CH 08
CH 08
8-1
OUTLINE
8-2
ANALYSIS OBJECTIVES
Analyze return on net operating assets and its relevance in our analysis.
Describe disaggregation of return on net operating assets and the importance of its
components.
Analyze return on common shareholders' equity and its role in our analysis.
8-3
QUESTIONS
1. The return that is achieved in any one period on the invested capital of a company
consists of the returns (and losses) realized by its various segments and divisions. In
turn, these returns are made up of the results achieved by individual product lines and
projects. A well-managed company exercises rigorous control over the returns achieved
by each of its profit centers, and it rewards the managers on the basis of such results.
Specifically, when evaluating new investments in assets or projects, management will
compute the estimated returns it expects to achieve and use these estimates as a basis
for its decision to invest or not.
2. Profit generation is the first and foremost purpose of a company. The effectiveness of
operating performance determines the ability of the company to survive financially, to
attract suppliers of funds, and to reward them adequately. Return on invested capital is
the prime measure of company performance. The analyst uses it as an indicator of
managerial effectiveness, and/or a measure of the company's ability to earn a
satisfactory return on investment.
3. If the investment base is defined as comprising net operating assets, then net operating
profit (e.g., before interest) after tax (NOPAT) is the relevant income figure to use. The
exclusion of interest from income deductions is due to its being regarded as a payment
for the use of money from the suppliers of debt capital (in the same way that dividends
are regarded as a payment to suppliers of equity capital). NOPAT is the appropriate
amount to measure against net operating assets as both are considered to be operating.
4. First, the motivation for excluding nonproductive assets from invested capital is based
on the idea that management is not responsible for earning a return on non-operating
invested capital. Second, the exclusion of intangible assets from the investment base is
often due to skepticism regarding their value or their contribution to the earning power of
the company. Under GAAP, intangibles are carried at cost. However, if their cost exceeds
their future utility, they are written down (or there will be an uncertainty exception
regarding their carrying value in the auditor's opinion). The exclusion of intangible
assets from the asset base must be based on more substantial evidence than a mere
lack of understanding of what these assets represent or an unsupported suspicion
regarding their value. This implies that intangible assets should generally not be
excluded from invested capital.
5. The basic formula for computing the return on investment is net income divided by total
invested capital. Whenever we modify the definition of the investment base by, say,
omitting certain items (liabilities, idle assets, intangibles, etc.) we must also adjust the
corresponding income figure to make it consistent with the modified asset base.
6. The relation of net income to sales is a measure of operating performance (profit
margin). The relation of sales to total assets is a measure of asset utilization or
turnovera means of determining how effectively (in terms of sales generation) the
assets are utilized. Both of these measures, profit margin as well as asset utilization,
determine the return realized on a given investment base. Sales are an important factor
in both of these performance measures.
8-4
7. Profit margin, although important, is only one aspect of the return on invested capital.
The other is asset turnover. Consequently, while Company B's profit margin is high, its
asset turnover may have been sufficiently depressed so as to drag down the overall
return on invested capital, leading to the shareholder's complaint.
8. The asset turnover of Company X is 3. The profit margin of Company Y is 0.5%. Since
both companies are in the same industry, it is clear that Company X must concentrate on
improving its asset turnover. On the other hand, Company Y must concentrate on
improving its profit margin. More specific strategies depend on the product and industry.
9. The sales to total assets (asset turnover) component of the return on invested capital
measure reflects the overall rate of asset utilization. It does not reflect the rate of
utilization of individual asset categories that enter into the overall asset turnover. To
better evaluate the reasons for the level of asset turnover or the reasons for changes in
that level, it is helpful to compute the rate of individual asset turnovers that make up the
overall turnover rate.
10. The evaluation of return on invested capital involves many factors. The
inclusion/exclusion of extraordinary gains and losses, the use/nonuse of trends, the
effect of acquisitions accounted for as poolings and their chance of recurrence, the
effect of discontinued operations, and the possibility of averaging net income are just a
few of many such factors. Moreover, the analyst must take into account the effects of
price-level changes on return calculations. It also is important that the analyst bear in
mind that return on invested capital is most commonly based on book values from
financial statements rather than on market values. And finally, many assets either do not
appear in the financial statements or are significantly understated. Examples of such
assets are intangibles such as patents, trademarks, research and development activities,
advertising and training, and intellectual capital.
11. The equity growth rate is calculated as follows:
[Net income Preferred dividends Common dividend payout] / Average common equity.
This is the growth rate due to the retention of earnings and assumes a constant dividend
payout over time. It indicates the possibilities of earnings growth without resort to
external financing. The resulting increase in equity can be expected to earn the rate of
return that the company earns on its assets and, thus, further contribute to growth in
earnings.
12. a. The return on net operating assets and the return on common stockholders' equity
differ by the capital investment base (and its corresponding effects on net income).
RNOA reflects the return on the net operating assets of the company whereas ROCE
reflects the perspective of common shareholders.
b. ROCE can be disaggregated into the following components to facilitate analysis:
ROCE = RNOA + Leverage x Spread. RNOA measures the return on net operating
assets, a measure of operating performance. The second component (Leverage x
Spread) measures the effects of financial leverage. ROCE is increased by adding
financial leverage so long as RNOA>weighted average cost of capital. That is, if the
firm can earn a return on operating assets that is greater than the cost of the capital
used to finance the purchase of those assets, then shareholders are better off adding
debt to increase operating assets.
8-5
Sales
Average common equity
This shows that equity turnover (sales to average common equity) is one of the two
components of the return on common shareholders' equity. Assuming a stable profit
margin, the equity turnover can be used to determine the level and trend of ROCE.
Specifically, an increase in equity turnover will produce an increase in ROCE if the
profit margin is stable or declines less than the increase in equity turnover. For
example, a common objective of discount stores is to lower prices by lowering profit
margins, but to offset this by increasing equity turnover by more than the decrease in
profit margin.
b. Equity turnover can be rewritten as follows:
Net operating assets
Sales
14. When convertible debt sells at a substantial premium above par and is clearly held by
investors for its conversion feature, there is justification for treating it as the equivalent
of equity capital. This is particularly true when the company can choose at any time to
force conversion of the debt by calling it in.
8-6
EXERCISES
Exercise 8-1 (35 minutes)
a. First alternative:
NOPAT = $6,000,000 * 10% = $600,000
Net income = $600,000 [$1,000,000*12%](1-.40) = $528,000
Second alternative:
NOPAT = $6,000,000 * 10% = $600,000
Net income = $600,000 [$2,000,000*12%](1-.40) = $456,000
b. First alternative:
ROCE = $528,000 / $5,000,000 = 10.56%
Second alternative:
ROCE = $456,000 / $4,000,000 = 11.40%
c. First alternative:
Assets-to-Equity = $6,000,000 / $5,000,000 = 1.2
Second alternative:
Assets-to-Equity = $6,000,000 / $4,000,000 = 1.5
d. First, lets compute return on assets (RNOA):
First alternative: $600,000 / $6,000,000 = 10%
Second alternative: $600,000 / $6,000,000 = 10%
Second, notice that the interest rate is 12% on the debt (bonds). More importantly,
the after-tax interest rate is 7.2% (12% x (1-0.40)), which is less than RNOA.
Hence, the company earns more on its assets than it pays for debt on an after-tax
basis. That is, it can successfully trade on the equityuse bondholders funds to
earn additional profits. Finally, since the second alternative uses more debt, as
reflected in the assets-to-equity ratio in c, the second alternative is probably
preferred. The shareholders would take on additional risk with the second
alternative, but the expected returns are greater as evidenced from computations
in b.
8-7
8-8
10.00%
7.86%
17.86%
Year 9
0.109
0.44
3.40
0.556
9.07%
8-9
21%
14%
35%
8-10
c
a
c
(Assessments of profit margin and asset turnover are relative to industry norms.)
Higher profit margin and lower asset turnover.
Higher asset turnover and lower profit margin.
Higher profit margin and similar/lower asset turnover.
Higher asset turnover and similar/lower profit margin.
Higher asset turnover and lower/similar profit margin.
Higher asset turnover and similar/higher profit margin.
Higher asset turnover and lower profit margin.
8-11
8-12
PROBLEMS
Problem 8-1 (30 minutes)
a. 1. Quaker Oats does not reveal its computation of this return. Accordingly, we
make some simple computations and assumptions: (i) For simplicity, focus on
one share, (ii) The dividend is $1.56 for Year 11, (iii) The average stock price is
$55 and the price increase for Year 11 is $14based on the beginning price of
$48 and the ending price of $62. Using this information, we compute return to
a share of stock as follows:
= [Dividend per share + Price increase per share] / Average price per share
= [$1.56 + $14] / $55
= 28.3%
However, if we use the beginning price of $48 per share, we get closer to the
company's 34% return:
= [$1.56 + $14] / $48
= 32.4%
2. The return on common equity is based on the relation between net income
and the book value of the equity capital. In contrast, Quaker Oats return to
shareholders uses dividends plus market value change in relation to the
market price per share (cost of investment to shareholders.)
b. The company must have derived the 3.6% from price, market, and other factors
that are not disclosed. Conceptually, this 3.6% should reflect the added risk of an
investment in Quaker Oats stock vis--vis a risk-free security such as a U.S.
Treasury bond.
c. Quaker does not reveal its computations. It may disclose a variety of interest
rates on long-term debt that it carries in the notes to financial statements. Based
on data available to it, but not to the financial statement reader, it probably
computed a weighted-average interest rate from which it deducted the tax benefit
in arriving at the 6.4% cost of debt.
8-13
$5,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
700,000
800,000
400,000
$ 400,000
8-14
0.36
0.23
Sales/current assets
1.47
2.97
0.98
0.88
0.03
8-15
= 19.38%
*Note: minority interest is treated as equity. If Minority interest is ignored, the ROCE is 19.8%
8-16
8-17
Product B
Yr 7
Yr 6
600
900
$50.00
$50.00
$32.50
$30.00
Johnson Corporation
Analysis Statement of Changes in Gross Margin
Year 2 versus Year 1
Analysis of Variation in Product A Sales
$ 15,000
7,000
3,000
(12,000)
(7,000)
(3,000)
$ 3,000
$ (15,000)
8-18
9,000
(2,250)
750
(7,500)
3,000
(7,500)
$ (4,500)
Increase
(Decrease)
100.0%
100.0%
20.0%
81.7
86.0
14.0
18.3
14.0
57.1
16.8
10.2
98.0
1.5
3.8
(52.6)
0.4
1.0
(52.0)
1.1
2.8
(52.9)
b. Performance in Year 9 is poor when compared with Year 8. One bright spot is the
percentage of Cost of Goods Sold to Sales, which decreased in Year 9. However,
Operating Expenses climbed sharply. This sharp climb in operating expenses is
unexpected since there is usually a larger fixed cost component comprising these
costs compared with that for Cost of Goods Sold.
Management should further check operating expenses. If operating expenses had
remained at the Year 8 level of 10.2%, income would have been up favorably for
Year 9. Operating expenses may have included a future-directed component such
as advertising or training costs. Also, management would want to follow up on
the change in gross margin. The sharp improvement in gross margin may have
been due to factors such as the liquidation LIFO inventory layers or, alternatively,
to something more fundamental with the activities of the firm.
8-19
8-20
10,000
7,000
20.0%
21.2
17.9
300.0
8.3
4,000
12.1
4,000
66.7
2,200
28.2
200
700
11,100
3,000
42.9
Problem 8-8continued
Analysis and Interpretation:
(1) ZETA has two "below the line" items--discontinued operations and a change in
accounting principle. While net income increased by 42.9%, income from
continuing operations increased by 31.7%. (Per note 1, the increase in Year 6
income from operations due to the change in inventory accounting is only $400.)
(2) Per note 3, ZETA acquired most of TRO Company effective December 31, Year 6.
As the acquisition was accounted for as a purchase, the Year 5 and 6 income
statements do not reflect the results of TRO. Certain pro forma information is
included in note 3.
(3) The 21.2% increase in COGS slightly exceeds the 20% increase in sales, leading
to a lower gross profit margin despite the accounting change.
(4) The increase in equity in income of associated companies helped increase net
income. The analyst should assess whether a dollar of income for associated
companies is equivalent to a dollar of income for ZETA.
(5) S&A expenses rose less than sales, contributing to increased income.
(6) The increase in interest expense is matched by an increase in long-term debt.
8-21
Inventory-to-Sales
1,897/6,890
= 27.5%
2,728/4,100
= 66.5%
287/1,850
= 15.5%
526/1,265
= 41.6%
5,438/14,105
= 38.6%
2.
Inventory-to-Contribution
Data communications ............................ 1,897/1,510
= 1.26
Time recording devices ......................... 2,728/412
= 6.62
Hardware for electronics ....................... 287/919
= 0.31
Home sewing products ......................... 526/342
= 1.54
Corporate total ....................................... 5,438/3,183
= 1.71
b.
Data communications ............
Time recording devices .........
Hardware for electronics .......
Home sewing products ..........
Total .........................................
Year 1
44%
34%
-22%
100%
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
59%
48%
21%
2%
-37%
20%
13%
100%
100%
47%
13%
29%
11%
100%
8-22
CASES
Case 8-1 (120 minutes)
a. Computation of Return on Invested Capital Measures:
2005
(1) Return on net operating assets [a] .............. 73.9%
(2) Disaggregated RNOA:
Oper. Profit margin [a] ............................ 5.9%
NOA turnover [a] ...................................... 12.49
(3) Return on common equity [b] ...................... 47.7%
(4) Disaggregated ROCE [c]:
RNOA
................................................. 73.9
LEV
................................................. -38.3%
Spread ...................................................... 68.6%
Computation notes:
[a]
NOPAT
Average net operating assets
= ($4,254 x (1-[$1,402/$4,445])) / (($1,9301+$5,9502)/2) = 73.9%
1
2
Disaggregated:
2005 profit margin: ($4,254 x (1-[$1,402/$4,445])) / $49,205 = 5.9%
2005 net operating asset turnover: $49,205 / (($1,930+$5,950)/2) = 12.49
[b] Net income [11] - Preferred dividends
Average common equity
2005: [$3,043 - $0] / [($6,485 + $6,280)/2] = 47.7%
[c] 2005 NFO = $505 - $5,060 = -$4,555
2004 NFO = $505 - $835 = -$330
LEV = Avg. NFO
Avg. Equity
(-$4,555 - $330)/2
($6,485 + $6,280)/2
-38.3%
8-23
Case 8-1continued
b. Computation of Asset Turnover Ratios:
2005
(1) Accounts receivable turnover ................................
12.23
29.85
102.26
3.57
6.56
4.96
73.61
c. Dell achieves extraordinary returns (both on net operating assets and equity) due to
its high turnover of net operating assets. Dells working capital management is
legendary. The Accounts receivable turnover rate has decreased in recent years as
the company expanded into more corporate sales, but remains high with an average
collection period of only 29.9 days. Dells ability to operating with very little inventory
and long-term operating assets, however, is the primary driver of its profitability.
Inventories turn 102 times a year, with an average inventory days outstanding of only
3.57. This is extraordinary. Furthermore, the company turns its long-term operating
assets 6.56 times a year, significantly greater than nearly every other publicly traded
company. Finally, Dell is able to use its market power to delay payment to suppliers.
Its accounts payable turnover rate is 4.96 times a year, for an average payable days
outstanding of 73.61. Dell is, therefore, collecting cash in 28.85 days and paying its
suppliers in 73.61 days. The cash generated by this relation is invested in marketable
securities, $5 billion in 2005, resulting in a negative NFO.
The fact that ROCE is lower than RNOA results from the use of relatively
high cost equity capital to finance investment in marketable securities. The company
could eliminate this problem by repurchasing stock with its marketable
investments, and has, indeed, repurchased a considerable amount of stock over the
past 3 years. Since it operates in a fast changing industry, the additional liquidity is
probably warranted. Dells ROE of 47.7% is still considerably greater than the 12%
median for publicly traded companies.
8-24
Gross Profit
SG&A exp %
NOPAT/Sales
TAX exp. %
NOA turnover
Receivables
turnover
Inventory turnover
8-25
Case 8-2concluded
b. NKEs operating performance is better than RBKs. Its NOPAT margin is 2.8
percentage points higher, driven by a significantly higher gross profit margin. It
appears that NKE is able to use its brand recognition and effective advertising to
command higher unit selling prices for its products.
The NOA turnover is roughly comparable to the two companies. Most of the
assets are current and NKE working capital turnover rate (not listed) is 3.89 times,
compared with RBKs of 3.14. The higher turnover of the more significant working
capital accounts more than offsets NKEs slower long-term operating assets
turnover rate.
Based on this analysis, NKE appears to exhibit superior operating performance.
Whether the stock is a buy depends on two factors: 1. is NKEs higher profit
margin sustainable, and 2. has the market already impounded the superior
operating performance into NKE stock price.
8-26
Year 9
13.34%
5,527
497
5,030
23.09%
3,243
199
3,044
LEVB
0.10
0.07
NOPAT
NFEC
Net income
654
17
671
677
26
703
11.82%
-3.52%
15.34%
20.87%
-13.17%
34.04%
ROCE
NOA
NFOA
Equity
RNOA
NFRD
SpreadE
NOA - Equity
NFO/Equity
C
Net income-NOPAT
D
Negative amount indicates net income vs. expense
E
RNOA-NFR
B
Computations
ROCE
NOA
NOPAT
1
Year 13
$671/$5,030 = .133
$363+$1,390+$609+5,228+$2,272$2,821-$1,514=$5,527
($8,529-$6,968-$515)x(1($403/$1,074))=$654
Year 9
$703/$3,044=.231
$381+$224+$+909+3,397+$1,084$1,262-$1,490=$3,243
($4,594-$3,484)x(1($450/$1,153)=$677
Ending assets are used because information is unavailable to compute average assets.
b. Disneys profit margin on sales decreased substantially from Year 9 to Year 13.
Some reasons for this change include:
Disney experienced above average growth in the film entertainment business,
which has the lowest operating margin of any of its business segments.
Disney experienced deterioration in consumer product margins as the
business mix shifted away from licensing and royalty income.
Euro Disney losses and reserve provision (write-off) hurt Year 13 results, as
compared with no effect in Year 9.
Disney experienced deterioration in the theme park margins because of lower
attendancethis, in turn, stemmed from a slower economy and more
expensive admission prices.
The profit margin on sales is offset, to some extent, by the favorable effects of
financial leverage as the return on financial assets (other current assets)
exceeds borrowing costs.
8-27
8-28
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
2.9
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Total .............................................. 61.1 40.4 37.6 37.1 52.5 30.7 43.5 40.7
5.7
5.5
2
3.7
--
--
--
--
3
3.5
6.3 14.3
5.8 12.0
-- 10.0
9.6
8.8
--
Systems Group ............................ 61.1 40.4 43.9 51.4 83.9 48.3 58.9 61.5
9.2
9.5 14.612.3
5.7
7.2
9.0 9.2
--
6.9
8.1 8.4
5.5 (1.8)
6.1
6.4 5.9
6.9
8.0 8.2
--
--
--
6.0 12.611.3
-- 31.4 17.6
--
8.7
--
--
Total Environmental
Graphics Group
Frye Copy Systems ..................... 23.6 17.3 16.1 15.3 20.2 15.6 13.2 13.6
Sinclair and Valentine .................
9.3 10.5
9.6 (4.1)
7.2
6.1
Total Graphics Group ................. 38.9 59.6 56.1 48.6 16.1 51.7 41.1 38.5
Total rev. or div. income ............. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
8-29
2.8
Case 8-5concluded
b. The Environmental Systems Group has generally declined in its contribution to
total consolidated revenue. The exception is in Year 3 when the decline was
reversed due to a strong increase in the revenue of the engineering and erection
services division. The Graphics Group markedly increased its dollar revenue
share in Year 2. This increase is largely due to the acquisition of Sinclair and
Valentine in Year 2. Accordingly, this increase has largely leveled off.
Note that only income-related data are reported for international operations. In
such a case, the analyst must carefully examine the related textual disclosures. In
the case of Petersen Corp., these figures consist of royalty income and the
Company's equity participation in the income before taxes of the international
subsidiaries and affiliates of the group, neither of which are included in revenue.
While the Environmental Systems Group has declined overall in its contribution
to sales, it has grown in its contribution to income. Its income share is much
larger than its share of revenuesthis is due to greater profitability by the
Environmental Systems Group and, particularly, the Manufactured Engineering
Products where profitability (as measured by divisional income as a percent of
revenues) has been growing. While this profitability has declined somewhat from
Year 2 to Year 3, it remains at a level considerably higher than the company as a
whole.
8-30
Wal-Mart
1999
OR
Operating Revenue
Sales and Service
Other Income
Credit Revenues
1998
36728
6
4343
36957
28
4618
41077
OE
27212
8418
871
848
41
OI
Operating Income
NFE
27444
8384
1287
830
352
MIN
NI
Net Income
1998
137634
1574
166809
129664
27040
139208
108725
22363
198
904
444
38297
766
498
156902
3338
358
131088
2740
279
1348
1264
3696
3019
2339
2042
6211
5101
1268
1423
756
266
529
268
1022
797
24
1268
165013
1796
41603
37390
TE
1999
1447
444
8-31
498
358
279
824
949
664
518
62
45
170
153
1453
1048
5377
4430
Case 8-6continued
Sears and Wal-MartRecast Balance Sheet
Sears
1998
1999
Net Operating Assets
Operating Assets
OA
Cash and cash equivalents
729
Retained interest in transferred
3144
credit card receivables
Net credit card receivables
18033
Trade Receivables
404
Merchandise inventories
5069
Prepaid exp & deferred charges
579
Deferred Taxes
1076
Property, Plant & Equipment, net
6450
Property under Capital Leases,net
Goodwill and Intangibles
Other Assets & Deferred Charges
1470
495
4294
612
3719
17972
397
4816
506
1363
6380
18003
401
4943
543
1220
6415
1452
36954
OL
NOA
1461
37675
6732
6862
971
584
928
524
950
554
2346
10727
26227
Ave.
1856
1879
1868
1341
19793
1366
1118
17076
1059
1230
18435
1213
32839
3130
9392
632
23674
2299
2538
353
28257
2715
5965
493
37315
6992
2180
Wal-Mart
1999
1998
Ave.
70349
49996
60173
13105
6161
10257
4998
11681
5580
1129
759
501
716
815
738
2263
10530
27145
21154
49195
26686
4624
1414
3807
1790
13631
13258
16472
33524
18813
41360
3323
1662
1964
121
900
106
1432
114
13672
3002
6908
2699
10290
2851
18038
19669
18854
22082
10613
16348
18038
1350
6839
19669
1410
6066
18854
1380
6453
22082
1279
25834
10613
1799
21112
16348
1539
23473
Net Financing
26227
27145
26686
49195
33524
41360
FA
NFO
MIN
E
NFO
+E
1 Including this as operating because the pension expense has been included with operating expenses. Part 6 of the case
involves restating the balance sheet and income statement and redoing the analysis. At that stage it is necessary to classify
interest cost, return on plan assets and the funded status of the pension plans as non-operating (financial).
8-32
Case 8-6continued
2.
1999
BALANCE SHEET
Net Operating Assets
OA
Operating Assets
OL
less Operating Liabilities
NOA
Net Operating Assets
Sears
Wal-Mart
37315
10629
26686
60173
18813
41360
18854
16348
18854
1380
6453
26686
16348
1539
23473
41360
41077
37390
1348
2339
824
62
1453
166809
156902
3696
6211
664
170
5377
Sears
22.52%
19.34%
1.16
Wal-Mart
22.91%
22.18%
1.03
8.76%
6.27%
4.37%
15.02%
10.32%
4.06%
2.41
0.40
0.65
0.45
1.54
1.10
5.69%
4.03
2.77
3.72%
8-33
Case 8-6continued
FIRST STAGE ANALYSIS
ROEexcl MI
22.52%
22.91%
=
=
=
ROEincl MI
19.34%
22.18%
ROEexcl MI
RNOA
FLEV
Sears
19.34%
8.76%
2.41
Wal-Mart
22.18%
15.02%
0.65
Sears
Wal-Mart
RNOA
8.76%
15.02%
=
=
=
ROA
6.27%
10.32%
x (1+OLLEV)
x (1+0.40)
x (1+0.45)
Sears
Wal-Mart
x MI Sharing Factor
x
1.16
x
1.03
x
(RNOA-NBC)
<--Spread-->
x (8.76%-4.37%)
<--4.39%-->
(15.02%x
4.06%)
<--10.96%-->
3.
RNOA
8.76%
15.02%
=
=
=
PM
5.69%
3.72%
x
x
x
NATO
1.54
4.03
Sears
Wal-Mart
RNOA
8.76%
15.02%
=
=
=
PM
5.69%
3.72%
x
x
x
ATO
1.10
2.77
x
x
x
(1+OLLEV)
(1+0.40)
(1+0.45)
PM
5.69%
3.72%
=
=
=
Pre-Tax PM =
Sears
8.97%
=
Wal-Mart
5.94%
=
Sears
Wal-Mart
Pre-Tax
Sales PM
9.07%
6.06%
Pre-Tax PM
8.97%
5.94%
Pre-Tax Sales
PM
+/9.07%
6.06%
-
= Gross Margin
=
29.56%
=
22.26%
Tax Expense/OR
3.28%
2.22%
Other PM
0.10%
0.12%
SG&A/OR
20.49%
16.20%
8-34
Case 8-6continued
THIRD STAGE ANALYSIS----TURNOVER DRIVERS
First determine current and noncurrent portions of operating assets
and operating liabilities (average)
Sears
Wal-Mart
Operating Assets
Current
Non-Current
Total
Operating Liabilities
Current
Non-Current
Total
Operating WC
Sears
WalMart
1
NATO
1
1.54
237
183
1
4.03
91
28929
8386
37315
22746
37427
60173
8366
2263
10629
20563
18075
738
18813
4671
1
+
OWCTO
1
=
+
2
1
FATO
1
4.9
1
LOLTO
1
18.15
75
21
1
35.71
1
4.45
1
226
10
82
(days)
(days)
Sears
4943
22122
1864
28929
Wal-Mart
18434
1230
3082
22746
6862
1504
8366
11681
6394
18075
Payables
Other Current Liabilities
Current Operating Liabilities
Sears
WalMart
1
OWCTO
1
2
=
=
183
1
35.71
10
1
ITO
1
8.3
1
1
+
ARTO
OTHCATO
1
1
+
+
1.86
22
44
196
1
1
+
+
135.62
9.04
40
1
APTO
1
5.99
1
OTHCLTO
1
27.3
-
17
61
14
1
54.12
1
14.28
1
26.09
26
14
8-35
(days)
(days)
Case 8-6continued
4. Recast Financial Statements of Sears Business Segments
Income Statement
Revenue
Cost of Sales
Depreciation
Interest Expense
Provision for
uncollectible amounts
Others (Balancing)
Operating Income
Allocated Corporate
Other Income
Income before taxes
Tax
Net Income before
minority interest
OR Operating Revenues
OE Operating Expenses
Tax Expense
Interest Tax Debt
Shield
TE Tax Expense
OI Operating Income
Interest
Interest Tax Debt
Shield
NFE Net Financial Expense
NI Net Income
Credit
4085
Others
36986
27212
Total
41071
27212
14
792
848
1116
871
152
1268
737
1347
32
1315
491
824
7442
1388
290
6
1104
413
691
2413
322
6
2419
904
1515
4085
1654
491
391
36986
35730
413
53
41071
37384
904
444
882
1549
1116
391
466
790
152
53
1348
2339
1268
444
725
824
99
691
824
1515
OA
8-36
Others
221
Total
3719
16934
1069
18003
401
4943
401
4943
5991
1915
14541
890
15431
6415
37315
2209
2209
6862
1558
8420
6862
3767
10629
PP&E
106
Others (Balancing Amt.)
85
Sub-Total
20622
Allocated Corp. Assets
1262
Total
21884
OL
37315
Operating Liabilities
Payables
Others
Total
NOA
19675
7011
26686
FL
Financial Liabilities
16594
2260
18854
FA
Financial Assets
NFO
Net Financial
Obligations
16594
2260
18854
3081
4751
7832
Credit
3498
Others
14.55%
11.27%
5.12%
4.37%
0.48
1.20
2.14%
5.28
2.40
WalMart
Total
22.91%
15.02%
10.32%
4.06%
0.65
0.45
3.72%
4.03
2.77
Case 8-6continued
5. Although the ROCEs are similar the source of the ROCE is very different. WalMarts ROCE comes from business operations and, in particular, its ability to
control costs of retail operations as evidenced by higher profit margins in its
retail business. Sears, on the other hand, derives its ROCE from financial
leverage, particularly through its finance subsidiary. That means Sears is much
more risky and, therefore, is accorded a lower valuation.
8-37