression model, involving both model accuracy assessments and hypothesis testing (t-test and F-test). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Model Accuracy Test 1. Chow Test Table 1. Chow Test Results Effects Test Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Prob. Prob. Prob. Cross-section F 0.6718 0.000 0.000 Cross-section Chi-square 0.1974 0.000 0.000 The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7455 Based on the Chow test, it is known that in Indonesia the valueThe Chi-square Crosssection Probability is 0.1974, which is >0.05, indicating that the common effect model is better than the fixed effect model. In Malaysia and Singapore, the Chi-square Crosssection Probability value is 0.0000, which is <0.05, indicating that the fixed effect model is better than the common effect model. 2. Hausman test Table 2.Hausman Test Results Test Summary Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Prob. Prob. Prob. Cross-section Random 0.2051 0.1251 0.000 Based on the Hausman test results, Indonesia and Malaysia obtained probability values of 0.2051 and 0.1251, respectively, greater than 0.05, indicating that the random effects model was the best model. Meanwhile, Singapore obtained a probability value of 0.000 < 0.05, indicating that the fixed effects model was the best model. 3. Lagrange Multiplier Test Table 3. Test ResultsLagrange Multiplier Hypothesis Test Indonesia Malaysia Cross-section Cross-section Breusch-Pagan 0.368309 (0.5439) 51.09650 (0.0000) The results of the Lagrange Multiplier test in Indonesia obtained a Breusch Pagan cross-section value of 0.5439 > 0.05, indicating that the best model is the common effect model. Meanwhile, in Malaysia, the Breusch Pagan cross-section value was 0.000 < 0.05, indicating that the best model is the random effect model. Hypothesis Testing Table 4. Hypothesis Test Results Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Common Effect Model Random Effect Model Fixed Effect Model t-Statistic Prob. t-Statistic Prob. t-Statistic Prob. C 4.395833 0.0000 4.564634 0.0000 -1.152491 0.2555 iOS 4.087985 0.0001 1.761906 0.0815 2.744540 0.0088 IC 0.993999 0.3214 -0.554574 0.5806 -0.075605 0.9401 CH 4.273761 0.0000 6.906958 0.0000 12.54730 0.0000 Weighted Statistics Indonesia Malaysia Singapore F-statistic 16.86937 15.97667 13.07975 Prob(Fstatistic) 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Hypothesis testing of the State of Indonesia a. The partial test confirmed that the IOS variable significantly affects Company Value. This conclusion is supported by the calculated t-statistic of 4.087985, which exceeds the critical t-table value of 1.971896, and a significance value (0.0001) that is less than 0.05. Consequently, the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. b. The IC variable was found to have no significant effect on Company Value. The null hypothesis (H0) is accepted, as the calculated $t$-statistic of 0.993999 is less than the critical t-table value of 1.971896, and the significance value (0.3214) is greater than 0.05. The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7456 c. The partial test results indicated that the CH variable significantly influences Company Value. The null hypothesis (H0) is rejected because the t-statistic of 4.273761 is greater than the t-table value (1.971896), and the significance value (0.0000) is below 0.05. d. The simultaneous test, or F-test, demonstrated that the IOS, IC, and CH variables collectively affect the Value of Food and Beverage Companies in Indonesia. This is evidenced by a calculated F-value (16.86937) that exceeds the F-table value (2.64975), coupled with a high probability value of 0.000000. These results lead to the rejection of the null hypothesis (H0). Hypothesis testing for Malaysia a. The partial test indicated that the IOS variable has no significant effect on Company Value. This conclusion stems from the acceptance of the null hypothesis (H0), as the calculated t-statistic (1.761906) was less than the critical t-table value (1.986979), and the significance value (0.0815) exceeded the 0.05 threshold. b. The analysis showed that the IC variable also has no significant effect on Company Value in Malaysia. The null hypothesis (H0) was accepted because the t-statistic (-0.554574) was smaller than the critical t-table value (1.986979), and the p-value (0.5806) was greater than 0.05. c. In contrast, the partial test confirmed that the CH variable significantly influences Company Value. The null hypothesis (H0) was rejected due to the large calculated t-statistic (6.906958), which surpassed the t-table value (1.986979), and a significance value (0.0000) below the 0.05 cutoff. d. The overall model demonstrated a significant simultaneous effect of the IOS, IC, and CH variables on the Value of Food and Beverage Companies in Malaysia. This is confirmed by the calculated F-value (15.97667) exceeding the F-table value (2.706999), with a highly significant probability value (0.000000), leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis (H0). Hypothesis testing for the State of Singapore a. The partial test results indicated that the IOS variable significantly affects Company Value. The null hypothesis (H0) was rejected because the calculated t-statistic (2.744540) exceeded the critical t-table value (1.997138), and the significance value (0.0088) was less than 0.05. b. The analysis showed that the IC variable has no significant effect on Company Value in Singapore. This is confirmed by the acceptance of the null hypothesis (H0), as the t-statistic (-0.075605) was smaller than the critical t-table value (1.997138), and the p-value (0.9401) was greater than 0.05. c. The partial test confirmed that the CH variable significantly influences Company Value in Singapore. The null hypothesis (H0) was rejected due to the very large calculated t-statistic (12.54730), which significantly surpassed the t-table value (1.997138), and a significance value (0.0000) below the 0.05 cutoff. d. The overall model demonstrated a significant simultaneous effect of the IOS, IC, and CH variables on the Value of Food and Beverage Companies in Singapore. This is evidenced by the calculated F-value (13.07975) exceeding the F-table value (2.745915), coupled with a highly significant probability value (0.000000), leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis (H0). Test For the Equality of Regression Coefficients Table 5. Results of the coefficient comparison test Investment opportunity set Intellectual capital Cash holding t count P value t count P value t count P value Indonesia vs Malaysia 1,933 0.054 1,133 0.258 2,437 0.015 Indonesia vs Singapore -0.558 0.577 0.546 0.585 -6,290 0.000 Malaysia vs Singapore -1,781 0.076 0.956 0.956 -10,623 0.000 Results of the coefficient comparison test on the investment opportunity set variable show that H0 is accepted in all three countries, where in the comparison of Indonesia and Malaysia the p-value is 0.054 > 0.05. The comparison of Indonesia and Singapore the p-value is 0.577 > 0.05. The comparison between Malaysia and Singapore, indicated by a p-value of 0.076 (which is greater than 0.05), suggests that there is no significant difference in the influence of the Investment Opportunity Set (IOS) on firm value across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Results of the coefficient comparison test on the intellectual capital variable show that H0 is accepted in all three countries, where in the comparison between Indonesia and Malaysia the p-value is 0.258 > 0.05. The comparison between Indonesia and Singapore the p-value is 0.585 > 0.05. The comparison test for Intellectual Capital (IC) yielded a p-value of 0.956 (p > 0.05), indicating no significant difference in the variable's influence on firm value across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7457 Results of the coefficient comparison test on the cash holding variable show that H0 is rejected in all three countries, where in the comparison of Indonesia and Malaysia the p-value is 0.015 < 0.05. The comparison of Indonesia and Singapore the p-value is 0.000 < 0.05. The comparison of Malaysia and Singapore the p-value is 0.000 < 0.05, so the results show that there is a significant difference in the influence of CH in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS Overall, this study found that the influence of independent variables on Firm Value (NP) varies across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Cash Holding (CH) proved the most consistent, significantly influencing NP across all three countries. Meanwhile, Investment Opportunity Set (IOS) only influenced NP in Indonesia and Singapore, and surprisingly, Intellectual Capital (IC) did not show a significant influence on NP across all countries studied. Based on the results of the difference test, only Cash Holding (CH) showed a significant difference across countries, indicating homogeneity in the influence of IOS and IC across the three jurisdictions. This study has several major limitations. First, its scope is limited to the food and beverage subsector, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other industrial sectors. Second, the independent variables used are relatively limited (IOS, IC, and CH), leaving the potential influence of other important factors such as corporate governance or leverage excluded from the model. Third, the use of purposive sampling technique has the potential to introduce selection bias, where the selected sample of 122 companies may not be fully representative of the population of food and beverage companies in the three countries. Future researchers are advised to expand the scope of variables by including factors that theoretically also influence Firm Value, such as company size or governance variables, to build a more robust model. It is also recommended to expand the research sample to include other industrial sectors (e.g., the consumer or manufacturing sector in general) or to expand the coverage of countries in the Southeast Asian region. Finally, researchers can focus on in-depth analysis of the unique findings, namely the lack of influence of IC and the significant difference in influence of CH, by examining specific moderating or intervening variables related to the regulatory environment or corporate policies in each country. REFERENCES 1) Abdullah, A.H. (2025). Corporate Cash Holding and Firm Value in Saudi Listed Non-Financial Firms: the Moderating Role of Financial Expertise of the Audit Committee. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 22(2), 313–322. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.22(2).2025.25 2) Adam, M., Hakiki, A., Saftiana, Y., & Halimah, D. (2020). Managerial Ownership, Investment Opportunity Set and Firm Value of The Family Companies Listed on Indonesia Stock Exchange. Asian Journal of Accounting and Finance, 2(2), 104– 117. 3) Afifa, MA, Saleh, I., & Haniah, F. (2021). Direct and Mediated Associations Among Ownership Structure, Cash Holdings and Firm Value: The Case of Jordanian Insurance Firms. Vision, 25(4), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920983989 4) Afridi, FEA, Khan, Y., Zafar, S., & Ayaz, B. (2022). The Effect of Firm Size, Investment Opportunity Set, and Capital Structure on Firm Value. International Journal of Social Sciences and Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 175–186. 5) Ahmad, GN, Prasetyo, MRP, Buchdadi, AD, Suherman, Widyastuti, U., & Kurniawati, H. (2022). The Effect of CEO Characteristics on Firm Performance of Food and Beverage Companies in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. Quality - Access to Success, 23(186), 111–122. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/23.186.15 6) Al-Gamrh, B., Ku Ismail, KNI, Ahsan, T., & Alquhaif, A. (2020). Investment opportunities, corporate governance quality, and firm performance in the UAE. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 10(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-12-2018-0134 7) Anandita, D., & Septiani, D. (2023). The Effect of Capital Structure, Dividend Policy, and Foreign Ownership on Firm Value. Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Studies, 06(09), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.47191/jefms/v6-i9-06 8) Bala, A. J., Hassan, A., & Muhammad, M. L. (2024). Do board characteristics matter in the relationship between intellectual capital efficiency and firm value? Evidence from the Nigerian oil and gas downstream sector. Future Business Journal, 10(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-024-00351-3 9) Bardos, K.S., Ertugrul, M., & Gao, L.S. (2020). Corporate social responsibility, product market perception, and firm value. Journal of Corporate Finance, 62, 101588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101588 The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7458 10) Bon, SF, & Hartoko, S. (2022). The Effect of Dividend Policy, Investment Decision, Leverage, Profitability, and Firm Size on Firm Value Bon, SF, & Hartoko, S. (2022). The Effect of Dividend Policy, Investment Decision, Leverage, Profitability, and Firm Size on Firm Value. European Jo. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 7(3), 7–13. 11) Castro, JPG, Ramírez, DFD, & Escobar, J.M. (2021). The relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance in Colombian listed banking entities. Asia Pacific Management Review, 26(4), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2021.03.002 12) Chabachib, M., Hersugondo, H., Septivardi, D., & Pamungkas, ID (2020). The Effect of Investment Opportunity Set and Company Growth Firm Value: Capital Structure as an Intervening Variable. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(1), 139–156. 13) Christianty, R., & Latuconsina, Z. (2023). The Effect of Current Ratio, Debt to Equity Ratio and Total Assets turnover on Profit Growth in Property and Real Estate Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2019 – 2021 Period. The International Journal of Business Management and Technology, 7(1), 12–24. 14) Dang, C., (Frank) Li, Z., & Yang, C. (2018). Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance. Journal of Banking and Finance, 86, 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.09.006 15) Feng, X., Lo, Y. L., & Chan, K. C. (2022). Impact of economic policy uncertainty on cash holdings: firm-level evidence from an emerging market. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29(2), 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/16081625.2019.1694954 16) Hamad, A., Alzoubi, T., Iskandrani, M., & Alhadidi, A. (2021). A non-linear relationship between cash holdings and firm value: Study of companies in the emerging economy. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 10(4), 137–143. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv10i4art12 17) Houqe, M.N., Monem, R.M., & van Zijl, T. (2023). Business strategy, cash holdings, and dividend payouts. Accounting and Finance, 63(4), 3999–4035. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13082 18) Hussaini, I., Shehu, A., & Maidarasu, A.U. (2025). Intellectual Capital and Firm Value of Listed Oil and Gas Firms in Nigeria. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 13(7), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.37745/ejaafr.2013/vol13n72744 19) Ibrahim, UA, & Isiaka, AQ (2020). Effect of Financial Leverage on Firm Value: Evidence From Selected Firms Quoted on the Nigerian Stock Exchange. European Journal of Business and Management, 124–135. https://doi.org/10.7176/ejbm/12-3-16 20) Inrico, I., Sulastri, S., & Malinda, S. (2023). effect of working capital management and intellectual capital on firm performance in food and beverages industry listed in Indonesia stock exchange. International Journal of Business, Economics & Management, 6(3), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.21744/ijbem.v6n3.2152 21) Irawan, D., Widiyanti, M., Fuadah, LL, & Adam, M. (2022). The Effect of Profitability on Firm Value with Intellectual Capital as an Intervening Variable in Manufacturing Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Journal of International Conference Proceedings, 5(2), 574–582. https://doi.org/10.32535/jicp.v5i2.1722 22) Jabbouri, I., & Almustafa, H. (2021). Corporate cash holdings, firm performance and national governance: evidence from emerging markets. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 17(5), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMF-07-2020-0342 23) Jaradat, HZ, Alnaimi, AA, & Alsmadi, SA (2021). The effect of cash holdings and corporate governance on firm value: Evidence from the Amman stock exchange. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 10(4 Special issue), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.22495/JGRV10I4SIART7 24) Musyafa, KA, & Kholilah, K. (2023). Cash Holding, Financial Leverage, Profitability, Firm Size, Income Smoothing: Moderating Managerial Ownership. E-Journal of Accounting, 33(4), 1085. https://doi.org/10.24843/eja.2023.v33.i04.p15 25) Naveed, M., Ali, S., Iqbal, K., & Sohail, M. K. (2020). Role of financial and non-financial information in determining individual investor investment decisions: a signaling perspective. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 9(2), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-09-2019-0168 26) Necib, A., Feidi, A., & Jarboui, A. (2025). The Impact of Business Risk, Intellectual Capital, and Institutional Ownership on the Value of the Firm. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, XIII(Issue 1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.35808/ijeba/871 27) Nguyen, A.H., & Doan, D.T. (2020). The impact of intellectual capital on firm value: Empirical evidence from Vietnam. International Journal of Financial Research, 11(4), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v11n4p74 The Influence of Investment Opportunity Set, Intellectual Capital and Cash Holding on Company Value in the Food and Beverage Sub-Sector in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 11 November 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7459 28) Ni, Y., Cheng, Y.R., & Huang, P. (2020). Do intellectual capitals matter to firm value enhancement? Evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(4), 725–743. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0235 29) Ogunsola, A. (2024). Dividend Policy, Investment Decision and Firm's Value among Listed Conglomerate Firms in Nigeria ARF INDIA. Indo-Asian Journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(2), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.47509/IAJFA.2024.v05i02.01 30) Opazo, C.A., & Gonzalez, O.C. (2021). The impact of intellectual capital on financial performance and value-added of the production evidence from Chile. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, 26(51), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEFAS-08-2019-0178 31) Ousama, AA, Al-Mutairi, MT, & Fatima, AH (2020). The relationship between intellectual capital information and firms' market value: a study from an emerging economy. Measuring Business Excellence, 24(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-01-2019-0002 32) Pangestuti, DC, Muktiyanto, A., Geraldina, I., & Darmawan. (2022). Role of Profitability, Business Risk, and Intellectual Capital in Increasing Firm Value. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 37(3), 311–338. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v37i3.3564 33) Salvi, A., Vitolla, F., Giakoumelou, A., Raimo, N., & Rubino, M. (2020). Intellectual capital disclosure in integrated reports: The effect on firm value. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 160(July). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120228 34) Serna, G. (2023). On the predictive ability of conditional market skewness. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 91, 186–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2022.11.001 35) Shubita, M. F. (2020). The impact of capital structure and cash holdings on firm value: An empirical study on Jordanian industrial listed companies. Jordan Journal of Business Administration, 16(1), 53–68. 36) Soewarno, N., & Ramadhan, AHA (2020). The effect of ownership structure and intellectual capital on firm value with firm performance as an intervening variable. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 10(12), 215–236. 37) Susila, GPAJ, Purbawangsa, IBA, Henny Rahyuda, & Luh Gede Sri Artini. (2023). Competitive Advantage and Intellectual Capital as Mediators of the Influence of Corporate Governance on Firm Value. Scientific Journal of Accounting, 8(1), 206– 224. https://doi.org/10.23887/jia.v8i1.59442 38) Tabe, R., Lapian, SLVJ, & Murni, S. (2022). The Effect of Firm Size, Investment Opportunity Set, and Capital Structure on Firm Value. International Journal of Social Science & Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 32–46. https://doi.org/10.58661/ijsse.v2i2.42 39) Tangngisalu, J., Halik, A., Marwan, & Jumady, E. (2023). Leverage Analysis, Investment Opportunity Set, and Ownership of Company Value. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(6), e02414. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i6.2414 40) Xu, J., & Liu, F. (2020). The impact of intellectual capital on firm performance: A modified and extended variable model. Journal of Competitiveness, 12(1), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2020.01.10 41) Yudhyani, E., Kulsum, U., Reza, F., Sitorus, AN, & Kirana, NWI (2022). Determinant Factors of Firm Value: Cash Holdings and Dividend Policy as Mediation. Journal of Accounting and Strategic Finance, 5(2), 278–301. https://doi.org/10.33005/jasf.v5i2.325 42) Yunus, MHSM, Fami, AMA, Raz, NRM, & Salim, R. (2024). The Asian Journal of Professional and Business Studies ECONOMIC GROWTH IN ASIA-PACIFIC COUNTRIES. 5(2), 1–17.