Royal Dutch Shell Corporation: Research And Analysis Matrix

The gross profit ratio indicates that Next plc was able to maintain their gross profit. It has decreased insignificantly by 0.05%. In 2011

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.

The return on shareholders’ fund, capital employed, total assets all have gone down during this period. The ability of the company to pay its short term debt hasn’t varied much, but the administrative expenses have gone up by a very large amount.

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.

This ratio is similar to current ratio, except that it excludes inventory from current assets. Inventory is subtracted because it is considered to be less liquid than other current assets, that is, it cannot be easily used to pay for the company’s current liabilities. A company having a quick ratio of at least 1.0, is considered to be financially stable. It has sufficient liquid assets and hence, it will be able to pay back its debts easily (Qasim Saleem et al., 2011).

I decided to track financial performance metrics to assess the performances. For this year, I realized that my %change (Net Profit/Net Sales) was suffering starting with the first quarter and getting worst in the fourth quarter. My numbers from the first quarter to the fourth were -38%, -44%, -40%, and -161% respectively.

So while the company increased its net income, it has done so with diminishing profit margins.

These ratios are computed to judge the short term liquidity of the business. Two most important liquidity ratios are current ratio and quick ratio. These ratios determine the ability of firm to meets its current liabilities out of its current/quick assets.

To make further comment we need to investigate further by looking at industry, competitors and economy. There may be other factors causing this ratio to decrease such as a general decline gross margin profit in retail sector affecting all companies, high inflation causing less demand, increasing competition etc. We should do further investigation to make further comment.

Liquidity ratios measure the short term ability of a company to pay its obligations and meet their needs for maintaining cash. According to Cagle, Campbell & Jones (2013), “A good assessment of a company’s liquidity is important because a decline in liquidity leads to a greater risk of bankruptcy” (p. 44). Creditors, investors and analysts alike are all interested in a company’s liquidity. After computing liquidity

The ROE is actually very good in comparison to other market participants especially in 2003, but dropped significantly in 2004. Likewise the ROA dropped. Due to the fact that there was no decline in sales, the constantly rising operating expenses can be seen as a reason.

Liquidity ratios measure the ability of a firm to meet its short-term obligations. A company that is not able

This is due to the fact that inventory and accounts receivable are left out of the equation. Based on the cash ratio, this company carries a low cash balance. This may be an indication that they are aggressively investing in assets that will provide higher returns. We need to make sure that we have enough cash to meet our obligations, but too much cash reduces the return earned by the company.

Approximately 13.8% of the price differential in Europe for the Royal Dutch can be explained by market inefficiencies, and 11.71% for Shell in New York can be explained by the same reason.

These numbers come out to be lower than what is considered average for a normal manufacturing company in which a satisfactory current ratio is 2.0 while a good quick ratio is considered 1.5. However according to my research on the industry those numbers seem to be the norm.