Comparative Balance Sheets For Years 12 And 11 Essay

Debt ratio percentages increased for Company G from 28.34% to 29.94%. Industry quartile is 30, 45 and 66 percent, putting Company G below average. Debt Ratio represents strength for Company G.

In 2005 and 2006, the results for the acid test ratio are fairly low compared to a preferable ratio of 1:1. The figures indicate that in the short term, the Oroton Group would only be able to pay back 49% and 47% of currents liabilities respectively in the very short term. In 2007, this figure rose to 78% which is a better ratio, although still not at the preferable ratio.

The current ratio shows the short-term debt-paying ability of the company also known as liquidity ratio. Components of the current ratio are current assets and current liabilities. To find the current ratio, divide current assets by current liabilities. For example if a current ratio was 2:1, then that company would be able to pay off its short term debt easily. But you should also look at the types of debt the company has because some assets might be larger. For the current ratio a rule of thumb is the ratio should be around 2:1. The company wants to at least make sure that the value of the current assets covers at least the amount of the short-term obligations. In 2013 the current ratio is 1.75 and in 2014 the current ratio is 1.8. This is showing a favorable

Liabilities. Company G has a Current Ratio for YR12 of 1.77. Comparing YR12 to YR11 the

Current Ratio: Current ratio helps the company assess its ability to use assets like cash, accounts receivable, inventory and the ability to pay short term liabilities as the accounts payable and wages. The ratio can be found by dividing the current assets /the current liabilities. Year 12 shows a ratio of 1.78 with year 11 a ratio of 1.86. Year 12 is down from year 11. The industry is 2.1 so year 12 has declined from the previous year and is near the lower quartile which means there is a weakness. There is a showing of declining trending.

First of which, is the current ratio. It has been rapidly declining since 2000. To me this indicates that there is a liquidity issue. Each year their trade debt increase exceeds the increase of net income for the company. As a result, the working capital has taken a nosedive from $58,650 in 2002 to only $5,466 in 2003.

A more tell tale sign is the quick ratio, or acid test, which has increased year after year. Debt to total assets has decreased over 5% since 2001, indicating less financing of current and long term debt and more company assets. Their cash debt coverage far surpasses the ideal 20%, indicating a high level of solvency with sufficient funds and assets to satisfy all debtors. Asset turnover has more or less maintained at right around 1.6, signifying a turnover rate of just less than 180 times per year.

Current ratio shows how well the company can pay off its short-term liability obligations. Short-term liabilities are debt due within the next year. Companies that have larger amounts of current assets are better able to pay off their current liabilities. The higher the ratio, the better able the company is to pay current obligations. A low ratio indicates the company is weighted down with current debt and the cash flow will suffer. The equation for current ratio

Increase in current liabilities Substantial increase in current liabilities weakened the company’s liquidity position. Its current liabilities were US$2,063.94 million at the end of FY2010, a 48.09% increase compared to the previous year. However, its current assets recorded a marginal increase of 25.07% - from US$1,770.02 million at the end of FY2009 to US$2,213.72 million at the end of FY2010. Following this, the company’s current ratio declined from 1.27 at the end of the FY2009 to 1.07 at the end of FY2010. A lower current ratio indicates that the company is in a weak financial position, and it may find it difficult to meet its day-to-day obligations.

Lawsons 2010 and 2011 current ratio are above the industry average (1.8:1) however in 2012 the current ratio falls below the industry average at 1.55:1 and than again in 2013 to 1.02:1. This indicates that the company’s ability to pay its debts is

If this ratio is high means company owns too many debts which may decrease their

Balance sheets and income statements are a snapshot of a company’s stability and financial situation. Combined the statements show the income, expenses, and stockholder’s equity in the company. These statements are often analyzed by financial institutions when a company comes to them needing a loan. Stockholders and other investors also look at these statements to make sure their investment will return a profit for them. This paper will look at four different companies and their balance sheets and income statements. The companies are Eastman Chemical Company, Covenant Transportation

The balance sheet and Income statement are the most important financial statements of the company that help conduct current analysis of company and evaluate its trends overtime. The balance sheet represents the company snapshots of its financial position on the last days of accounting period. Apple balance sheets, which represent a snapshot of its ending balances in asset, liability and equity account as of the date stated on the report, are changes each year from 2003 to 2014. On the other hand, the income statement shows its financial performance over 2003 to 2014. Apple basically ends its accounting period in September. Most of the long-term debts are in the form of the bonds. According to appleinsider.com, Apple recently issues a new euro bond worth about $2.26 billion with a maturity date on January 17, 2024 and coupon rate of 1.375% payable annually. The first payment will occur on January 17, 2016. Moody’s recently assigned a rating of Aa to Apple Inc. 's senior unsecured note issuance. Thus, Apple recent capital expenditure amount to 11,488 million according to morningstar.com. The analysis of financial statements is conduct to compare Apple with one of its closest rival Hewlett-Packard and twelve ratio were calculated. From table1 and chart1, the current ratio that determine the company ability to meet its short term obligation shows Apple’s current ratio is higher than that of Hewlett-Package from 2003 to 2014. That is, Apple is solvent than Hewlett Packard. Table

CURRENT RATIO show a company’s ability to pay its current obligations that is company’s liquidity. The current ratio position is lower for Honda at 0.33 than for Toyota at 1.22 in 2010. Honda has a large portion of receivables in assets both in trade, notes receivables and finance receivables. It has a huge portion of cash as well. This indicates the company has no problem in terms of generating a positive influx of assets. But in terms of liabilities it has a large portion of short term debt which makes almost 1/3rd of total Current liabilities. Also there is a significant portion of Long Term debt. The higher level of liabilities in the denominator reduces the overall ratio.

Current ratio of Company X and Y is 1.80, and 2.55 respectively. This ratio presents the proportion of current assets to current liabilities. This ratio provided a measure of degree to which current assets cover current liabilities. Since both companies have excess of current assets over their current liabilities, they met basic requirement of safety margin against uncertainty in realization of current assets and funds flows. Generally, it is suggested that a firm should have neither a very high ratio nor a very low ratio. Very high ratio implies heavy investments in current assets reflecting under utilization of the resources. A very low ratio endangers the business in to risks of not being able to pay short term requirements. Normally, it is advocated to have the current ratio as 2:1 (Baker and Powell, 2009).