current ratio 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon

1.16121276 2.196740284 0.813771858 1.128814298

2010
1.004981259 2.59710498 0.749129542 1.675793537

2009
1.181115173 3.778221639 0.865193895 3.046586345

quick ratio 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon
0.396946691 1.846851191 0.398359873 1.001985857

2010
0.383014401 2.28329631 0.427908222 1.376537032

2009
0.529759767 3.106328007 0.420274363 2.605943775

interval measure 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon net working capital ratio 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon
0.180160118 0.7439498 -0.505416863 0.456723338 1.378653549 3.55749582 2.287244644 3.051630034

2010

2009

-3.381913195 -37.3110119 6.3762507 14.80375071 -20.88453159 -7.433823529 -2.096352749 -2.608457951

2010

2009

0.006912916 0.190378892 0.754029366 0.809380989 -0.679811298 -0.172886519 0.688091425 0.90844267

4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

2011
2010 2009

Current ratio shows the liquidity position of any company i.e. how much current assets the company has for every rupee of a current liability. For force motors it has been increasing, for eicher motor, hindustan motor, volkswagen it has decreased. for eicher motor and volkswagen decrease is good because they have started using the unused cash. decrease for hindustand motors is not good because their current asset are not able to meet the current liability and so low liquidity. for force motor it is good because they were just above the level of meeting the cl, so their liquidity position was strenghtening with the increase in this ratio.

4 3 2 1 0

2011

2010
2009

the difference between cr and qr is high so the inventory in all the selected companies is high. for forcemotor, eicher,volkswagen, hindustan motor the inventory has increased, hence the quick ratio is decreasing.there is large amount of funds unutilized because of large inventory.
the higher the interval ratio, higher is the profitability. except eicher motors the rest of the selected companies had a negative value implying that the companies were bearing the loses. this may be due to the economic scenario prevaling in the world during this period. but when the three companies were recovering in 2011 the value for eicher motor was decreasing.

20

0
-20

2011 2010
2009

-40
1

0.5 0
-0.5

2011 2010 2009

-1

current ratio gvk power jp power tata power 2011 2010 1.99784 2.184474573
3.175469 1.231729

liquidity position of any company i.e. how much ssets the company has for every rupee of a current liability. For ors it has been increasing, for eicher motor, hindustan motor, en it has decreased. for eicher motor and volkswagen decrease ecause they have started using the unused cash. decrease for d motors is not good because their current asset are not able to current liability and so low liquidity. for force motor it is good hey were just above the level of meeting the cl, so their osition was strenghtening with the increase in this ratio.

2009 3.15633

10.17558511 2.7682 1.342734587 1.165151

quick ratio 2011 2010 1.88959 2.010865841

3.155321 1.113769

ference between cr and qr is the inventory in all the d companies is high. for otor, eicher,volkswagen, tan motor the inventory has ed, hence the quick ratio is sing.there is large amount of unutilized because of large

gvk power jp power tata power

2009 2.82626

10.11787234 2.736798 1.2156618 1.017651

interval measure 2011 2010 6.34533 16.09068223 2009 5.21174

higher the interval ratio, higher is the fitability. except eicher motors the rest of the ected companies had a negative value implying t the companies were bearing the loses. this y be due to the economic scenario prevaling in world during this period. but when the three mpanies were recovering in 2011 the value for her motor was decreasing.

gvk power jp power tata power

-0.01273 -0.012261754 -0.01152 2.137735 2.062209336 1.780453

net working capital ratio 2011 2010 0.09761 0.057752153

1 0.121898

gvk power jp power tata power

2009 0.17521

1 1 0.146015426 0.073924

12
10

8
gvk power

6 4
2

jp power tata power

0 2011 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power
jp power tata power

in 2010 the ratio is very high for jp power. but again the value has fallen in 2011. it is due to the major change in cash in hand. the decrease in 2011 is good because it is showing the use of cash which was unutilizes in 2010. for gvk power the value was high in 2009 but has decresed during the subsequent years. for tata power it is least varied showing a constant ratio.

2010

2009

since these are part of power industry where the inventory is very low the difference between cr and qr is very low.

20 15
10
gvk power

5
0

jp power
tata power

except jp motor the rest of the selected companies had a positive interval measure and that was greater than 1 showing that they

-5 1.5
1

2011

2010

2009

gvk power jp power tata power

0.5
0 2011 2010 2009

ery high for jp power. but allen in 2011. it is due to cash in hand. the decrease use it is showing the use of

ue was high in 2009 but the subsequent years. for varied showing a constant

power industry where the he difference between cr and

itive interval measure and n 1 showing that they

debtor turnover 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon creditor turnover 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon inventory turnover ratio 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon asset turnover 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon
0.774318593 1.806227407 2.226196138 2.486474744 2.251329535 14.72853267 7.762671437 28.50153879 1.336722611 4.861976069 2.437109277 4.011327434 13.84998057 17.82142423 40.60844419 15.96470588

2010
11.04567584 14.2403082 42.51777701 55.99499106

2009
8.07833223 9.52749875 39.4027431 30.8152866

2010
1.571763944 4.140178676 2.427824518 7.202201258

2009
1.62942307 3.29833767 2.88371655 2.68725474

2010
2.956059481 9.389943091 8.510757081 22.93866359

2009
3.11048398 5.15833999 8.45248265 3.60590594

2010
0.964685311 1.350690598 2.008118947 2.822368896

2009
1.05524335 0.76975434 2.10891254 0.71677614

60 40 20 0

2011

2010 2009

8 6 4 2 0

2011 2010 2009

30 20 10 0

2011 2010 2009

2 1 0

2011 2010 2009

debtor turnover gvk power jp power tata power 2011 27.9778 2010 27.1052 2009 7.99533

30

20 10
0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power jp power

4.160182 4.317525 2.503069 4.429243 5.465058 5.972152

tata power

creditor turnover 2011 0 2010 0 2009 0

gvk power jp power tata power

0.008152 0.021146 0.030318 1.338444 1.693565 2.019163

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

2011 2010 2009

gvk power
jp power

tata power

inventory 2011 32.556 2010 29.1986 2009 6.81783

gvk power jp power tata power

13.38851 26.15564 41.83265 13.91828 14.77193 13.87156

50 40 30 20 10 0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power
jp power

tata power

asset turnover 2011 0.42861 2010 0.40655 2009 0.28839

1
gvk power

gvk power jp power tata power

0.261196 0.183099 0.698738 0.69061 0.753299 0.811663

0.5

jp power tata power

0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power jp power

tata power

gvk power
jp power

tata power

gvk power
jp power

tata power

gvk power jp power tata power

GROSS PROFIT MARGIN RATIO 2011 0.062285329 force motors 0.013031375 eicher motors 0.023842078 hindustan motors 0.017230246 volkswagon NET PROFIT MARGIN RATIO 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon

2010
0.049374523 0.018335075 0.028642408 0.012855737

2009
0.045230204 0.021488152 0.032688839 0.008543475

2010

2009

-0.000830621 -0.17706487 -0.067280955 0.026820072 0.015687582 0.00273189 0.000882311 -0.06934643 -0.050421695 0.068563918 -0.14690811 -0.440815764

OPERATING EXPENSE RATIO 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon 2010 2009

0.196239758 -0.06823292 -0.006895349 0.110179938 0.085026016 0.061499569 0.057169715 -0.00745287 -0.015062814 0.103001618 -0.11737569 -0.428482844

0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0

2011

2010
2009

0.1 0

-0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4

-0.5

2011 2010

2009

0.4 0.2 0
-0.2
2011 2010

2009

-0.4 -0.6

GROSS PROFIT MARGIN RATIO 2011 2010 2009 0.09591259 0.076747 0.151719 gvk power 0 0 0 jp power 0.050926717 0.046369 0.036356 tata power

0.2
0.15
gvk power

0.1 0.05
0 2011 2010 2009

jp power
tata power

NET PROFIT MARGIN RATIO 2011 gvk power jp power tata power 2010 2009

0.02
0.015
gvk power jp power
tata power

0.015898384 0.010668 0.000603 0 0 0 0.010208826 0.012334 0.005957

0.01 0.005

OPERATING EXPENSE RATIO 2011 0.283350569 2010 0.27844 2009 0.38476

0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power jp power tata power

0.599534747 0.337497 0.271486 0.260051797 0.233789 0.217742

0.8 0.6
0.4
gvk power jp power tata power

0.2 0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power

jp power
tata power

gvk power jp power

tata power

gvk power jp power tata power

ROTA 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon RONA 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon ROE 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon EPS 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon DPS 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon P/E 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon
-112.03 5.682114388 164.5668 71.7704777 0 10.99851522 0 0 -0.561456753 113.9012621 0.092971365 0.988150034 -0.002144555 0.249038259 0.018382353 0.174673245 0.187687494 0.217880481 0.263071126 0.968401168 0.19 0.22 0.26 0.97

1.5

2010
-0.27 0.12 -0.27 -0.75

2009
-0.11 0.02 -0.2 -0.45

1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1

2010
-0.271063859 0.115758847 -0.269384299 -0.751783375

2009
-0.114955803 0.020670368 -0.196953542 -0.452296064

1.5

1 0.5 0
-0.5

-1

2010
-12.63392226 0.121127367 -1.272093602 -0.054193038

2009
-0.400256379 0.060968207 -0.421064037 0.003921848

5
0

-5
-10

-15
200

2010
-135.6373293 48.51629824 -3.168795734 -0.067084517

2009
-49.74962064 23.95514418 -2.409773037 0.02693174

100
0

-100 -200

2010
0 7.002622705 0 0

2009
0 5.001779993 0 0

15 10 5 0

2010
-1.089670526 4.522191675 -6.611344423 -3566.098584

2009
-6.271404606 10.4549569 -5.465244982 7032.222873

10000 5000 eicher

force

hindustan

0 -5000

volkswagon

2011 2010 2009

ROTA and RONA are both Return on Investment ratios. The term investments refers to either total assets or net assets. The conventional approach to calculate ROI is to divide PAT by investment. Investment is defined as the pool of funds supplied by the shareholders and lenders. The figures for both ROTA and RONA are similar to each other for all the companies and all the three years. This implies that the current liabilities are very small and in turn do not have any effect on the overall profit of the company.

2011
2010

2009

2011 2010 2009

ROE calculates the profitability on the owner's investment. ROE is an indication of how well the firm has used the resources of its owners.. This ratio of ROE reflects the extent to which a satisfactory earning has taken place. It also presents great interest to the prospective shareholders. The figures for ROE for Force Motors , Hindustan Motors and Volkswagen are negative. This fact can be attributed to the prescence of an economic recession wherein the profits for the companies had gone down.

2011

The profitability of shareholders can also be measured through other ratios called the EPS. EPS simply shows the profitability of a firm on a per share basis. It does not reflect how much of the profit is distributed as a 2009 dividend to the shareholders. Since the profits for the company for both Force Motors, Hindustan Motors and Volkswagen are in the negative as these companies could not translate their operations into substantial profits due to the recessionary economic conditions. On the other hand the dividends per share measure how much of the profits that the company has made has 2011 actually translated into returns for the shareholders in the form of 2010 dividends. Here as you can see only Eicher Motors has given out dividends 2009 to its shareholders whereas all the other companies have not paid dividends as they did not make any profits.
2010

2011 2010 2009

This ratio indicates the investors' expectations about the growth in the firms' earnings. This ratio acys as a market appraisal for all the firms performance. Here most of the firms have negative P/E ratio as their EPS is negative. This can be attributed to recession due to which the market prices of all the securities dropped and also profit margins of the companies was affected severely.

ROTA gvk power jp power tata power 2011 0.081964474

0.23 0.17

0.4

2010 0.08128258
0.07 0.16

2009 0.066203381
0.3 0.15

0.3
0.2 0.1

RONA 2011 0.081964474

0.228589196 0.171223887

2011

2010

2009

gvk power jp power tata power

2010 0.08128258
0.068530038 0.161815358

2009 0.066203381
0.296727194 0.149529901

0.4 0.3 0.2

0.1

ROE 2011 0.020921831

9.29084E-05 0.155541409

2011

2010

2009

gvk power jp power tata power

2010 0.03696129
0 0.173761568

2009 0.030687699
0 0.138710525

0.2 0.1 0 2011 2010 2009

EPS 2011 4.712512665

0.001828739 91.95119895

gvk power jp power tata power

2010 7.8045846
0 90.12769185

2009 5.42893726
0 58.6598916

100 80 60 40 20 0

gvk power jp power

tata power

2011 2010 2009

DPS 2011 0
0 12.51295883

15

gvk power jp power tata power

2010 0
0 12.01272704

2009 0
0 11.52935863

10
5

0 2011 2010 2009

P/E 2011 5.506616501 2010 5.74021582 2009 4.301025943

20

15 10 5
0 2011 2010 2009

gvk power jp power tata power

23130.6975 N/A N/A 14.46800058 15.22950352 13.04639301

gvk power jp power

Here also ROTA and RONA are same which shows that the current liabilities are very less as compared to the current assets and as a result the liquidity of the firm is high. Also the firm has low return on both total assets and total liabilities.

tata power

gvk power
jp power

tata power

gvk power
jp power tata power

Return on equity for the power company shows that the return is very low for all the three companies as the profits the company has made are negligible in comparison to the shareholder's funds. For JP Power the profitability for this company is very low and as a result their return on equity is zero.

gvk power jp power

tata power

Since the net profit is very low for GVK power and JP power the earning per share is very low for both these companies. Since the share capital for both JP and GVK is much higher as compared to Tata power the earnings per share for Tata is higher as compared to the other two companies.

gvk power jp power tata power

gvk power

tata power

P/E ratio shows the ratio of price to earnings per share. Ideally this ratio should reflect the true picture of the shareholder earnings. For JP the P/E ratio is very large which in turn can be due to two reeasons namely, very high market price and very low EPS. Here this is caused due to very low EPS which is not a good signal to the prospective shareholders.

urn is very low for all

solvency ratio 2011 force motors eicher motors hindustan motors volkswagon
0.060076371 0.353938864 0.047621641 0.102917517

2010
-0.117848165 0.222504004 -0.103777681 0.034065073

2009
-0.026399843 0.155778519 -0.061837456 0.02875502

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2

solvency ratio

2011

2010
2009

Solvency ratio indicates the ability of a firm to meet its long term fixed obligations. These long term fixed obligations include the instalments paid for repayment of loan. It is the company's ability to seervice its long term fixed obligations. usually a solvency ratio of 20% is desirable. But in the case of all the four automobile companies this ratio is way below the benchmark. The reason for this fact can be attributed to huge capital investments in the automobile industry and as a result these firms have a huge portion of long term liabilities. Also fuel costs required are very high and therefore greater working capital requirements translate into higher short term liabilities and in turn lower solvency ratios.

gvk power jp power tata power

0.15

2011 0.0434

2010 0.056

2009 0.04955

0.1 0.05

gvk power jp power

tata power

0.000532 0 0 0.092004 0.116219 0.093007

Also as we can see in the case of power industry th their accepted benchmark because the capital inve huge which in turn results into higher long term lia is required where in the short term liabilities are m is less as compared to the benchmark of 20%.

0 2011 2010 2009

lso as we can see in the case of power industry the solvency ratios are well below heir accepted benchmark because the capital investment in power industry is very uge which in turn results into higher long term liabilities. Also a lot of power and fuel required where in the short term liabilities are more and as a result the solvency ratio less as compared to the benchmark of 20%.