The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure

Studies Management and Finance Economics, of Journal 0504-2644 (online): ISSN 0490,-2644 (print): ISSN 5202 December 12 Issue 80 Volume 8.317 Factor: Impact ,31-i12-10.47191/jefms/v8 DOI: Article 9878-7881 No: Page JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7881 The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure Dian Hapsari1, Evi Gantyowati2 1,2 Sebelas Maret University ABSTRACT: This study examines the influence of CEO characteristics, financial performance, and ownership structure on forwardlooking information disclosure (FLID) in manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during 2022–2024. FLID represents future-oriented corporate disclosure that provides insights into a firm’s strategies, projections, and future plans. CEO characteristics are proxied by CEO age and gender, financial performance is measured by profitability and leverage, while ownership structure is represented by foreign ownership and institutional ownership. The results indicate that CEO age and foreign ownership have a positive and significant effect on FLID. In contrast, CEO gender, profitability, leverage, and institutional ownership do not significantly influence FLID. KEYWORDS: Forward-looking information disclosure, CEO characteristics, financial performance, ownership structure. I. INTRODUCTION Rapid technological advancement, globalization, and dynamic economic changes have increasingly intensified the complexity of the business environment. This situation not only presents new challenges for companies but also creates opportunities for growth and innovation (Wulandari et al., 2024). To ensure business sustainability and enhance competitiveness, companies are required to adapt effectively to these changes. The intensifying competition among business entities, along with global economic uncertainty, has significantly affected the stability of capital markets. Despite these challenges, the number of Single Investor Identifications (SIDs) in the Indonesian capital market has continued to grow rapidly each year. This growth reflects increasing public interest in investment activities and rising public trust in the capital market as a financial management instrument. Table 1. Single Investor Identifications in Indonesia's Capital Market, 2020-2024 Source: www.ksei.co.id (accessed in 2025) Based on Table 1, the number of SIDs in the Indonesian capital market increased from 3.88 million in 2020 to 14.81 million in 2024. This substantial growth in the number of investors underscores the increasing demand for greater transparency and accountability in corporate financial reporting. Investor confidence largely depends on the availability of adequate information disclosure to support decision-making amid economic uncertainty. In general, corporate information can be classified into two categories: backward-looking information and forward-looking information. Backward-looking information contains historical data that reflects a company’s past performance and is commonly used by stakeholders to evaluate and compare performance across periods. However, historical information is not always sufficient to support investment decisions, as it does not provide insights into a company’s future condition and potential (Dey et al., 2020). Therefore, prospective or forward-looking information is essential for investors to predict future performance (Mardani & Kristanto, 2020). Year Number of SIDs 2020 3,880,753 2021 7,489,337 2022 10,311,152 2023 12,168,061 2024 14,817,000 The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7882 Several previous studies on the determinants of FLID have yielded mixed findings. CEO gender has been shown to have a positive influence on FLID in manufacturing companies in Indonesia (Hapsari et al., 2024), but research by Peterson & Philpot (2007) indicates a negative effect. Meanwhile, research by Christian & Salim (2022), Haque et al. (2023), and Luthfiansyah & Wijayanti (2022) indicates that CEO gender has no significant effect on disclosure level. Research on CEO age also shows inconsistent findings. Research by Alqatamin et al. (2017) found that CEO age negatively affects on FLID. Conversely, research by Malik et al. (2020) reported that older CEOs are more likely to encourage greater information disclosure. Meanwhile, research by Li et al. (2019) found that neither younger nor older CEOs significantly affects the level of information disclosure. Research on institutional ownership also presents inconsistent findings. Agyei-Mensah (2017), Celik et al. (2006), Puspayanti & Puspawati (2024), and Utami et al. (2020) found that institutional ownership has no significant impact on forward-looking information disclosure. These findings contrast with the study by Sidhu (2016), which reported a positive effect of institutional ownership on FLID. The inconsistency of these findings highlights a research gap that warrants further investigation, particularly regarding ownership structure as a determinant of forward-looking information disclosure. To understand the factors influencing FLID, this study classifies variables into three main categories. First, CEO characteristics, consisting of age and gender, are viewed as important elements of corporate governance that reflect managerial ability, risk-taking behavior, and leadership style in determining information disclosure policies. Second, financial performance, as reflected in profitability and leverage, indicates the firm’s financial condition and may influence its motivation to convey prospective information to stakeholders. Third, ownership structure, namely foreign ownership and institutional ownership, represents external factors that have the potential to exert pressure on or encourage firms to enhance transparency through FLID. This classification provides a clear conceptual framework for analyzing the determinants of FLID. II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT HYPHOTHESES A. Agency Theory Agency theory emerged from the separation between company owners as principals and managers as agents (Monks & Minow, 2004). Jensen & Meckling (1976) explained that this relationship can lead to conflict due to differences in goals between principals and agents. FLID reduces information asymmetry and agency costs by providing prospective information that increases transparency, reduces investor uncertainty, and serves as a monitoring mechanism to demonstrate managers' commitment to the company's long-term performance (Kılıç & Kuzey, 2018). B. Legitimation Theory Legitimacy theory views companies as part of a social system whose sustainability depends on acceptance by society and stakeholders (Suchman, 1995). To maintain legitimacy, companies need to ensure their activities and reporting align with public norms and expectations. FLID is one way to maintain legitimacy through financial projections, strategies, and risk analysis, which can demonstrate a company's transparency and readiness for the future, thereby strengthening its reputation and stakeholder trust. C. Forward-Looking Information Disclosure Forward-looking information disclosure is the disclosure of information that focuses on the company's future performance (Agyei-Mensah, 2017). FLID includes quantitative information presented in the form of numbers or numerical projections and qualitative information presented in the form of descriptive descriptions (Rahman & Khatun, 2023; Uyar & Kilic, 2012). Disclosure of prospective information provides several benefits, such as reducing information asymmetry and providing information about the company's future operations, plans, strategies, policies, and financial targets (Celik et al., 2006). This information helps investors estimate expected cash flows and the company's future value (Menicucci & Paolucci, 2016). Prospective disclosure can also increase company value by attracting investors motivated by the company's commitment to creating value for its owners (Haque et al., 2023). D. CEO Age A CEO's age reflects their level of professional maturity and experience with various business conditions. More senior CEOs have a deeper understanding of company dynamics and are therefore better able to develop a comprehensive assessment of business prospects (Aribi et al., 2018; Tan & Liu, 2017) . Agency theory explains that this experience helps reduce information asymmetry by conveying prospective information to stakeholders. Legitimacy theory holds that more senior CEOs have a greater sense of responsibility and prudence in ensuring the company remains well perceived by stakeholders. One way to maintain this The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7883 legitimacy is to increase transparency by disclosing forward-looking information that builds confidence in the company's direction and strategy. Therefore, the hypotheses proposed in this study are as follows: H 1 : CEO age has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure. E. CEO Gender CEO gender is a crucial aspect of corporate governance because women are believed to bring more diverse perspectives to decision-making. The presence of women is often associated with a more cautious, ethical, and transparent leadership style than men. These characteristics give women the potential to improve the quality of information disclosure, including FLID (Hapsari et al., 2024). Previous research has shown that women on boards of directors strengthen oversight independence and reduce information asymmetry. They tend to be more detailed in conveying information and can provide relevant perspectives in the face of business uncertainty (Dowling & Aribi, 2013). From a legitimacy theory perspective, the representation of women at the top level can be seen as a company's effort to meet public expectations for transparency and good governance. Companies with female CEOs are considered more responsive to stakeholder needs and more open in presenting future projections. Effah et al. (2022), Mardani & Kristanto (2020), and Oktavia & Imelda (2022) have shown that companies with female CEOs have higher levels of prospective disclosure. Therefore, the hypothesis proposed in this study is as follows: H 2 : CEO gender has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure. F. Profitability Profitability is a company's ability to generate profits by utilizing its assets and is an important indicator for assessing performance effectiveness. Highly profitable companies demonstrate strong resource management and have good business prospects. Agency theory holds that high profitability can reduce information asymmetry by signaling to investors through prospective disclosures. Meanwhile, legitimacy theory explains that more profitable companies tend to increase transparency to maintain public trust and demonstrate that good performance is supported by responsible governance. Furthermore, prospective disclosure can be a tool to demonstrate the sustainability of company performance, reduce uncertainty, and strengthen the company's position in the eyes of stakeholders. This is in line with research by Menicucci & Paolucci (2016). Novia et al. (2021) explained that profitability is positively related to the extent of FLID. Therefore, the hypothesis proposed in this study is as follows: H 3 : Profitability has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure. G. Leverage Leverage is an important ratio in assessing a company's funding structure because it indicates the extent to which assets are financed with debt. High leverage reflects increased financial risk and pressure on the company to meet long-term obligations. From an agency theory perspective, this condition creates information asymmetry, so companies strive to increase transparency by disclosing prospective information. Meanwhile, legitimacy theory holds that companies with high financial risk face a greater need to maintain public and stakeholder trust, making the disclosure of prospective information one way to strengthen their legitimacy. Previous research has shown that leverage can encourage companies to increase their FLID levels because high debt requires companies to send positive signals about their future prospects and ability to repay their obligations (Kılıç & Kuzey, 2018). Therefore, the hypothesis proposed in this study is as follows: H 4 : Leverage has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure. H. Foreign Ownership Foreign ownership reflects the proportion of a company's shares held by foreign investors, which brings high standards of governance and transparency. Due to geographical and cultural limitations in direct oversight, foreign investors rely heavily on the quality of corporate disclosure. Within the agency theory framework, foreign ownership increases the need for companies to reduce information asymmetry through broader disclosure, including forward-looking information. From a legitimacy theory perspective, prospective disclosure serves as a means for companies to gain global legitimacy and demonstrate commitment to good governance practices. FLID becomes increasingly important for companies with a high proportion of foreign ownership because information about future projections, business strategies, and long-term risks is needed to support global investment decisions. Various empirical studies by Novia et al. (2021) and Utami et al. (2020) ound that the greater the foreign ownership, the higher the level of transparency in companies' disclosure of prospective information. Therefore, the hypothesis proposed in this study is as follows: H 5 : Foreign ownership has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7884 I. Institutional Ownership Institutional ownership refers to the percentage of a company's shares held by institutions such as banks, investment firms, pension funds, etc. Institutional investors possess greater analytical capabilities and resources than individual investors, enabling them to conduct more rigorous management monitoring. Agency theory explains that this strong oversight encourages companies to increase transparency to reduce information asymmetry. Legitimacy theory explains that the demand for transparency is perceived as external pressure that encourages companies to demonstrate greater accountability by disclosing prospective information. Research by Agyei-Mensah (2017) found that the greater the proportion of institutional ownership, the higher the tendency for companies to disclose prospective information widely. This indicates that institutional ownership not only provides capital but also improves governance quality by demanding more comprehensive disclosure. Therefore, the hypothesis proposed in this study is as follows: H 6 : Institutional ownership has a positive effect on forward-looking information disclosure. III. METHODOLOGY This research is quantitative. It aims to analyze the influence of CEO gender, CEO age, profitability, leverage, foreign ownership, and institutional ownership on forward-looking information disclosure in manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during 2022-2024. The data used in this study are secondary data. They were obtained by reviewing the annual reports of manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The research data were obtained from www.idx.co.id and the official websites of each company. The sample was selected using a purposive sampling method, which selects samples from the existing population based on criteria determined by the researcher. The sample criteria used were companies that published complete annual financial reports on their websites or on the IDX website during the 2022-2024 period, companies that did not experience losses during the 2022-2024 period, and companies that presented complete annual financial reports according to the information required by the researcher. Table 2. Variable Measurement IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Descriptive Analysis Table 3. Descriptive Statistics Results Variables Measurement Source Forward-Looking Information Disclosure Forward-looking information disclosure (FLID) is measured using a disclosure index consisting of 52 qualitative and quantitative items. The FLID score is calculated as the ratio of disclosed items to total expected items. (Rahman & Khatun, 2023) CEO Age Natural logarithm of CEO age in the reporting year (Ma et al., 2019) CEO Gender Dummy variable with a score of 1 if there is a female CEO and 0 if there is not (Gutierrez-romero et al., 2021) Profitability Amount of net profit earned by the owner from the company's total assets (Dey et al., 2020; Luthfiansyah & Wijayanti, 2022) Leverage Ratio of total liabilities to total assets (Kusumawati et al., 2018; Uyar & Kilic, 2012) Foreign Ownership Percentage of shares owned by foreign shareholders to total outstanding shares (Effah et al., 2022; Utami et al., 2020) Institutional Ownership Percentage of shares owned by institutions to total shares outstanding (Aljifri et al., 2013; Utami et al., 2020) CEO Age CEO Gender Profitability Leverage Foreign Ownership Institutional Ownership FLID Mean 4.05417 0.06756 0.07645 0.33483 0.27397 0.74038 0.43104 Median 4.06044 0.00000 0.05850 0.33250 0.14850 0.88400 0.43250 Maximum 4.44265 1,00000 0.35200 0.86600 0.97600 0.99800 0.67300 The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7885 Source: Data processed with Eviews13, 2025 1. CEO Age CEO age has a mean of 4.05417, a median of 4.06044, a maximum of 4.44265, a minimum of 3.58351, and a standard deviation of 0.18112. These results indicate that there is no extreme age difference among CEOs, suggesting that CEOs are in a relatively similar age range. 2. CEO Gender CEO gender has a mean of 0.06757, a median of 0.00000, a maximum of 1.00000, a minimum of 0.00000, and a standard deviation of 0.25162. These results indicate that the proportion of female CEOs is relatively small and the majority of companies are still led by male CEOs. 3. Profitability Profitability has a mean of 0.07650, a median of 0.05850, a maximum of 0.35200, a minimum of 0.00100, and a standard deviation of 0.06720. These results indicate that the profitability of the companies in the sample remains relatively low, although some companies generate much higher profits than others. 4. Leverage Leverage has an average of 0.33480, a median of 0.33250, a maximum of 0.86600, a minimum of 0.00000, and a standard deviation of 0.17270. This result shows that the level of debt use among inter-debt companies is sufficiently diverse, with some companies using debt at high levels and others at relatively low levels. 5. Foreign Ownership Foreign ownership has a mean of 0.27400, a median of 0.14850, a maximum of 0.97600, a minimum of 0.00000, and a standard deviation of 0.30420. These results indicate that, in general, foreign ownership in companies remains relatively low, but several companies have almost all their shares owned by foreign parties. 6. Institutional Ownership Institutional ownership has a mean of 0.74040, a median of 0.88400, a maximum of 0.99800, a minimum of 0.00000, and a standard deviation of 0.29680. These results indicate that most of the company shares in the sample are held by institutional investors, although several companies still have relatively low levels of institutional ownership. B. Panel Data Model Selection 1. Chow Test Table 4. Chow Test Results Effect Test Cross-section Chi-square Statistics 332.84237 Prob. 0.00000 Source: Data processed with Eviews13, 2025 Based on the chow test results presented in Table 4, the p-value of 0.00000 is below the significance threshold of 0.05. This indicates that the CEM model is rejected, making the FEM a more appropriate choice for this study. Minimum 3.58351 0.00000 0.00100 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.25000 Std. Dev. 0.18112 0.25156 0.06715 0.17270 0.30419 0.29684 0.07938 Skewness -0.00012 3.44564 1.74126 0.23676 1.01352 -1.43174 0.30275 Kurtosis 2.74233 12.87246 6.35383 2.76507 2.69981 3.81010 3.19210 Jarque-Bera 0.61413 1340,837 216.2306 2.58467 38.84125 81.91703 3.732805 Probability 0.73560 0.00000 0.00000 0.27463 0.00000 0.00000 0.15468 Sum 900.0264 15,00000 16.97200 74.33300 60.82300 164.3650 95.69200 Sum Sq. Dev. 7.24992 13.98649 0.99664 6.59172 20.44974 19.47324 1.39269 Observations 222 222 222 222 222 222 222 The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7886 2. Hausman test Table 5. Hausman Test Results Effect Test Cross-section Chi-square Statistics 48.73922 Prob. 0.00000 Source: Data processed with Eviews13, 2025 Based on the hausman test results presented in Table 5, the probability value of 0.00000 was obtained is below the significance threshold of 0.05. This indicates that the REM model is rejected, so the FEM is the more appropriate model for in this study. If the chow test and the hausman test have produced consistent results, there is no need to proceed to the lagrange multiplier test. C. Hypothesis Testing Results Table 6. Hypothesis Testing Results Variables Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Probability Results C -2.99330 0.65524 -4.56829 0.00000 CEO Age 0.81562 0.16120 5.05990 0.00000 H1 Accepted CEO Gender 0.03474 0.02786 1.24671 0.21456 H2 Rejected Profitability 0.03996 0.14122 0.28295 0.77763 H3 Rejected Leverage -0.02787 0.06128 -0.45477 0.64997 H4 Rejected Foreign Ownership 0.29374 0.14360 2.04554 0.04265 H5 Accepted Institutional Ownership 0.05557 0.04870 1.14117 0.25572 H6 Rejected Adjusted R-Squared 0.68437 F-Statistic 7.06560 Prob (F-Statistic) 0.00000 Source: Data processed with Eviews13, 2025 The test results show that the Adjusted R-Squared value is 0.68437, which means that all independent variables in this study, namely CEO age, CEO gender, profitability, leverage, foreign ownership, and institutional ownership are able to explain the dependent variable by 68.437%, while the remaining 31.563% is explained by other variables outside the research model. Based on the results of the simultaneous test (F Test), the F-Statistic value is 7.06560, with a Prob value (F-Statistic) of 0.00000 <0.05, so it can be concluded that the regression model used in this study is fit for use. CEO Age on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of the study show that CEO age has a positive and significant effect on FLID. This finding indicates that the more mature the CEO, the greater the company's tendency to disclose future-oriented information. (Aribi et al., 2018) . Older CEOs are considered to have a better understanding of the importance of information transparency for stakeholders. CEOs with more experience tend to be more cautious in disclosing information to the public (Malik et al., 2020). This experience enables CEOs to assess the risks and benefits of future information disclosure, particularly in maintaining the company's reputation among investors. The results of this study reinforce the view that characteristic factors can influence leadership patterns, risk orientation, and preferences for information disclosure. More senior CEOs generally have more mature managerial experience and a deeper understanding of company dynamics, making them better able to provide comprehensive assessments of business prospects (Tan & Liu, 2017). Therefore, it can be concluded that the more mature the CEO, the greater the company's commitment to disclosing relevant information regarding the company's future prospects, strategy, and policy direction. CEO Gender on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of this study indicate that CEO gender does not significantly influence FLID. Gender differences among company leaders are not a major factor in determining the level of disclosure of future-looking information. Both male and female CEOs have relatively similar tendencies in determining corporate disclosure policies. Christian & Salim (2022) explain that the insignificant influence of gender on FLID may be due to the still very limited involvement of women on the board of directors, so that women's presence is not yet strong enough to influence company strategic policies, including the disclosure of forwardlooking information. The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7887 The results of this study also reinforce the view that the presence of women as CEOs does not automatically improve the quality of corporate information disclosure (Haque et al., 2023; Luthfiansyah & Wijayanti, 2022). For women's presence in top positions to truly have a tangible impact, it is necessary to strengthen women's roles, capacities, and involvement in the company's strategic decision-making process. Furthermore, these findings suggest that future disclosure practices are more influenced by management professionalism, corporate governance mechanisms, and regulatory and market pressures, than by biological factors such as gender. Profitability against Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of this study indicate that profitability does not significantly influence FLID. This finding suggests that a company's profit level does not directly influence its level of disclosure (Kılıç & Kuzey, 2018; Uyar & Kilic, 2012). Companies do not always use profit as the primary basis for disclosing information regarding future prospects and strategies. Companies with high profits are not necessarily more open in conveying future projections, while companies with lower profits are not always closed in disclosing information (Oktavia & Imelda, 2022). Effah et al. (2022) explain that companies with high profitability do not necessarily disclose more information, as stakeholders are generally satisfied with the information available. Christian & Salim (2022) emphasize that neither high profits nor high financial risk guarantees a company will engage in FLID because information disclosure is primarily influenced by management's voluntary disclosure. Therefore, it can be concluded that profitability is not the primary driver of companies' increased forward-looking information disclosure. Leverage of Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of this study indicate that leverage has no significant effect on FLID. This finding indicates that corporate debt levels are not a determining factor in encouraging management to disclose prospective information about the company's future condition and strategy. Companies with both high and low debt levels have similar tendencies in FLID disclosure practices. The results of this study align with the findings of Christian & Salim (2022) and Oktavia & Imelda (2022), which also demonstrated that leverage had no significant effect on FLID. This insignificant effect of leverage indicates that pressure from creditors is not necessarily the primary factor driving companies to increase the transparency of future information. In practice, companies with high leverage tend to focus more on historical reporting and compliance with accounting standards to maintain their credit reputation, rather than expanding FLID. On the other hand, companies with lower leverage are still required to maintain information transparency to maintain investor confidence. This suggests that FLID disclosure policies are not solely determined by a company's funding structure. Therefore, it can be concluded that leverage is not a primary determinant of FLID disclosure practices. Foreign Ownership of Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of this study indicate that foreign ownership has a positive and significant effect on FLID. This finding indicates that the greater the proportion of foreign ownership, the higher the company's future-oriented information disclosure. Foreign ownership reflects the influx of international governance standards and demands for greater transparency within companies. Foreign investors tend to rely on the quality of information disclosure due to geographical and cultural limitations in conducting direct oversight. The results of this study align with those of Utami et al. (2020), who stated that foreign ownership encourages increased corporate transparency, including the disclosure of prospective information, as a way to meet global market expectations. Novia et al. (2021) also found that companies with a greater proportion of foreign ownership have higher levels of FLID, which helps maintain legitimacy and investor trust in international markets. Therefore, it can be concluded that foreign ownership is a crucial factor in encouraging increased FLID practices within companies. Institutional Ownership of Forward-Looking Information Disclosure The results of this study indicate that institutional ownership does not significantly influence FLID. This finding indicates that the proportion of institutional share ownership has not directly encouraged increased disclosure of future information. Institutional ownership, which is the ownership of shares by institutions such as pension funds, insurance companies, and investment managers, theoretically has strong monitoring capabilities, but in the context of this study, it has not played an optimal role in encouraging FLID practices. This finding aligns with the research of Celik et al. (2006), who found that the presence of institutional investors is not always accompanied by increased disclosure of prospective information due to differences in the level of institutional involvement in corporate oversight activities. Furthermore, Puspayanti & Puspawati (2024) also showed that institutional ownership has no significant effect on FLID, due to variations in investment strategies and institutions' focus on portfolio stability rather than future information disclosure. Therefore, it can be concluded that institutional ownership is not a primary determinant of FLID practices. The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7888 CONCLUSIONS This study shows that CEO characteristics, financial performance, and share ownership structure have different influences on forward-looking information disclosure in manufacturing companies. Regarding CEO characteristics, the study found that CEO age has a positive effect on FLID. This indicates that the older and more experienced a CEO is, the greater their tendency to disclose information related to the company's future prospects, strategies, and plans. Meanwhile, CEO gender does not have a significant effect on FLID, indicating that differences in the gender of company leaders do not directly determine future-oriented information disclosure policies. Financial performance variables, measured by profitability and leverage, have no significant effect on FLID. This finding suggests that the level of profit and the extent of a company's debt use do not directly influence management's decisions regarding prospective information disclosure. Regarding the share ownership structure, foreign ownership has been shown to positively affect FLID. This indicates that the greater the proportion of shares owned by foreign investors, the greater the incentive for companies to increase the disclosure of prospective information. This reflects the demand for greater transparency from foreign investors towards company management. Meanwhile, institutional ownership has no significant effect on FLID, indicating that institutional investors' presence does not directly determine a company's prospective information disclosure. REFERENCES 1) Agyei-Mensah, B. K. (2017). The Relationship between Corporate Governance, Corruption, and Forward-Looking Information Disclosure: A Comparative Study. Corporate Governance (Bingley), 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-11-20150150 2) Aljifri, K., Hussainey, K., & Oyelere, P. (2013). The Determinants of Forward-Looking Disclosure: A Corporate Governance Perspective. Corporate Ownership and Control, 10(2 A), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv10i2art1 3) Alqatamin, R., Aribi, ZA, & Arun, T. (2017). The Effect of CEOs' Characteristics on Forward-Looking Information. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 18(4), 402–424. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-03-2016-0027 4) Aribi, ZA, Alqatamin, RM, & Arun, T. (2018). Gender Diversity on Boards and Forward-Looking Information Disclosure: Evidence from Jordan. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 8, 205–222. 5) Celik, O., Ecer, A., & Karabacak, H. (2006). Impact of Firm Specific Characteristics on The Web Based Business Reporting: Evidence from the Companies Listed in Turkey. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4(3), 100–133. 6) Christian, Y., & Salim, S. (2022). Factors Influencing the Nature of Forward-Looking Disclosure in Integrated Reporting. Journal of Accounting Paradigms, 4(2), 918–926. https://doi.org/10.24912/jpa.v4i2.19691 7) Dey, P. K., Roy, M., & Akter, M. (2020). What Determines Forward-Looking Information Disclosure in Bangladesh?. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 5(2), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-03-2020-0014 8) Dowling, M., & Aribi, Z.A. (2013). Female Directors and UK Company Acquisitiveness. International Review of Financial Analysis, 29, 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2013.04.004 9) Effah, N.A.A., Kyei, B.T., Kyeremeh, G., & Ekor, N.W.K. (2022). Boardroom Characteristics and Forward-Looking Information Disclosure: Evidence from Ghana. Corporate Governance (Bingley), 22(7), 1444–1461. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-092021-0321 10) Hapsari, D., Setiawan, D., & Aryani, Y.A. (2024). Forward-Looking Information Disclosure: The Role of the Board of Directors. Indonesian Accounting and Financial Research, 9(3), 308–317. https://doi.org/10.23917/reaksi.v9i3.5428 11) Haque, T., Afroze, S., & Rahman, M. (2023). Forward-Looking Information and Its Determinants: An Empirical Evidence from Listed Pharmaceutical Firms of Bangladesh. Journal of Economics, Finance, and Management Studies, 06(08), 3717–3728. https://doi.org/10.47191/jefms/v6-i8-21 12) Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 77–132. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674274051-006 13) Kılıç, M., & Kuzey, C. (2018). Determinants of Forward-Looking Disclosures in Integrated Reporting. Managerial Auditing Journal, 33(1), 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-12-2016-1498 14) Kusumawati, E., Trisnawati, R., & Fatchan Achyani. (2018). Financial Report Analysis. Muhammadiyah University Press. 15) Lam, KCK, Mcguinness, PB, & Paulo Vieito, J. (2013). CEO Gender, Executive Compensation, and Firm Performance in Chinese - Listed Enterprises. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 21, 1136–1159. 16) Li, D., Lin, A., & Zhang, L. (2019). Relationship between Chief Executive Officer Characteristics and Corporate Environmental Information Disclosure in Thailand. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 6(4), 564–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524019-0067-7 The Influence of Financial Performance, CEO Characteristics, and Share Ownership Structure on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure JEFMS, Volume 08 Issue 12 December 2025 www.ijefm.co.in Page 7889 17) Luthfiansyah, MH, & Wijayanti, R. (2022). Forward Looking Information Disclosure: Study of Board Diversity in Indonesian Companies. American Journal of Sciences and Engineering Research, 5(6), 101–109. www.iarjournals.com 18) Ma, Y., Li, J., Yang, L., Hu, Y., & Gao, K. (2019). Relationship Between a CEO's Level of Education and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms. International Journal of Business and Economics Research, 8(4), 232– 244. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijber.20190804.18 19) Malik, F., Wang, F., Naseem, M.A., Ikram, A., & Ali, S. (2020). Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Related to CEO Attributes: An Empirical Study. SAGE Open, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019899093 20) Mardani, A., & Kristanto, AB (2020). Characteristics of Directors and Disclosure of Forward-Looking Information. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1689–1699. 21) Menicucci, E., & Paolucci, G. (2016). The Determinants of Bank Profitability: Empirical Evidence from the European Banking Sector. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting (Vol. 14, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1108/jfra-05-2015-0060 22) Monks, R. A., & Minow, N. (2004). Corporate Governance. Blackwell Publishing. 23) Novia, I., Lukviarman, N., & Setiany, E. (2021). The Influence of Corporate Governance on Disclosure of Forward-Looking Information. Journal of Accounting and Business, 21(2), 190–210. 24) Oktavia, E., & Imelda, E. (2022). Determinants of Forward-Looking Disclosure in Manufacturing Companies. Journal of Accounting Paradigms, IV(3), 1131–1140. 25) Peterson, C. A., & Philpot, J. (2007). Women's Roles on US Fortune 500 Boards: Director Expertise and Committee Memberships. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9164-8 26) Puspayanti, W., & Puspawati, D. (2024). Forward Looking Information Disclosure: Aspects of Corporate Governance. Journal of Social and Economic Research, 6(1), 810–824. https://idm.or.id/JSER/index. 27) Rahman, MM, & Khatun, N. (2023). Forward Looking Disclosure and Its Determinants: Empirical Evidence from The Listed Banks of Bangladesh. Journal of Banking & Financial Services, 15(1 & 2), 131–151. https://doi.org/10.57143/jbfsv15a7 28) Sidhu, M. K. (2016). Corporate Governance and Stock Market Liquidity. Journal of Commerce and Accounting Research, 5(3), 12–20. 29) Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. 30) Tan, Y., & Liu, Y. (2017). How Do Investors View Information Disclosure Quality Rating?: The Effect of FNFI on Corporate Investment Efficiency. Nankai Business Review International, 8(2), 210–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/NBRI-06-2016-0024 31) Utami, W., Wahyuni, PD, & Nugroho, L. (2020). Determinants of Stock Liquidity: Forward-Looking Information, Corporate Governance, and Asymmetric Information. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 7(12), 795–807. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO12.795 32) Uyar, A., & Kilic, M. (2012). Influence of Corporate Attributes on Forward-Looking Information Disclosure in Publicly Traded Turkish Corporations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.039 33) Wulandari, M., Syahrani Amelia, N., Nashobi, MZ, & Noviyanti, I. (2024). Adaptation Strategies in Facing Recent Economic Changes. STIEP Journal of Economics, 9(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.54526/jes.v9i1.280