Horizontal Analysis Of Financial Statements

Revenue

 

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

2014

2015

2016

2017

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

 

Revenue

21.29%

37.24%

-68.54%

-1.97%

Cost of revenue

113.50%

148.68%

55.46%

75.66%

Gross profit

-2.42%

8.59%

-100.43%

-21.94%

Operating expenses

Sales, General and administrative

24.59%

38.10%

16.86%

29.36%

Other operating expenses

109.91%

435.63%

171.96%

23.30%

Total operating expenses

38.52%

102.99%

42.18%

28.37%

Operating income

-38.23%

-73.98%

-225.14%

-65.93%

Interest Expense

196.76%

214.12%

234.33%

225.51%

Other income (expense)

-52.60%

-42.10%

-385.21%

-97.21%

Income before income taxes

-32.78%

-134.77%

-34.60%

-40.84%

Provision for income taxes

-26.27%

-65.47%

-64.33%

-48.76%

Minority interest

Other income

Net income from continuing operations

-54.33%

-167.19%

-21.22%

-37.28%

Net income from discontinuing ops

Other

Net income

-45.02%

-166.58%

-116.03%

-37.28%

Horizontal or trend analysis of financial statements

The horizontal analysis is basically a scrutiny if the financial statements which ultimately depicts the changes in the amounts of the financial statement. The trend situation can easily be analysed by the use of the Horizontal Analysis.

In the above analysis it can be observed that though the revenue increased from the year 2014 to 2015 to 37.24% but the company lost just the double in the year 2016. By the year 2017 the company improved to change the financials into the positives. Earlier the cost of the revenues have increased to peak in the year 2015 to 148% but then the company combat itself to make the positions better (Accounting for management, 2018). In terms of the sales and the general administrative expenses there is no major fluctuation in terms of the percentage. The major reason behind the loopholes in the performance of the company is the interest expense which is increasing continuously and therefore, it is advised to the company to cut down the cost of revenue by manufacturing internally and to set up another mode of the earnings in order to bring the balance between the costs and the earnings (Caccioli, Shrestha, Moore and Farmer, 2014).

The total rise in income was highest in the year 2014 which was 166% as compared to the base year. Even after the low growth in sales the company performed better in the year 2015. Henceforth, the company needs to improve the operating margin and the interest costs.

Profitability ratios are a kind of the measurement indicators that are used to assess the ability of the business to generate relative earnings along with the expenses (Tracy, 2012).

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Operating profit Margin

17.5%

9.7%

-4.4%

36.4%

10.6%

EBIT * 100

Sales

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Gross profit margin

79.55%

64.00%

62.94%

-1.08%

63.35%

Gross profit

Sales

As per the above calculations for the year 2013 to 2017, the performance of the company in terms of gross margin have relatively decreased and on the and also it can be observed that in the year 2016 the margin is negative as the cost of revenue is much higher than the sales value (Vogel, 2014) . The possible reason is decline in the sales and the overhead costs have been increased. Therefore the company needs to focus on the cost of revenue in the later periods.

The efficiency ratio basically determines the ability of the company to keep a management and alignment between the assets and the liabilities of the company (Warren & Jones, 2018).

Inventories turnover period

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Inventory * 365

142.80

78.49

72.98

74.27

78.34

Cost of goods sold

Settlement period of debtors

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Trade debtors *365

839.39

482.76

390.11

489.48

356.42

Revenue

 

Like in the above table the inventory turnover period and the debtor’s turnover period are analysed for the period of the five years (Bragg, 2012).  Since the inventory turnover is decreasing it can give confidence to the company to improve the weaker areas. Moreover, on the other hand if debtors period are decreasing the company is taking longer time than the usual to cover from the debtors. Hence, they need to improve the debtor’s period accordingly (Brown and Petersen, 2015).

The main aim of calculating the ratios is to analyse the capacity of the company to pay off the external liabilities without any help from the external sources (Gibson, 2011).

Current Ratio

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Current assets

1.71

2.18

2.16

2.09

2.71

Current Liabilities

Quick Ratio

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Quick assets

1.42

1.82

1.78

1.69

2.36

Current Liabilities

Cost of revenue

According to the performance of the company in the last five years the current ratio of the company has improved immensely (Godwin & Alderman, 2012). There are enough current assets to pay off the external liabilities and also mostly the liquid assets which again perform better than the standard benchmark. In the year 2017 the quick ratio is highest up to 2.36. Yet it is advisable to keep the ratio till 1.7 as the enough cash will also turns out to be unfavourable.

The best known examples of the gearing ratio are debt to total assets, interest coverage ratio, debt to equity ratio.

Debt to assets ratio

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Debt

0.000

0.156

0.150

0.150

0.153

Total assets

Interest coverage ratio

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

EBIT

16.61

3.76

-1.84

3.25

3.02

Interest Expense

The gearing ratio is the measure that demonstrates the degree of the firm’s operations which is funded by the combination of the equity as well as the debt. A company may have a ratio of the 0.6 but still it will vary from the industry’s average (Higgins, 2012). If the computation is less than 1, it means the company isn’t making enough money to pay its interest payments and vice versa the company is able to pay the interest obligations easily with enough cash left. The company though have failed dot achieve the standard in the year 2015 yet it improved in the year 2016 but in the last year again the company is facing issues. Therefore, the company shall cut down the interest expenses (Jenter & Lewellen, 2015).

The investment ratios are the performance drivers of the company. The company assess the price earnings ratio, the dividend yield ratio. These ratios are majorly in the interest of the investors, analysts and the competitors (Law, 2018).

In essence the price earnings ratio is the indicator of the company’s earnings against the one dollar. A higher P/E ratio suggests the investors are expecting the higher earnings growth.

Price earnings ratio

Price per share

1.07

1.08

0.7

0.44

0.39

Price per share

0.79

1.79

-0.83

0.41

0.49

EPS

Dividend yield

Annual dividend

0.375

0.04

0.04

0.02

0.01

Annual dividend

48%

2%

-5%

5%

2%

Current stock price

As per the table only in the year the company was able to bring the P/E ratio to 1.79 and in the rest of the years the performance is utterly questionable (Chiaramonte and Casu, 2017). On the other hand the annual dividend was also low after the year 2013. Dividend Yield ratio on the other hand determines the dividend per share. The earnings on the amount of the investment are determined by this ratio. Historically a higher dividend has been in the demand as it able to provide and evidence that the stock is under-priced and the company has fallen the hard. On the other hand to many investors this scheme can act as pros as it acts as an aid to marketing a fund to the investor in the retail business (Makri,Tsagkanos and Bellas, 2014). Such a situation arises mainly because the earnings are not enough and the company is advised to improve the financials as the price per share is also low in terms of the competitors.

References

Tracy, A. (2012) Ratio analysis fundamentals: how 17 financial ratios can allow you to analyse any business on the planet. RatioAnalysis. Net.

Vogel, H.L. (2014) Entertainment industry economics: A guide for financial analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Warren, C. S., & Jones, J. (2018) Corporate financial accounting. USA: Cengage Learning.

Bragg, S. M. (2012) Financial analysis: a controller’s guide. New Jersy: John Wiley & Sons.

Gibson, C. H. (2011) Financial reporting and analysis. USA: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Godwin, N., & Alderman, C. (2012) Financial ACCT2. USA: Cengage Learning.

Higgins, R. C. (2012) Analysis for financial management. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Jenter, D. & Lewellen, K. (2015) CEO preferences and acquisitions. The Journal of Finance, 70(6), pp.2813-2852.

Accounting for management, (2018) Horiozontal Analsyis [online] Available from https://www.accountingformanagement.org/horizontal-analysis-of-financial-statements/ [Accessed on 8th August 2018]

Caccioli, F., Shrestha, M., Moore, C. and Farmer, J.D., (2014) Stability analysis of financial contagion due to overlapping portfolios. Journal of Banking & Finance, 46, pp.233-245.

Makri, V., Tsagkanos, A. and Bellas, A., (2014) Determinants of non-performing loans: The case of Eurozone. Panoeconomicus, 61(2), pp.193-206.

Chiaramonte, L. and Casu, B., (2017) Capital and liquidity ratios and financial distress. Evidence from the European banking industry. The British Accounting Review, 49(2), pp.138-161.

Law, J., (2018) A Dictionary of Finance and Banking. Oxford University Press.

Brown, J.R. and Petersen, B.C., (2015) Which investments do firms protect? Liquidity management and real adjustments when access to finance falls sharply. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 24(4), pp.441-465.