Operating Expenses Analysis

The overall assessment is mainly conducted on Harvey Norman (HVN) organisation, where its financial performance is evaluated by analysing different financial ratios, income statement, balance sheet statement and cash flow statement. In addition, the financial performance is mainly conducted to understand the progress and financial trend of Harvey Norman for previous five financial year. The company mainly falls under Consumer discretionary sector, where its financial performance could help in understanding its current financial condition. Moreover, the income statement analysis is conducted to understand the changes in retained earnings and operating expenses of the company. The evaluation of balance sheet mainly helps in depicting the Growth of property, plant, and equipment, while detecting the growth of long term liabilities. The cash flow statement analysis also helps in understanding the Cash at the year end, and Net financing cash flows of the company over the period.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14 Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	06/15	06/16	06/17
Operating Expenses	(2,078,166,000)	(1,974,394,000)	(2,120,288,000)	(2,229,745,000)	(2,416,109,000)	(2,423,093,000)
Percentage change in OE		-4.99%	7.39%	5.16%	8.36%	0.29%
Retained Earnings	1,956,966,000	2,008,880,000	2,109,032,000	2,043,463,000	2,125,186,000	2,229,200,000
Percentage change in RE		2.65%	4.99%	-3.11%	4.00%	4.89%

The above table and figure mainly helps in depicting the overall operating expenses of the company over the period of five years. In addition, the percentage change in operating expenses of the company could also be conducted from the above calculations. From the overall evaluation the changes in expense has been conducted due to the rising income and revenue incurred by the company over the time. The percentage change expenses during 2013 is mainly at the levels of -4.99%, which is due to the low expense incurred during 2013 as compared to 2012. The overall increment in expenses has mainly increased during 2014, which is portrayed from the high value of percentage change by 7.39%. On the other hand, Atoom, Malkawi & Al Share (2017) criticises that the evaluation of profit and loss account does not help in understating the actual cash position of the company, as it includes the credit transactions conducted by the company over the period. From the overall evaluation of operating expenses, relevant increment in value was witnessed from 2014 to 2017. However, during 2017 the increment in operations expenses was as low as 0.29%, which indicates the slow growth in expenses incurred by the company. This increment was mainly conducted to support the rising operational capability of the company, which was achieved due to the rising revenue generated by the company. In this context, Liang et al., (2016) stated that the evaluation of income statement mainly helps in understanding the expense and income that is generated by the company over the period. 

Retained Earnings Analysis

The above figure mainly depicts the overall changes in value of retained earnings and percentage change in retained earnings. This valuation mainly helps in understanding the financial position and profit generation capability of the company over the period. The values of retained earnings mainly increased from 2012 to 2013 by 2.65%, which indicates the high income generated by the company. Nevertheless, Brooks (2015) argued that companies to increase their retained earnings reduce their tax outflow by using different depreciation and other measures. However, the retained income of the company mainly declined in 2015, where a steep decline in income stream of the company was witnessed, while the expenses remained same, which declined its retained earnings for 2015. However, from 2016 to 2017 the overall increment in retained earnings was seen, which is calculated at the levels of 4.89%. This increment in profits mainly indicates the financial improvements, which was obtained by Harvey Norman in 2017, as compared to other years. Ronapat (2018) stated that with the evaluation of retained earnings investors can identify the current financial position of the company, which could be used in the expansion process of the organisation.

The analysis of retained earnings and operational expenses of Harvey Norman mainly helps in identifying and improving financial position of the company over time. Moreover, revenue of the organisation has relevantly increased exponentially against the rising operating expenses, while raising the level of retained earnings of the company. Therefore, it could be understood that income status of the organisation has relevantly increased over time, due to the accumulation of high revenues and low expenses incurred from operations. According to Kanapickiene & Grundiene (2015), the analysis of income statement mainly helps investors in gauging into the expenses and income that is been conducted by the company over the fiscal year.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
NCA – PP&E	536,277,000	548,903,000	569,057,000	552,603,000	580,805,000	625,112,000
Percentage change in PP&E		2.35%	3.67%	-2.89%	5.10%	7.63%
Total NCL	767,164,000	867,119,000	471,998,000	518,605,000	464,114,000	633,412,000
Percentage change in Long term liabilities		13.03%	-45.57%	9.87%	-10.51%	36.48%

The change in Growth of property, plant and equipment is mainly evaluated with the help of above figure and tables. The increment in overall valuation of property, plant and equipment mainly helps in depicting the financial position of the company over time. In addition, the changes in percentage of property, plant, and equipment from 2012 to 2017 is relevantly positive, which indicates the accumulation of adequate assets conducted by Harvey Norman. Furthermore, the financial position, and expenses incurred by the company on property, plant and equipment can be seen from the above calculations. The values of net increment in property, plant, and equipment can be seen from the above figure, which has relevantly increased from 2012 to 2014, while decline in its value can be seen during 2015. This decline is mainly conducted, due to the reduction in dur to the low accumulation of revenue and cash conducted during 2015 to support the purchase of assets. Moreover, the percentage change in property, plant, and equipment during 2015 was mainly at the levels of -2.89%, which eventually depicts the low expenses incurred in asset accumulation. Buchman, Harris & Liu (2016) mentioned that with the use of fixed assets analysis the investors evaluate the operational capability of the company.

Moreover, increment in property, plant, and equipment accumulation during 2016 was at the levels of 5.10%, while during 2017 the value increased to 7.63%. This relevantly indicates the accumulation of high end fixed assets, which was used in improving the level of operations of the company. This increment in in property, plant and equipment mainly supported the overall financial capability and revenue generation capacity of the organisation. On the contrary, Paul & Mitra (2017) criticises that the increment in fixed asset accumulation might reduce the cash availability and working capital capability of the company to continue its operations smoothly. 

The overall figure helps in understanding the change in long term liabilities of the company over the period of 5 years, which has changed exponentially over time. In addition, the changes in percentage of long term liabilities is mainly identified from the non-current liabilities of Harvey Norman. Moreover, the long-term liabilities accumulated by the company can be identified from the above figure, which has declined from 2012 to 2017. Moreover, the financial performance of company mainly improved due to the low accumulation of debt conducted for supporting its operations. The long-term liabilities mainly declined in 2014, where the change in long term debt was at the levels of -45.57%. Carlino et al., (2017) mentioned that with the evaluation of non-current liabilities the current debt position of the company can be identified, which could help in understanding solvency condition of the company. This relevantly indicates that the company disposed maximum of the liabilities during the financial year, which declined the net income and cash position. The increment in long term liabilities of the company increased in 2015, where a sudden decline was seen in 2016, as the long-term debt declined by -10.51%. This decline in overall long-term debt mainly helps in understanding the financial improvements, which is achieved by the company during the five financial years. On the other hand, during 2017 the increment in long term liabilities can be seen at the levels of 36.548%, which was conducted to support the operational needs of the organisation. On the other hand, Lakshmi, Martin & Venkatesan (2016) argued that accumulation of high end non-current liabilities by the organisation could increase the level of interest payments, which might hamper the level of profits that is generated from operations.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Cash at End of Period	140,093,000	124,567,000	115,172,000	153,220,000	103,631,000	42,882,000
Percentage change in Cash at end of period		-11.08%	-7.54%	33.04%	-32.36%	-58.62%
Net Financing Cashflows	-8,509,000	-46,562,000	-235,213,000	-220,597,000	-307,427,000	-287,124,000
Percentage change in net financing cash flows		447.21%	405.16%	-6.21%	39.36%	-6.60%

The changes in cash at the end of period can be identified from the above figure, which helps in understanding its cash position. The company’s overall cash position mainly declined over the period of 5 fiscal years, which cans be identified from the above table and figure. During 2013 the overall decline in cash position of the company was at the levels of -11.08%, which further declined by -7.54% in 2014. However, during 2015 the overall cash position of the company mainly improved by 33.04%, which indicated the improving cash position of the company that might help in supporting its financial decisions. Moreover, decline in overall cash position was further seen in 2016 and 2017 at the levels of -32.36% and -58.62%. This relevantly indicates the declining in position of Harvey Norman in supporting its activities due to cash crunch. According to Wong & Joshi (2015), the evaluation of cash position relevantly allows investor to understand its financial capability for supporting its short-term liabilities and continue with its operations.

Long-term Liabilities Analysis

Therefore, it could be understood that cash position of the Harvey Norman mainly declined over the period of 5 years, which relevantly reduces its ability to conduct smooth operations. This continuous decline in cash position during 2013, 2014, 2016 and 2017 is mainly complemented with the rising in net assets. This relevantly indicates that Harvey Norman has used its spare cash to purchase relevant assets for complementing the increment in assets such as property, plant, and equipment. Hence, it could be understood that decline in cash position of Harvey Norman is supported by the increment in total assets, which is used to improve its operational capability. On the other hand, Wijesundera et al., (2015) argued that the evaluation of cash position does not allow investors to gauge into the financial growth and progress, which could be obtained by the company in near future. 

The above figure mainly helps in understanding the changes in net financial cash flows of the company over the period of 5 years can be identified. The changes in net financing cash flows of the company mainly depicts the investment, which is been conducted by Harvey Norman during the 5-financial year. The net financing cash flows of the organization has the relatively increased over the financial year, which indicates the level of investment that is conducted by the organization in its operations. The drastic changes net financing cash flows was seen you during 2013, where the percentage change in client to 447.21%. Moreover, the continuous increment in investment is seen in 2014 with a total percentage change in investments of 405.16%. However, during 2015 the overall investment growth mainly declined to -6.21%, which indicated it slow growth and investment capability of the company to support its operations. Moreover, the net financing cash flows conducted by Harvey Norman continue to during 2016, which was again halted in 2017, as the change in percentage of Financing cash flow became -6.60%. In this context, Choi, Kim & Oh (2017) stated that with the evaluation of cash flow statement the overall financial capability of the organization can be identified, which is essential for investors while making relevant investment decisions.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Net Profit after Tax Before Abnormal	176,315,000	144,477,000	212,238,000	268,914,000	351,340,000	452,966,000
Total Revenue	2,352,978,000	2,239,716,000	2,435,336,000	2,580,961,000	2,825,978,000	2,904,742,000
Net Profit Margin (%)	7.49%	6.45%	8.71%	10.42%	12.43%	15.59%

The above calculations mainly represent the overall net profit margin of Harvey Norman from 2012 to 2017, which is relatively improved from the level of 7.49 % to 15.59%. This increment in overall net profit margin is a relatively conducted due to the rising revenues and net profit incurred by the company during the 5 fiscal years. The overall net profit margin relatively increased from 2014 to 2017, as during 2013 overall ratio declined to 6.45 per cent as compared to 7.49% in 2012. This relatively indicated the decline in overall revenue generated by the organization during the fiscal year. However, after 2013 the overall net profit margin relatively increased from 8.71% to 15.59% without any halt. This relatively indicate the increasing profit generation capacity of the organization while supporting it’s expensive. Rashid et al., (2015) mentioned that with evaluation of net profit margin investors can detect the overall capability of the organization to sustain higher net income after conducting all its expenses.

Cash Position and Net Financing Cashflows Analysis

The difference between net profit and total revenues relatively states the expenses incurred by the organization. Nevertheless, the declining gap indicates the reduction and cost incurred by the organization to support its future continuity and growth. Nevertheless, Elhaj, Muhamed & Ramli (2015) argue that net profit margin does not allow investors to detect organizations financial stability and growth, which is essential in generating returns from investment. The continuous rise in net profit mainly States the capability of Harvey Norman to capture the overall market in Australia and generate adequate returns from Investments.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Net Profit after Tax Before Abnormal	176,315,000	144,477,000	212,238,000	268,914,000	351,340,000	452,966,000
Average Shareholder’s Equity	2,247,671,500	2,315,368,500	2,427,480,500	2,523,983,000	2,622,767,000	2,750,790,500
Return on Equity	7.84%	6.24%	8.74%	10.65%	13.40%	16.47%

The above figure relatively indicates the change in overall return on equity of Harvey Norman from 2013 to 2017, which helps in analyzing the management decision in utilizing its overall equity capital. In addition, the increment in return on equity is a relatively seen during 2014, where the return on equity is valued at 8.74%, which was relatively higher from 6.24% achieved during 2013. However, the overall decline of return on equity was seen during 2013 as its value declined from 7.84% in 2012 to 6.24% in 2013. This relatively indicates the low net income generated by the organization during the financial year. The continuous rise in net profit after tax was scene from 2014 to 2017, was the main reason behind the relevant increment in return on equity obtained by Harvey Norman. However, the evaluation also indicated that the average stakeholder equity did not decline from 2012 to 2017, which relatively depicts the incapability of the management to adequately utilize the current equity capital to generate a higher rate of return from investment. The decline in net income and the continue increment in average shareholders’ equity was the main reason behind the decline in return on equity during 2013. The return on equity relatively increased due to the exponential increment in net profit obtained by Harvey Norman, as compared to the shareholders equity. This relatively indicated that Harvey Norman was generating a higher net profit from operation by deploying the relevant equity capital. The evaluation of return on equity allows investor to detect management efficiency in utilizing the available funds achieving higher rate of return (Ecer & Boyukaslan, 2014).

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Current Assets	1,498,941,000.00	1,531,913,000.00	1,607,167,000.00	1,676,468,000.00	1,605,547,000.00	1,112,433,000.00
Current Liabilities	917,770,000.00	834,057,000.00	1,262,232,000.00	1,283,079,000.00	1,279,012,000.00	743,425,000.00
Current Ratio	1.63	1.84	1.27	1.31	1.26	1.50

The overall graph relatively indicates the change in current ratio of Harvey Norman from 2012 to 2017, which has relatively deteriorated for the period of 5 fiscal years. The overall current ratio of the company relatively declined from the levels of 1.63 in 2012 to 1.50 in 2017, which is only conducted due to the low accumulation of both current assets and current liabilities by the organization. The increment in overall current assets was seen from 2012 to 2015 while a decline and upgrade in current liabilities was seen between the period. this was relatively conducted due to the continuous changes in the operational capability of Harvey Norman to support it long term assets. The company was more focused on improving its long-term assets for raising the level of operations in the organization. However, from 2015 to 2017 the overall current assets and current liabilities of the organization relatively decline, why the decline in current assets was much higher than the current liabilities. this could be identified from the low current ratio of 1.50 that is achieved by the company during 2017. Khan & Khokhar (2015) argued that the continuous increment in current liabilities are not a fruitful condition for the organization, as it forces them to sell their fixed assets to support the need of relevant payments.

Conclusion

The low current ratio achieved by Harvey Norman relatively reduces its capability to support its short term financial obligations without selling it fixed assets. However, the current ratio is relatively lower than the minimum standard of 2, which helps in identifying the low financial capability of the company to support its operations. In this context, Eckerd (2015) stated that the current ratio relatively helps investor to identify the current financial position of an organization gauges into its ability for acquiring more current liabilities to support it operations.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Current Assets	1,498,941,000	1,531,913,000	1,607,167,000	1,676,468,000	1,605,547,000	1,112,433,000
Current Liabilities	917,770,000	834,057,000	1,262,232,000	1,283,079,000	1,279,012,000	743,425,000
CA – Inventories	263,421,000	268,781,000	297,670,000	298,381,000	315,746,000	315,968,000
Quick Ratio	1.35	1.51	1.04	1.07	1.01	1.07

The above figure relatively helps in detecting the overall calculation of quick ratio or acid test ratio, which helps in identifying the actual position of the company in supporting with short term liability. The company’s overall value of quick ratio has a relatively declined from 1.35 in 2012 to 1.07 in 2017, which relatively indicates the accumulation of high current liabilities in comparison to current assets. The company’s overall accumulation of current assets and current liabilities has a relatively declined over the period of 5 fiscal years. The quick ratio has a relatively reduced due to the continuous maintenance of adequate inventory by the company while reducing its current assets and liabilities. Harvey Norman has been maintaining adequate inventory levels to support its demand from customers while reducing its current assets and current liabilities. This has relatively forced the organization to minimize the exposure in current assets and effectively utilize its overall financial resources. However, the continuous maintenance of inventory levels as relatively blocked as the essential capital of the organization. From the overall calculation it will be understood that the invention level of the organization has a relatively increased from 2012 to 2017 while both the current assets and current liabilities has a relatively declined, which only indicates the accumulation of inventory conducted by the company for the period of time. This relatively indicates the incapability of the organization to continue with its operations without accumulating inventory. Sriram (2018) stated that with the use of quick ratio investors are able to gauge into the actual financial position of the company.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Net Interest Expense	-40,033,000.00	-34,102,000.00	-27,563,000.00	-24,215,000.00	-21,111,000.00	-14,930,000.00
EBIT	292,925,000.00	283,435,000.00	340,491,000.00	402,589,000.00	523,992,000.00	660,906,000.00
Net Interest cover	7.32	8.31	12.35	16.63	24.82	44.27

The above calculation relatively indicates the overall changes in net interest expenses and earnings before interest and tax for determining the overall in net interest coverage of Harvey Norman. The overall increment in earnings before interest and tax is seen from 2012 to 2017, which indicates the high financial capability of the company to continue its growth and obtain relevant revenues. However, the net interest expense has relatively declined over the period, which only indicates the continuous repayment of short term and long-term loans conducted by the organization during the period. This decline in overall net interest expenses as a relatively allowed the organization to improve loans and depth to support its overall operations and progress. The net interest expense has relatively declined from 2012-2017, while the overall Earnings before interest and tax has increased exponentially. This relatively forced the overall net interest coverage ratio of Harvey Norman from 7.32 to 44.27, which relatively indicates the high capability of the company to acquire more debt, as it could support more interest payments on loans. Erdogan (2014) stated that with the increment in net interest coverage ratio the financial position of the organization improves, as its capability to support the interest payments has a relatively enhanced over the period, which will not affect its financial progress.

On the other hand, the rising net interest cover ratio would also allow the company to acquire loans from banks, as they evaluate the condition of the organization to support short term and long-term liabilities. This achievement is relatively obtained due to the continuous decline in current liabilities and long-term liabilities of the organization for the period of 5 fiscal years. The company has been declining its liabilities over the period of 5 fiscal year for improving its overall financial position and condition.

Particulars	06/12	06/13	06/14	06/15	06/16	06/17
Total Liabilities	1,684,934,000.00	1,701,176,000.00	1,734,230,000.00	1,801,684,000.00	1,743,126,000.00	1,376,837,000.00
Total Assets	3,951,816,000.00	4,065,031,000.00	4,225,336,000.00	4,358,544,000.00	4,431,800,000.00	4,189,744,000.00
Debt Ratio	42.64%	41.85%	41.04%	41.34%	39.33%	32.86%

The above calculation relevantly indicates the overall debt ratio of Harvey Norman from 2012 to 2017, which relatively indicates usage of adequate debt to support operation of the company. The overall evaluation of the above figure relatively indicates that depth ratio of the company has declined over the period 5 fiscal years, which started from 42.64% in 2012 to 32.86% in 2017. This relevant decline in depth ratio indicates the low accumulation of liabilities in comparison to assets of the organization. Moreover, it also evaluates the total asset condition of Harvey Norman, which is relatively supported by equity finance and not by debt finance (Ozturk & Serçemeli, 2016). This relevant change in debt ratio was mainly achieved due to the arising total Assets of the organization while its total liabilities declined. the total Assets of the organization relatively increased from 2012 to 2016 in 2017 slide decline in total assets can be seen. However, in comparison to the total assets the total liabilities of the organization relatively declined from 2016, which relatively improved the overall debt ratio of Harvey Norman.

Conclusion:

From the overall calculations and evaluation of the financial ratios, the current financial position of Harvey Norman can be identified. Harvey Norman current financial position is relatively good, which could allow investors in improving its return from investment by purchasing shares of the organization. Valuation of the ratio relatively indicated a positive by for Harvey Norman as it iteratively improved over the period of 5 fiscal year. The company’s financial progress during the 5 fiscal years has been relatively impressive, which could relevantly attract move investors into their vicinity. The continuous improvement in profitability, liquidity, and solvency ratios could eventually help depicting the financial improvements that has been achieved by Harvey Norman over the fiscal year. The company has relatively increased its overall assets during the period, while both its current and noncurrent liabilities has a relatively declined. this mainly indicates the financial improvements obtained by the organization during the fiscal years. Therefore, after evaluating the financial ratios in income stability and asset accumulation condition of Harvey Norman can be identified. Harvey Norman has a relatively improved its overall operational capability for the period of 5 fiscal year, by increasing its accumulation of plants machinery and equipment to support the rising demand from customers. The continuous improvement in revenue generation condition is mainly supported from the high operational capability obtained by the organization. Financial ratios mainly highlight the overall provisions and conditions taken by the organization in achieving the current of financial health. Thus, it could be said the Harvey Norman’s financial position is relevantly sound and it is an adequate investment option for potential investors.

Reference and Bibliography:

Adam, M. H. M. (2014). Evaluating the financial performance of banks using financial ratios A case study of Erbil bank for investment and finance. European Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance Research, 2(6), 162-177.

Aripin, N., Ho, P., & Tower, G. (2017). The Masters’ Control: How Ownership Structure Influences the Communication of Financial Ratios. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 7(2).

Arkan, T. (2016). The importance of financial ratios in predicting stock price trends: A case study in emerging markets. Finanse. Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia, (1), 79.

Asiri, B. K. (2015). How investors perceive financial ratios at different growth opportunities and financial leverages. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 6(3), 1.

Atoom, R., Malkawi, E., & Al Share, B. (2017). Utilizing Australian Shareholders’ Association (ASA): Fifteen Top Financial Ratios to Evaluate Jordanian Banks’ Performance. Journal of Applied Finance and Banking, 7(1), 119.

Banerjee, S., Guha, B., & Bandyopadhyay, G. (2016). A Post Factor Analysis of Financial Ratios of Selected IPOs and its Impact on Grading: An Empirical Inquest. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 8(1), 23.

Brooks, R. (2015). Financial management: core concepts. Pearson.

Buchman, T., Harris, P., & Liu, M. (2016). GAAP vs. IFRS Treatment of Leases and the Impact on Financial Ratios.

Carlino, L., Coppens, F., González, J., Ortega, M., Pérez-Duarte, S., Rubbrecht, I., & Vennix, S. (2017). Decomposition techniques for financial ratios of European non-financial listed groups (No. 21). ECB Statistics Paper.

Choi, J. Y., Kim, J., & Oh, K. J. (2017). Portfolio optimization strategy based on financial ratios. The Korean Data & Information Science Society, 28(6), 1481-1500.

Dias, A., Pinto, C., Batista, J., & Neves, M. E. (2016). Signaling Tax Evasion by Using Financial Ratios and Cluster Analysis. OBEGEF.

Ecer, F., & Boyukaslan, A. (2014). Measuring performances of football clubs using financial ratios: the gray relational analysis approach. American Journal of Economics, 4(1), 62-71.

Eckerd, A. (2015). Two approaches to nonprofit financial ratios and the implications for managerial incentives. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(3), 437-456.

Elhaj, M. A. A., Muhamed, N. A., & Ramli, N. M. (2015). The influence of corporate governance, financial ratios, and Sukuk structure on Sukuk rating. Procedia Economics and Finance, 31, 62-74.

Erdogan, A. (2014). Applying factor analysis on the financial ratios of Turkey’s top 500 industrial enterprises.

Ibrahim, S. N. S., Arif, H. M., & Paino, H. (2017). The Relationship between Corporate Governance Disclosures and Balance Sheet Ratios. Gading Journal for the Social Sciences, 11(02), 33-40.

Kanapickien?, R., & Grundien?, Ž. (2015). The model of fraud detection in financial statements by means of financial ratios. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 321-327.

Khan, M. N., & Khokhar, I. (2015). The effect of selected financial ratios on profitability: an empirical analysis of listed firms of cement sector in Saudi Arabia. Quarterly Journal of Econometrics Research, 1(1), 1-12.

Lakshmi, T. M., Martin, A., & Venkatesan, V. P. (2016). A genetic bankrupt ratio analysis tool using a genetic algorithm to identify influencing financial ratios. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 20(1), 38-51.

Liang, D., Lu, C. C., Tsai, C. F., & Shih, G. A. (2016). Financial ratios and corporate governance indicators in bankruptcy prediction: A comprehensive study. European Journal of Operational Research, 252(2), 561-572.

Mousa, G. A. (2015). Financial Ratios versus Data Envelopment Analysis: The Efficiency Assessment of Banking Sector in Bahrain Bourse. International Journal of Business and Statistical Analysis, 2(2), 75-84.

Öztürk, M., & Serçemeli, M. (2016). Impact of New Standard” IFRS 16 Leases” on Statement of Financial Position and Key Ratios: A Case Study on an Airline Company in Turkey. Business and Economics Research Journal, 7(4), 143.

Paul, S., & Mitra, G. (2017). Impact of Financial Ratios on Stock Price: A Comparative Study with Hang Seng and Nifty Data. Research Bulletin, 43(2), 64-71.

Rahman, M. A., Asaduzzaman, M., & Hossin, M. S. (2016). Impact of Financial Ratios on Non-Performing Loans of Publicly Traded Commercial Banks in Bangladesh. International Journal of Financial Research, 8(1), 181.

Rashid, N. M., Norfadzilah, N. M., Noor, R. M., Mastuki, N. A., & Bardai, B. (2015). Longitudinal Study of Corporate Tax Planning: Analysis on Companies’ Tax Expense and Financial Ratios. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 23.

Ronapat, M. (2018). BANKRUPTCY PREDICTION USING CAMEL RATIOS: THE CASE OF THE STOCK EXCHANGE OF THAILAND. AU Journal of Management, 4(1), 26-32.

Sriram, M. (2018). Do firm specific characteristics and industry classification corroborate voluntary disclosure of financial ratios: an empirical investigation of S&P CNX 500 companies. Journal of Management and Governance, 1-18.

Vedd, R., & Yassinski, N. (2015). The Effect of Financial Ratios, Firm Size & Operating Cash Flows on Stock Price: Evidence from the Latin America Industrial Sector. Journal of Business and Accounting, 8(1), 15.

Wijesundera, A. A. V. I., Weerasinghe, D. A. S., Krishna, T. P. C. R., Gunawardena, M. M. D., & Peiris, H. R. I. (2015). Predictability of stock returns using financial ratios: empirical evidence from Colombo stock exchange.

Wong, K., & Joshi, M. (2015). The impact of lease capitalisation on financial statements and key ratios: Evidence from Australia. Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, 9(3), 27.

Yu, Q., Miche, Y., Séverin, E., & Lendasse, A. (2014). Bankruptcy prediction using extreme learning machine and financial expertise. Neurocomputing, 128, 296-302.

Zeller, T. L., Kostolansky, J., & Bozoudis, M. (2016). Have changes in business practices and reporting standards changed the taxonomy of financial ratios?. American Journal of Business, 31(2), 85-97.