RATIO| YEAR| CONCLUSION| | 2009| 2010| 2011| | 1. win margin| 8.5%| 9.5%| 9.2%| From 2009-2010: goodish signFrom 2010-2011: non good | 2. ROA| 9%| 10.3%| 8.9%| | 3. roe| 28%| 29%| 30%| | 4. Receivable upset| 17.2x| 17.4x| 16x| | 5. Average collection resolution| 21 days| 20.6 days| 22.4 days| | 6. Inventory alienation| 11.1x| 10.3x| 10.1x| | 7. Fixed asset disturbance| 6.9x| 6.6x| 6.3x| | 8. Total asset turnover| 1.1x| 1.1x| 1x| | 9. Quick proportionality| 0.6| 0.6| 0,5| | 10. Current ratio| 0.9| 0.9| 0.8| | 11. Debt to summarize ratio| 67.4%| 64.8%| 69.9%| | 12. Times interest earned| 10.1x| 19.1x| 17.7x| | 13. Fixed charge indemnity coverage| 3.1x| 3.5x| 2x| | ANALYSIS: *From 2010 to 2011: Inefficient operating period Generally, monetary ratios of Unilever in 2011 was not a good sign to investors and the shareholders. * lucrativeness ratio: * Profit mar gin slightly declined in 2011 (down to 9.2 %), though the sales change magnitude during the year. It proved that Unilever control the cost and expenses inefficiently. The costs exceeded a substantial amount in revenues.
That was due(p) to the cost inflation occurred in 2011 and the expenditure on novel marketing (advertising, promotion) and branding scheme increased. * ROA fell off from 2010 to 2011. Because Unilever could not maximize their asset in operating. Additionally, it due to the depreciation on the old assets which did not overprotect income effectively. Moreover, in 2011, Unilever increased their short investment (part of current asset) t! o R&D part for innovation which might not contribute to the revenue immediately. * roe in 2011 is spunkyer than in 2010. Because the total equity reduced a little. On the some other hand, due to declining on mesh margin, this increased in ROE resulted from an increasing in debt to total asset ratio. Therefore, ROE is high but not positive....
If you need to get a estimable essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment