Part 1

Ratio Analysis Of Dawan Cement Limited

Working capital

Company Industry

2009 -3600460 NaN

2010 -4575565 NaN

2011 -5137170 NaN

2012 -4955109 5088021

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%95%

WORKING CAPITAL

Dew

an C

emen

t lim

ited

Performance Compare to Industry’s Ratio

Working capital measures a firm’s ability to meet its short term obligations. It shows the

difference between current assets and current liabilities.

In this company working capital is Rs. (4955109). It means that the company’s working capital is Rs.(4955109) times less than that of its current liabilities.

If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s working capital is less than industry’s working capital.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 (4955109) 5088021 WORSE

Performance Compare by year to year

In year 2009 working capital was (3600460). It means working capital were (3600460) times less than that of its current liabilities. In year 2011 the working capital was also decrease to (5137170) and in 2012 it is also remain (4955109).

If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's current ratio is showing Negative trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision(3600460) (4575565) (5137170) (4955109) WORSE

Current ratioCompany

industry

2009

0.295

NaN

2010

2011

2012

0.1

0.3

0.5

Current Ratio

2009 2010 2011 2012


Current ratio measures a firm’s ability to meet its short term obligations. It

shows the relationship between current assets and current liabilities. In this company current ratio is 0.233 times. It means that the company’s

current assets are 0.233: 1 times that of its current liabilities.

If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s current ratio is less than that of industry’s current ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0.233 1.31 WORSE

Performance Compare by Year to Year

In year 2009 current ratio was 0.295 times. It means current assets were 0.295:1 times that of its current liabilities , and in 2012 it is decreased to 0.233 times.

If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's current ratio is showing decreasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision0.295 0.198 0.194 0.233 WORSE

Quick Ratio

Company Industry

2009 0.095 NaN

2010 0.0790000000000003 NaN

2011 0.0830000000000001 NaN

2012 0.092 0.52

0.05

0.15

0.25

0.35

0.45

0.55

Quick Ratio


• Quick ratio measures a firm’s ability to meet its short term obligations. It shows the relationship between quick assets and current liabilities.

• In this company quick ratio is 0.092 times. It means that the company’s quick assets are 0.092:1 that of its current liabilities.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s quick ratio is less than industry’s quick ratio.



• In year 2009 quick ratio was 0.095 times. It means quick assets were 0.095:1times that of its current liabilities. In year 2010 the quick ratio was 0.079 times, and in 2011 it was 0.083 and in 2012 it is reached to 0.092 times (the result shows mixed trend).

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's current ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0.095 0.079 0.083 0.092 BETTER

Cash Ratio

Company Industry

2009 0.0239 NaN

2010 0.0105 NaN

2011 0.0112000000000001 NaN

2012 0.0194000000000001 0.23

0.025

0.075

0.125

0.175

0.225

Cash Ratio

2012201120102009

Performance Compare to Industry Ratio

• Cash ratio measures a firm’s ability to meet its short term obligations. It shows the relationship between cash and current liabilities.

• In this company cash ratio is 0.0194 times. It means that the company’s cash ratio is 0.0194:1 times that of its current liabilities.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s cash ratio is less than industry’s cash ratio.


Performance Compare by Year to Year Ratio

• In year 2009 cash ratio was 0.0239 times. It means cash were 0.0239: 1 times that of its current liabilities. In year 2010 the cash was decrease to 0.0105 times, and in 2011 it is increase to 0.0112 times, and than in 2012 it is reached to 0.0194 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's current ratio is showing mixed trend (if we compare it with 2010 the result is showing increasing trend).

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision0.0239 0.0105 0.0112 0.0194 BETTER

Debt Ratio

Company Industry

2009 0.618000000000002 NaN

2010 0.632000000000003 NaN

2011 0.632000000000003 NaN

2012 0.630000000000003 0.27

0.25

0.75

1.25

1.75

2.25

2.75

Debt Ratio


• Debt ratio measures a firm’s ability to meet its long term obligations. It shows the relationship between total debts and total assets.

• In this company debt ratio is 0.63 times. It means that the company’s total debts are 0.63 times of its total assets.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s debt ratio is more than that of industry’s debt ratio.



• In year 2009 debt ratio was 0.618 times. It means debts were 0.618 times more than that of its total assets. In year 2010 & 2011 the debt ratio was increase to 0.632 times, and in 2012 it was also to 0.27 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's debt ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision0.618 0.632 0.632 0.63 WORSE

DEBT TO EQUITY RATIO

Company Industry

2009 1.62 NaN

2010 1.71 NaN

2011 1.72 NaN

2012 1.67 0.27

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

6.5

Debt to Equity Ratio


• Debt to equity ratio measures a firm’s ability to meet its long term obligations. It shows the relationship between total debts and total share holder’s equity.

• In this company debt to equity ratio is 1.67 times. It means the company’s total liability is 1.67 of its total share holder equity.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position than industry’s results, because company’s debt to equity ratio is more than that of industry’s debt to equity ratio.



• In year 2009 debt to equity ratio was 1.62 times. It means debts to equity were 1.62 times more than that of its total share holder’s equity. In year 2010 and 2011 the debt to equity ratio was increase to 1.71 and 1.72 times, and in 2012 it is also to 1.67 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's debt ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision1.62 1.71 1.72 1.67 WORSE

Equity Ratio

Company Industry

2009 0.38 NaN

2010 0.37 NaN

2011 0.37 NaN

2012 0.37 0.730000000000001

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

Equity Ratio

2012201120102009

Performance Compare with Industry Ratio

• Equity Ratio indicates how much shareholders would receive in the event of a company-wide liquidation. Or a financial ratio that measures the level of leverage used by a company, the equity ratio quantifies the proportion of the total assets that are financed by stockholders, and not creditors (or debt).

• In this company equity ratio is 0.63 times. It means that the company’s total shareholder equities are 0.37 times of its total assets.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position, because company’s equity ratio is less than that of industry’s equity ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0.37 times 0.73 times WORSE


• In 2009 the equity ratio is 0.38 times. It means that Shareholder investment in a firm is 0.38 times of its total assets. In 2010 the ratio is decrease to 0.37 times and in 2011 and 2012 the ratio is also 0.37.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's equity ratio is constant before three years.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision

0.38 times 0.37 times 0.37 times 0.37 times BETTER

RETURN ON ASSETS

Company Industry

2010 -0.0293 NaN

2011 -0.0175 NaN

2012 0.0184 0.1513

-0.025

0.025

0.075

0.125

0.175

Return on Assets

201220112010


• Return on assets shows the relationship between net profit and total assets. It is a percentage of net profit based on the value of total assets.

• In this company return on assets is 1.84%. It means that a company generates net profit of 1.84% based on the value of total assets.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s return on assets is less than that of an industry return on assets.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 1.84 % 15.13% WORSE


• In year 2010 return on asset ratio was (2.93%). It means the firm’s bear loss of (2.93%) based on the value of total assets. In year 2011 the return on asset ratio was (1.75%), and in 2012 the firm generate profit 1.8% based on the value of total assets.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's return on asset ratio is showing increase trend.

2010 2011 2012 Decision(2.93 %) (1.75 %) 1.84 % BETTER

TOTAL ASSETS TURNOVER

Company Industry

2009 0.26 NaN

2010 0.17 NaN

2011 0.25 NaN

2012 0.330000000000002 13.33

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

Total Assets Turnover

2012201120102009


• Total assets turnover ratio indicates that how many times a company generated revenue from its total assets of its own worth.

• In this company total assets turnover ratio is 0.33 times. It means that company total assets generate total revenue 0.33 times of its own worth.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s total assets turnover ratio is less than that of an industry total assets turnover ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0.33 Times 13.33 Times WORSE


• Total assets turnover ratio indicates that how many times revenue can be generated by the total assets of its own worth.

• In year 2009 total assets turnover ratio was 0.26 times. It means the firm’s total assets can generate total revenue 0.26 times. In year 2010 and 2011 the total assets turnover ratio was 0.17 and 0.25 times, and in 2012 it is increase to 0.33 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's total asset turnover ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0.26 times 0.17 times 0.25 times 0.33 times BETTER

FIXED ASSETS TURNOVER

Company Industry

2009 0.28 NaN

2010 0.18 NaN

2011 0.26 NaN

2012 0.36 16.72

13579

11131517

Fixed Assets Turnover

2012201120102009


• Fixed assets turnover ratio indicates that how many times a company generated revenue from its fixed assets of its own worth.

• In this company fixed assets turnover ratio is 0.36 times. It means that a company fixed assets generate total revenue 0.36 times of its own worth.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s fixed assets turnover ratio is less than that of an industry fixed assets turnover ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0.36 Times 16.72 Times WORSE


• Fixed assets turnover ratio indicates that how many times revenue can be generated by the fixed assets of its own worth.

• In year 2009 fixed assets turnover ratio was 0.28 times. It means the firm’s fixed assets can generate total revenue 0.28 times. In year 2010 the fixed assets turnover ratio was decrease to 0.18 times, and in 2011 and 2012 it is increase to 0.0.26 and 0.36 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's fixed asset turnover ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0.28 times 0.18 times 0.26 times 0.36 times BETTER

RETURN ON SHAREHOLDER EQUITY

Company Industry

2009 -0.0198000000000001 NaN

2010 -0.0811 NaN

2011 -0.0497000000000001 NaN

2012 0.0487 0.1463

-17.50%

-12.50%

-7.50%

-2.50%

2.50%

7.50%

12.50%

Return on Shareholders Equity

2012201120102009


• Return on equity shows the relationship between net profit and total shareholders’ equity. It is a percentage of net profit based on the value of total shareholders’ equity.

• In this company return on equity is 4.87%. It means that a company generates net profit of 4.87% based on the value of total shareholders’ equity.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s return on equity is less than that of an industry return on equity

Year Company Industry Decision2012 4.87 % 14.63 % WORSE


• Return on equity ratio measures the overall record of management in producing profit on the value of total share holder’s equity. It shows the relationship between profit and total share holder’s equity.

• In year 2009 return on equity ratio was (1.98%). It means the firm’s bear loss of (1.98%) based on the value of total share holder’s equity. In year 2010 and 2011the loss on based of the return on equity ratio was increase to (8.11%) and (4.97%), and in 2012 the firm generate profit base on shareholder equity is increase to 4.87%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's return on equity ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision (1.98 %) (8.11 %) (4.97 %) 4.87 % BETTER

EARNING PER SHARE

Company Category 2

2009 -0.46 NaN

2010 -1.74 NaN

2011 -0.970000000000001 NaN

2012 0.98 12

-3

-1

1

3

5

7

9

11

Earning Per Share

2012201120102009

Performance Compare with Industry

• Earnings per share are the earning of the company on each share. It shows relationship between net income and number of shares issued. It is generally more considerable by the shareholders.

• In this Company earning per share is Rs 0.98 per share. It means company generate net income Rs 0.98 per share based on outstanding/issued common per share.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s earning per share is less than that of an industry earning per share

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0.98 12 WORSE


• In 2009 earnings per share was Rs.(0.46) per share. it means that company bear loss Rs.(0.46)per share in this year . And in 2010 and 2011 this ratio was increased to Rs.(1.74) and (0.97) per share. and in 2012 the firm earn profit Rs.0.98 per share.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time company’s results are showing BETTER position because there is an increasing trend in company’s earnings per share.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision (0.46) (1.74) (0.97) 0.98 BETTER

PERCENTAGE OF EARNING RETAINED

Company Industry

2009 -1 NaN

2010 -1 NaN

2011 -1 NaN

2012 1 0.670000000000003

-275%

-225%

-175%

-125%

-75%

-25%

25%

75%

Percentage of Retained Earning

2012201120102009


• Retained earnings indicate that net income retained by the firm for reinvestment in its operations; earnings / net income that are not paid out as dividends to shareholders.

• In this company percentage of earning retained is 100%. It means that a firm retained 100% of overall net income for reinvestment in its operation. Company not paid out dividends to shareholders.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company’s earning retained is more than that of an industry earning retained.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 100 % 67 % BETTER

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Earnings

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Firm

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reinvestment+rate

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Earnings

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Dividend


• In year 2009 the firm percentage of earning retained was (100%). It means firm fulfill 100% net loss from retained earning account. In year 2010 and 2011 this ratio was also (100%) and (100%). But in 2012 the percentage of earning retained is 100%, firm retained overall net income for reinvestment in its operation.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's earning retained ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision (100 %) (100 %) (100 %) 100 % BETTER

DIVIDEND PAYOUT

Company Industry

2009 0 NaN

2010 0 NaN

2011 0 NaN

2012 0 0.330000000000002

0.025

0.075

0.125

0.175

0.225

0.275

0.325

Dividend Payout

2012201120102009


• Dividend payout ratio indicates how much of the company’s profits are being paid out to shareholders.

• In this company dividend payout ratio is 0%. It means firm not paid dividend or profit to shareholders.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s dividend payout ratio is less than that of an industry ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0 % 33 % WORSE


• In year 2009 firm dividend payout ratio was 0%. It means firm not paid dividend or profit to shareholders. In 2010 and 2011 this ratio was also 0%. In 2012 this ratio is also 0%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's dividend payout ratio is 0%. This ratio is not change in four years.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0 0 0 0 WORSE

DIVIDEND YIELD

Company Industry

2009 0 NaN

2010 0 NaN

2011 0 NaN

2012 0 0.17

0.01

0.03

0.05

0.07

0.09

0.11

0.13

0.15

0.17

Dividend Yield

2012201120102009

Performance Compare with Industry Ratio

• Dividend yield indicates how much of an income return you receive for the money you spend on your investment.

• In this company dividend yield ratio is 0%. It means dividend payout ratio is also 0%.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s dividend yield ratio is less than that of an industry ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 0% 17 % WORSE


• In year 2009, 2010 and 2011 the firm dividend yield ratio was 0%. Because firm not paid dividend or profit to shareholders of company. In 2012 this ratio is also 0%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's dividend yield ratio is 0%. This ratio is not change in four years.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0 0 0 0 WORSE

BOOK VALUE PER SHARE

Company Industry

2009 23.03 NaN

2010 21.47 NaN

2011 20.18 NaN

2012 20.22 63

51525354555657585

Book Value Per Share

2012201120102009


• A measure used by owners of common shares in a firm to determine the level of safety associated with each individual share after all debts are paid accordingly.

• In this company the book value of per share is Rs.20.22. it means if a company is dissolve a shareholder get Rs.20.22 on the basis of per share.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s book value per share is less than that of an industry ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 20.22 63 WORSE


• In year 2009 the book value per share of firm was 23.03. it means if a company is dissolve a shareholder get Rs.23.03 per share, after paid all debts of firm’s. In 2010 and 2011 this value was decrease to Rs.21.47 and 20.18 per share, and in 2012 this value is also Rs.20.22 per share.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company's book value per share is showing decreasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 23.03 21.47 20.18 20.22 WORSE

GROSS PROFIT MARGIN

Company Industry

2009 0.0763 NaN

2010 -0.0875 NaN

2011 -0.0111000000000001 NaN

2012 0.1238 0.2587

-7.50%

-2.50%

2.50%

7.50%

12.50%

17.50%

22.50%

27.50%

Gross Profit Margin

2012201120102009


• Gross profit margin shows the relationship between gross profit and net sales. It is a percentage of gross profit based on the value of net sales.

• In this company gross profit margin is 12.38%. It means that a company generates gross profit of 12.38% based on the value of net sales.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s gross profit margin is less than that of an industry gross profit margin.



• In year 2009 gross profit margin ratio was 7.63%. It means the firm’s generate gross profit of 7.63% based on the value of net sales. In year 2010 and 2011 the firm bear gross loss (8.75%) and (1.11%) based on the value of net sales, but in 2012 gross profit margin ratio increased to 12.38%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's gross profit margin ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 7.63% (8.75 %) (1.11 %) 12.38 % BETTER

OPERATING PROFIT MARGIN

Company Industry

2009 0.00980000000000005 NaN

2010 -0.1749 NaN

2011 -0.0678 NaN

2012 0.063 0.1787

-22.50%

-17.50%

-12.50%

-7.50%

-2.50%

2.50%

7.50%

12.50%

17.50%

Operating Profit Margin

2012201120102009


• Operating profit margin shows the relationship between operating profit and net sales. It is a percentage of operating profit based on the value of net sales.

• In this company operating profit margin is 6.30%. It means that a company generates operating profit of 6.30% based on the value of net sales.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s operating profit margin is less than that of an industry operating profit margin.



• In year 2009 operating profit margin ratio was 0.98%. It means

the firm’s generate operating profit of 0.98% based on the value of net sales. In year 2010 and 2011 the firm bear operating loss was (17.49%) and (6.78%) based on the value of net sales. But in 2012 the firm operating profit margin ratio is increase to 6.30%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's operating profit margin ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision 0.98% (17.49 %) (6.78 %) 6.30 % BETTER

NET PROFIT MARGIN

Company Industry

2009 -0.0287 NaN

2010 -0.1781 NaN

2011 -0.0713 NaN

2012 0.0544000000000002 0.1065

-27.50%

-22.50%

-17.50%

-12.50%

-7.50%

-2.50%

2.50%

7.50%

12.50%

Net Profit Margin

2012201120102009


• Net profit margin shows the relationship between net profit and net sales. It is a percentage of net profit based on the value of net sales.

• In this company net profit margin is 5.44%. It means that a company generates net profit of 5.44% based on the value of net sales.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORRSE position because company’s net profit margin is less than that of an industry net profit margin.



• NET profit margin ratio measures the overall record of management in

producing profit. It shows the relationship between net profit and net sales.

• In year 2009 net profit margin ratio was (2.87%). It means the firm’s bear net loss of (2.87%) based on the value of net sales. In year 2010 and 2011 this loss was increase to (17.81%) and (7.13%). In 2012 the net profit margin ratio increase to 5.44%.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's net profit margin ratio is showing increasing trend.

2009 2010 2011 2012 Decision (2.87 %) (17.81 %) (7.13 %) 5.44 % BETTER

ACCOUNT RECEIVABLE TURNOVER

Company Industry

2010 9.03 NaN

2011 11.73 NaN

2012 15.03 28.58

2.5

7.5

12.5

17.5

22.5

27.5

32.5

37.5

Account Receivable Turnover

201220112010


• Account receivable turnover ratio indicates that how many times a company converts its receivable into cash during a year.

• In this company account receivable turnover ratio is 15.03 times. It means that a company converts its receivables into cash 15.03 times during a year.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s account receivable turnover ratio is less than that of industry’s account receivable turnover ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision

2012 15.03 Times 28.58 Times WORSE


• Account receivable turnover ratio indicates how efficiently management utilizes its assets in generating revenue by relating or comparing sales to different types of assets.

• In year 2010 account receivable turnover ratio was 9.03 times. It means the firm can convert its account receivables into cash 9.03 times. In year 2011 the account receivable turnover ratio was 11.73 times, and in 2012 it is increase to 15.03 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's account receivable turnover ratio is showing increasing trend.

2010 2011 2012 Decision

9.03 times 11.73 times 15.03 times BETTER

ACCOUNT RECEIVABLE TURNOVER IN DAYS

Company Industry

2010 40.44 NaN

2011 31.32 NaN

2012 24.28 12.77

5

15

25

35

45

55

65

75

85

95

Account Receivable Turnover in Days

201220112010


• Account Receivable Turnover in days or Average collection period indicates that how many days a company converts it’s receivable into cash during a year.

• In this company average collection period is 24.28 days. It means that a company converts its receivables into cash after every 24.28 days during a year.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing WORSE position because company’s average collection period is more than that of industry average collection period.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 24.28 Days 12.77 Days WORSE


• Average collection period indicates how efficiently management utilizes its assets in generating revenue by relating or comparing sales to different types of assets.

• It shows the relationship between days and account receivable turnover.• In year 2010 average collection period was 40.44 days. It means the firm

can collect its account receivables within 40.44 days. In year 2011 the average collection period was 31.32 days, and in 2012 it is decrease to 24.28 days.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's account receivable turnover in days ratio is showing decreasing trend.

2010 2011 2012 Decision

40.44 days 31.32 days 24.28 days BETTER

INVENTORY TURNOVER

Company Industry

2010 15.07 NaN

2011 38.18 NaN

2012 31.69 13.27

5

15

25

35

45

55

65

75

85

Inventory Turnover

201220112010


• Inventory turnover ratio indicates that how many times a company converts its inventory into cash or sales during a year.

• In this company inventory turnover ratio is 31.69 times. It means that a company converts its inventory into cash or sales 2.48 times during a year.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company’s inventory turnover ratio is more than that of industry inventory turnover ratio.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 31.69 Times 13.27 Times BETTER


• Inventory turnover ratio indicates how many times a company converts its inventory into cash or sales during a year.

• It shows the relationship between costs of goods sold and average inventory.

• In year 2010 inventory turnover ratio was 15.07times. It means the firm can convert its inventory into cash or sales 15.07 times during a year. In year 2011 the inventory turnover ratio was 38.18 times, and in 2012 it is increase to 31.69 times.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's inventory turnover ratio is showing increasing trend.

2010 2011 2012 Decision

15.07 times 38.18 times 31.69 times BETTER

INVENTORY TURNOVER IN DAYS

Company Industry

2010 24.2 NaN

2011 9.56 NaN

2012 11.52 27.51

2.5

7.5

12.5

17.5

22.5

27.5

32.5

37.5

42.5

47.5

Inventory Turnover in Days

201220112010


• Inventory Turnover in days indicates that how many days a company converts its inventory into cash or sales during a year.

• In this company the inventory turnover in days is 11.52 days. It means a company converts its inventory into cash or sales after every 11.52 days during a year.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company’s Inventory Turnover in days is less than that of industry.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 11.52 Days 27.51 Days BETTER


• In year 2010 the inventory turnover in days is 24.2 days. It means a company converts its inventory into cash or sales after every 24.2 days during a year. In year 2011 the result was decrease to 9.56 days and in 2012 it is reached to 11.52 days.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's inventory turnover in days ratio is showing decreasing trend as compare to 2010.

2010 2011 2012 Decision 24.21 days 9.56 days 11.52 days BETTER

OPERATING CYCLE

Company Industry

2010 64.65 NaN

2011 40.68 NaN

2012 35.8 42.28

10

30

50

70

90

110

130

150

Operating Cycle

201220112010

Operating Cycle 2012 of a Dawan Cement Limited

11.52

24.28

Operating Cycle 2012 is 35.8 Days

Inventory Turnover in DaysAccount Receivable Turnover in Days


• Operating Cycle indicates that how many days a company converts its inventory into cash during a year or the average time between purchasing or acquiring inventory and receiving cash proceeds from its sale.

• In this company the operating cycle is in 35.8 days. It means a company converts its inventory into cash after every 35.5 days during a year.

• If we compare the results of the company with the results of the industry, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company’s operating cycle in days is less than that of industry.

Year Company Industry Decision2012 35.8 Days 42.28 Days BETTER


• In year 2010 the operating cycle is in 64.65 days. It means a company converts its inventory into cash after every 64.65 days during a year. In year 2011 the result was decrease to 40.68 days and in 2012 it is reached to 35.8 days.

• If we evaluate the performance of the firm over the period of time, company’s results are showing BETTER position because company's operating cycle in days is showing decrease trend.

2010 2011 2012 Decision 64.65 days 40.68 days 35.8 days BETTER

Part 1

Documents

Transcript of Part 1