arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Innovative startups and their traditional peers: Further evidence using performance and survival analysis

Luisa Anderloni & Murad Harasheh

Review of Financial Economics2025https://doi.org/10.1002/rfe.70004article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.41

What the paper says

Abstract This study assesses the Italian Startup Act, introduced in 2012, to promote innovative entrepreneurship. Focusing on manufacturing firms registered between 2014 and 2017, we compare innovative startups with non‐innovative peers using matching techniques, survival analysis, probit models, and panel regressions. Findings reveal that innovative startups exhibit stronger financial structures, higher survival rates, and fewer credit constraints, though they take longer to achieve profitability. Firms with greater leverage are more likely to register as innovative, while larger firms are less inclined to do so. Intellectual property (IP) compliance correlates with higher survival and stronger patent activity. These results offer insights into industrial policy effectiveness. While the Startup Act supports financial access and firm resilience, its potential to drive innovation and IP development remains underexploited. Our analysis suggests the need for more targeted, regionally nuanced interventions to enhance the policy's impact and better support the growth of Italy's innovation‐driven startup ecosystem.

2 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/rfe.70004

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{luisa2025,
  title        = {{Innovative startups and their traditional peers: Further evidence using performance and survival analysis}},
  author       = {Luisa Anderloni & Murad Harasheh},
  journal      = {Review of Financial Economics},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/rfe.70004},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Innovative startups and their traditional peers: Further evidence using performance and survival analysis

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.