201 0

Financial Management Final Project Report

Financial Ratio Analysis
Financial Ratio Analysis of SHELL and PSO on the basis of financial record of 2005 to 2009

Acknowledgement
First of all we would like to thank our teacher for giving our group the opportunity to do this project as part of our Financial Management course. With this project, we have experienced the practical side of doing the financial ratio analysis. It appear as if by doing this analysis report we would definitely be having some idea of what is ahead for us ahead and that Finance is more than just accounting. As students of Financial Management, we have found it rewarding in terms of understanding the requirements, and the process of compiling a term report, which was motivating as well as helpful task for us as a group. We also like to thank you for not making the class boring and for imparting us knowledge and wisdom in the light of your experience.

Executive Summary
This report is showing relationship between two Petroleum Companies internal and external Financial Analysis. This project is an effort to practically exploit the analytical techniques ratio analysis, horizontal analysis, vertical analysis, Profitability Ratios, Long Term Solvency Ratios and Du Pont. This project will help to understand the reader of the project about the financial aspects of the companies regarding Profitability of the companies, market worth, investment trend, dividend payment policies, assets and liabilities utilization, depreciation methodology, assets and liabilities management, product sale & cost plan, management policies and other accounting procedures of the said companies. The main purpose of this project is to compare the financial statements of the said companies and to reach conclusions about their financial strength and relative stability. Due to ratio analysis every company can make future planning. We have selected project on these companies, because these companies are supporting of Cement Industry to manufacture cement. After study of this project every investor and shareholder can judge financial position of the company. All financial ratios present correct financial position of the company.

INTRODUCTION
Financial statement analysis is a process in which interested parties such as investor creditor and the management to calculate the past present and future situation and performance of the firm There are various methods or techniques that are used in analyzing financial statements, such as comparative statements, schedule of changes in working capital, common size percentages and ratios analysis. Financial statements are prepared to meet external reporting obligations and also for decision making purposes. They play a dominant role in setting the framework of managerial decisions. But the information provided in the financial statements is not an end in itself as no meaningful conclusions can be drawn from these statements alone. However, the information provided in the financial statements is of vast use in making decisions through analysis and interpretation of financial statements. The main purpose of this project is to compare the financial statements of the said companies and to reach conclusions about their financial strength and relative stability. Here we selected two companies which are from Cement industry.

Our Vision To be the Top Performing and Most Admired Refinery in Asia Our Mission To continuously deliver shareholder value by: Manufacturing and supplying oil products and services that satisfy the needs of our

customers Constantly achieving operational excellence Conducting our business in a safe, environmentally sustainable and economically optimum manner

Employing a diverse, innovative and results-oriented team motivated to deliver excellence

Our Objectives We are committed to deliver sustainable excellence in business performance by focusing on the following: Benefit our shareholders

Realise the potential of our people Meet our customer requirements Maximise refinery margins Safeguard asset integrity Deliver structural cost reductions
Page 1

Lahore Business School

Sustain a robust management system Deliver continuous sustainable Health, Safety, Security and Environmental excellence

Shell World Wide

Shell has been exploring for and producing oil and gas for more than a century. We employ around 101,000 people in more than 90 countries and territories. Our headquarters are in The Hague, the Netherlands, and our Chief Executive Officer is Peter Voser. The parent company of the Shell group is Royal Dutch Shell plc, which is incorporated in England and Wales. Shell worldwide by numbers a. 2%: amount of worlds oil we produce b. 3%: amount of worlds gas we produce c. 3.1 million: barrels of gas and oil we produce every day d. 44,000: Shell service stations worldwide e. 10 million customers: buy our transport fuel f. +35: refineries and chemical plants we run (figures for 2008) g. 1: ranking by Fortune 500 in 2009

Lahore Business School

Page 2

Shell Pakistan
Shell in Pakistan has played a leading role in abridging the growing energy demand gap in the country and has a stake in Pakistan Refinery, LPG distribution and a shareholding in the white oil pipeline. The primary goal of the company is to position itself as the preferred oil and Gas Company in Pakistan, leading the field in its commitment to customer service, quality of products, safety and environmental protection. Over the last decade, Shell Pakistan has developed a robust program of social investment, which supports organizations and initiatives in areas of health, education, welfare, community development, heritage and environment. Our Shell Tameer Program, introduced in 2003, today exists as one of the foremost efforts to facilitate youth entrepreneurship in the country and has engaged more than 45,000 young people through workshops, seminars, and community engagements. We continue to strive toward operational excellence and remain committed to growing our business in Pakistan. Shell Pakistan Limited (Shell Pakistan) is engaged in marketing of compressed natural gas and petroleum. The company provides different types of lubricating oil. Shell Pakistan caters to businesses and motorists. The company for businesses provides Shell cards, aviation customer service, exploration and production, transport, liquefied petroleum gas and industrial operations for power, automotive and sugar. Shell Pakistan for motorists provides customer service, car care tips, shell Helix motor oil and Shell advance motorcycle oil. The company also participates in motor sports like formula one and Moto GP by tying up with Audi, Ferrari and Ducati. Shell Pakistan is headquartered at Karachi, Pakistan. Shells range of innovative products is constantly expanding, supported by extensive research and development. With an eye on the future, Shell has evolved with a new identity in Pakistan. The overall brand positioning today has also evolved in line with the global theme of Made to Move, which is symbolic of Shells endeavor for our customers, who are forever on the move.

Our efforts to promote business excellence are not just limited to our products and services, but are also included in the way we do business. Over the past year, Shell Pakistan has made commendable strides in introducing global technical standards into the industry. In 2007, Shell
Lahore Business School Page 3

Pakistan had inducted eight such vehicles, with the fleet expected to double in number by the end of 2008. In order to further strengthen and streamline our internal processes and to increase efficiencies, Shell Pakistan has embarked on Shell Groups Global Downstream-One journey. The ultimate goal of Downstream-One is to reduce business complexity and increase operational efficiency in order to reduce costs and increase competitiveness, while simultaneously enhancing customer satisfaction. Shell Pakistan commenced its challenging Downstream-One journey with an introductory mobilization session in January 2008. With just over 21 months left for our momentous Go-Live on 1st April 2010, Shell Pakistan is engaging and preparing its stakeholders and businesses for the ensuing changes and benefits that will come from moving to a truly global system. Shell Pakistans IT department contributed to strengthening efficiencies within the organization in 2007-08 by providing a robust infrastructure for supporting our growing business. The capacity of our international circuit was upgraded successfully to ensure a more reliable communication network to support consolidated Shell systems. Shell Aviation also rolled out its global Apron system at Karachi airport, which will allow real-time communication from the apron to back-office IT systems. This is the first implementation of its kind for the aviation industry in Pakistan.

Lahore Business School

Page 4

Pakistan State Oil

To excel in delivering value to customers as an innovative and dynamic energy company that gets to the future first.

We are committed to leadership in energy market through competitive advantage in providing the highest quality petroleum products and services to our customers

Lahore Business School

Page 5

PSO is the market leader in Pakistans energy sector. The company has the largest network of retail outlets to serve the automotive sector and is the major fuel supplier to aviation, railways, power projects, armed forces and agriculture sector. PSO takes pride in continuing the tradition of excellence and is fully committed to meet the energy needs of today and rising challenges of tomorrow. Pakistan State Oil, the largest oil marketing company in the country, is currently engaged in storage, distribution and marketing of various POL products. The companys current value of Rs. 75 billion, its 82.1% share in the black oil market and 61.2% share in the white oil market, alone speak volumes about its success. The companys astounding growth in terms of sales and turnover, combined with its status of being the first Pakistani Public Sector Company to become a member of the World Economic Forum (WEF), and winning the Karachi Stock Exchange Top Companies Award has made PSO a notable company world over. PSO has the widest strategic oil distribution network. This network comprises of 29 storage depots and 9 installations, 860,000 MTs of capacity i.e. almost 81% of total national storage, numerous pipe lines network and equity partnership in White Oil Pipeline Project (WOPP) from Karachi to Mehmood Kot. A most efficient product movement system for its POL products facilitates the operations at PSO. This system includes a fleet of 6000 tank Lorries, tank wagons and pipelines. With the inception of white oil pipeline (WOPP) the pattern of supplies from Karachi has changed drastically as the entire white oil movement from Karachi has been switched over from tank lorries to pipelines. Moreover, to make this system more efficient and effective, new pilfer-proof tank Lorries equipped with satellite tracking system have been introduced. With its 3612 distribution outlets, PSO has the largest network in the country. Out of these, 1,610 outlets have been upgraded as per the New Vision Retail Program, with most modern facilities like electronic dispensing units, convenience stores, business centers, Easy Payment Centers and customer friendly staff to provide unmatched and diverse services to its customers, all of which are comparable to international practices. The fact that PSO serves 2.8 million retail customers on daily basis, along with 2000 industrial units and business houses, is indicative of its vast customer base. The company has also been meeting the fuel needs of various government entities, armed forces, railways, agriculture sector, IPPs and industrial units. PSO also provides Jet Fuel to Refueling Facilities at 9 airports in Pakistan and ship fuel at 3 ports.

Lahore Business School

Page 6

Objectives
The main objective of financial statement analysis to determine which company is performing better, to determine where the company stands relative to the industry average, to determine strengths and weaknesses of the companies, to give future direction by providing accurate data for analysis

This project aims to present the reader true information and records about the said companys performance. The major purpose here is to analyze the financial statements from the position of a financial analyst. This would mean ignoring a lot of inappropriate information and only taking the most important figures into account. Only then, can a true ratio analysis be carried out. The key objectives of this project are as follows:

WHICH COMPANY IS BETTER FOR THE INVESTMENT ? WHICH COMPANY IS BETTER FOR THE DEBTOR ? WHICH ONE COMPANY HAS PROSPECTS OF GROWTH?

FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS will be USEFUL and important for

COMPETITORS STAKEHOLDERS : BANK LENDING
OFFICERS AGENCIES

GOVERNMENTAL MANAGERS SECURITY

ANALYSTS

CREDITORS
DEBTORS

Lahore Business School

Page 7

DATA PROCESSING, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Data Collection Sources:
The data collection sources for this project are secondary sources These include internet and the stock exchange for gathering data as these companies are listed in Lahore stock exchange to collect their annual reports from there and then examine them.

Data Collection Tools/Instruments:

This project is concerned with performing the financial statement analysis of the two listed companies. The major data collection tool will be the observational tool which will be employed to analyze and collect relevant data from the statements

Data Processing, Analysis and Interpretation:

According to our project we use Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel work sheets to calculate the various ratios and analysis. The data will be presented in the form of summary tables and graphs/ charts because graphs and charts show the clear position of the firm.

Lahore Business School

Page 8

Ratio Analysis
A statistic has little value in isolation. Hence, a profit figure of Rs.100 million is meaningless unless it is related to either the firms turnover (sales revenue) or the value of its assets. Accounting ratios attempt to highlight the relationships between significant items in the accounts of a firm. Financial ratios are the analysts microscope; they allow them to get a better view of the firms financial health than just looking at the raw financial statements.

Ratios are used by both internal and external analysts Internal uses Planning Evaluation of management

External uses Credit granting Performance monitoring Investment decisions Making of policies

Lahore Business School

Page 9

LIQUIDITY RATIOS

A.

CURRENT RATIO Shows a companys ability to pay off its current liabilities from its current assets. Formula=

Shell
YEAR 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Description Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets
Amount 12983152 20316721

Description Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities

Amount 12209080 17902377

Analysis 1.0634 1.1349

20041859 30220209
21363250

19612115 23307811
25169302

1.0052 1.2966
0.8488

1.5000 1.0000 0.5000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Lahore Business School

Page 10

SHEEL COMPARISON Shells Current ratio increased significantly as compared to previous years although the volume of current liabilities increased as a whole due to increase in trade payables and Short term Loans but current assets grew at a rapid rate. The reason behind this was the significant change in the value of stock in trade, Trade Debts. This is due to higher prices of petroleum products during that time and the company is using FIFO method for its inventory. As current financial cries in the world as well as in Pakistan almost every company has a liquidity problem. .

PSO
YEAR 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Description Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets
Amount 40,734,366 58,034,675

Description Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities

Amount 32764205 47056578

Analysis 1.2433 1.233

6251327 115878692
138,689,524

51385727 93736220
130023120

1.2165 1.2362
1.0667

1.3000 1.2000 1.1000 1.0000 0.9000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON
PSO has positive trend in current ratio. FY06 and FY08 current ratios are same as FY07 current ratio is comparatively low. But high negative in FY09

Lahore Business School

Page 11

In 2008 current ratio 1.236, as compare to 2006 and 2007 it is increased .current ratio is increased due to huge increase 110%, 100% in inventory level and cash and bank balance consecutively as compare to 2007. Trade and other payable and short term borrowing are increased by 100% and 12% comparatively. But decreases in FY09. As current financial cries in the world as well as in Pakistan almost every company has a liquidity problem.

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON Shell current ratio increased more rapidly as compared to PSO because PSO current liabilities grew but current ration not grow as liabilities grow but shell increase there liabilities and assets.
1.8000 1.6000 1.4000 1.2000 1.0000 0.8000 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

B.

QUICK RATIO Shows a firms ability to meet its current liabilities with its most liquid assets.

Formula= SHELL 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets
12983152 20316721

20041859 30220209
21363250

Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities

12209080 17902377

Inventory 6608167 Inventory 9979886 Inventory 8244054 Inventory 18095523 Inventory 13076718

0.5222 0.5774 0.5848 0.5202 0.3292

19612115 23307811
25169302

Lahore Business School

Page 12

0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON Shells Quick ratio decreased due to higher prices of petroleum products, as the volume allocated for inventories was higher. Quick ratio increase in 2006, 2007, 2008 but after 2008 it decrease.
Quick ratio is .3292, .5202, .5848, .5774 and .5222 respectively in 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005. In 2009 quick ratio is comparatively low. It is decreased 20% in 2009 as compare to 2005, while 18% increased in 2007. In 2006 Quick ratio is 0.5774, as compare to 2005 it was 0.5222. As it is improved while current ratio is decreasing.

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Current 40,734,366 Assets Current 58,034,675 Assets Current 6251327 Assets Current 115878692 Assets Current 138,689,524 Assets Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities
32764205 47056578

Inventory 20,583,30
1 3

0.6151 0.6347 0.6413 0.5709 0.7536

Inventory 28,168,63 Inventory 29562055 Inventory 62360067 Inventory 40,698,20

9

51385727 93736220
130023120

Lahore Business School

Page 13

0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON
Quick ratio is .571, .641, and .636 respectively in 2008, 2007 and 2006. In 2008 quick ratio is comparatively low. It is decreased 10% in 2008 as compare to 2006, while 1% increased in 2007. In 2006 Quick ratio is 0.636, as compare to 2005 it was 0.615. As it is improved while current ratio is decreasing. As stock in trade is the major portion of current assets, when if is reduced as 40% of total assets. Cash ratio in 2006 is .040 as compare to 2005 which was .059. Cash ratio are .032, .030, .040 in 2008, 2007and 2006 respectively. While keeping 2006 as base year cash ratio is decreased 25% and 20% in 2007 and 2008 respectively. But downfall in FY09 Quick assets are not enough for the payment of current liabilities. Because the major inventory level of the company is 40%, 39% and 49% of total assets in 2006, 2007, and 2009 respectively. The company is improving its inventory level because it is a public company and it has a lot of branches and stations all over the county.

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON THE PSS HAS BETTER POSITION TO PAY HIS CURRENT LIBILITIES AS COMPARE TO SHELL PAKISTAN ONLY BECOUSE PSO INVEST LESS AMONT IN INVENTARY AS COMAPRE TO SHELL
0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 14

C.

CASH RATIO The ratio of a company's total cash and cash equivalents to its current liabilities. The cash ratio is most commonly used as a measure of company liquidity. It can therefore determine if, and how quickly, the company can repay its short-term debt. A strong cash ratio is useful to creditors when deciding how much debt, if any, they would be willing to extend to the asking party. Formula=
Cash & bank / Current Liabilities

SHELL 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities
12209080 17902377

Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank

752112 981197 814530 872414 869623

0.0580 0.0520 0.0399 0.0361 0.0334

19612115 23307811
25169302

0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series1

SHELL COMPARISON
Lahore Business School Page 15

Cash ratio in 2006 is .0520 as compare to 2005 which was .0580. Cash ratio are . 0399, .0361, .0334 in 2007, 2005and 2009 respectively. While keeping 2005 as base year cash ratio is decreased 12% and 25% in 2007 and 2008 respectively and 30% decrease in 2009

Shell cash Ratio decries every year only because lees reserves of cash in bank thats reason graph downward

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities Current Liabilities
32764205 47056578

Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank Cash & Bank

1,921,936 1898894 1522276 3018640 2883118

0.0587 0.0404 0.0296 0.0322 0.0222

51385727 93736220
130023120

0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series1

PSO COMPARISON

Lahore Business School

Page 16

Cash ratio in 2006 is .040 as compare to 2005 which was .059. Cash ratio are .032, . 030, .040 in 2008, 2007and 2006 respectively. While keeping 2006 as base year cash ratio is decreased 25% and 20% in 2007 and 2008 respectively and 10% decrease in 2009

The Cash position of PSO is not good because Current Liabilities increase more rapidly compare to Cash increase thats reason graph downward

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The cash position of Shell is better as compare to PSO. But not satisfied because its current liabilities increase more rapidly as compare Cash
0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

Over All Liquidity Ratios Analysis of Shell

Lahore Business School Page 17

Liquidity position of Shell is not commendable, as other players of the industry. However, with the introduction of higher margin products, Shell has been able to enhance its performance since FY05 owing to inauguration of White Oil Pipeline enabling it to better supply/transportation of oil across the country. As a result, the company's oil stock increased significantly. FY07 however, disturbed the increasing trend of Shell's liquidity position and it was the most challenging period for the whole industry. Short-term loans and accrued liabilities increased significantly, depressing the current liabilities and the current ratio of the company. On the other hand FY08 improved Shell's liquidity position. This is mainly due to sharp decline witnessed in the short-term loans taken by the company. but

ASSETS TURNOVER RATIO a. Fixed Assets Turnover Ratio

Fixed assets turnover ratio is also known as sales to fixed assets ratio. This ratio measures the efficiency and profit earning capacity of the concern .

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 Sales Sales Sales

11495036 132840460

Sale / Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets

7597964 7855161 9498295 14.6743 16.9112

130129844

13.7003
Page 18

Lahore Business School

2008 2009

Sales Sales

157626491
177110208

Fixed Assets Fixed Assets

9444650 12290483

16.6895
14.4101

20.0000 15.0000 10.0000 5.0000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON
Fixed asset turnover are improving year by year. The reason is that company sale is improving year to year and the fixed asset like property; plant and equipment are also increase as sale increases.

The FY 07 is not good because the sales was decries this year and the FY 09 is also not good because these year the economy and the political position in Pakistan is not well and the Fy09 the price of oil in international market change

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales
253776920 352514873

Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets

11341468 12133849

22.3760 29.0522

411057592 583213959
719282176

12224042 11231328
14732119

33.6270 51.9274
49.8241

Lahore Business School

Page 19

60.0000 50.0000 40.0000 30.0000 20.0000 10.0000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON
Fixed asset turnover are improving year by year. The reason is that company sale is improving year to year but the fixed asset like property, plant and equipment is decreased 7% in 2008 as compare to 2007. Fixed asset is not increasing in FY08 but increase 15 %in FY09 as compare FY08

The Sale of PSO increase every year with high rate but the Fixed Assets not incases as Sale.The major change in fixed Assets the Long Term Loan decries in every year but the sale Inca rise and company utilize his assets with efficiently. That is good sign for company

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The PSO utilize his assets more efficiently and effectively compare to Shell because Shell incase the fixed assets in Long Term Debts and Investment outside the company thats reason the company focus on there sale is not positively as compare to PSO

Lahore Business School

Page 20

60.0000 50.0000 40.0000 30.0000 20.0000 10.0000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

b. Total Assets Turnover Ratio

Asset turnover measures a firm's efficiency at using its assets in generating sales or revenue. .

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales
11495036 132840460

Sale / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 5.4173 4.7154

130129844 157626491
177110208

4.4547 3.9740
5.2627

6.0000 4.0000 2.0000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Total Assets Turnover Ratio show us the Company performance to used there assets for garneting the sale or Profit the graph show Total asset turnover increased in FY09 as compare Fy08 but the company pervious position is good as FY09
Lahore Business School Page 21

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Sales Sales Sales Sales Sales
253776920 352514873

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524

4.8730 5.0238

411057592 583213959
719282176

74737315 127110020
153421643

5.5000 4.5883
4.6883

6.0000 5.5000 5.0000 4.5000 4.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON The use of Assets was well in FY2007 but overall sale and assets increase same ratio. The trade debts increase in high ratio that effect show in FY09

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The both companies use their assets almost equal ratio

Lahore Business School

Page 22

6.0000 5.0000 4.0000 3.0000 2.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 23

PROFITABILITY RATIOS

A. GROSS PROFIT MARGIN

Indicates the efficiency of the operations and the firms pricing policies.

Formula=

Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit
8738106 9961448

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

111495036 132840460

0.0784 0.0750 0.0490 0.0961 0.0728

6380502 15150218
12902182

130129844 157626491
177110208

0.1200 0.1000 0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON
In 2005 the net Gross margin was increased by 9% but In 2006 the net Gross margin was decreased by 8% .The year 2007 was a year of decrease in profitability ratios in this GP decreased with high rate The year 2008 was a good for the Shell there was an increase in the profitability as there was GP margin was increases as compare all pervious years and decreases in FY09 t hat might because of increasing oil

prices but decries in FY09

PSO
Lahore Business School Page 24

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

6.0000 5.0000 4.0000 3.0000 2.0000 1.0000 0.0000

Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit Gross Profit

13746331 17207226

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

253776920 352514873

5.4167 4.8813 2.9824 5.1487 0.4185

12259430 30023626
3010111

411057592 583213959
719282176

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

PSO COMPARISON
In 2006 the net Gross margin was increased by 5% whereas net profit margin was increased by 2%. The year 2007 was a year of decrease in profitability ratios in this GP was 3% The year 2008 was a good for the PSO there was an increase in the profitability as there was GP margin was 5.15% but badly down in FY09 because in FY09 oil Prices changes in international market

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON GPM of PSO and Shell doubled in FY 08 because of increasing oil in International market and local market but decrease in FY09 as Normal Position

B. OPERATING
Lahore Business School

PROFIT MARGIN

Page 25

Indicates the firms profitability after taking account of Opreating expenses.

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit
3973925 4997503

Operating Profit /Sale

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

111495036 132840460

0.0356 0.0376 0.0087 0.0538 0.0276

1133458 4 8481359
4886635

130129844 157626491
177110208

0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON Shells NPM has improved a lot from FY07 to FY08 . This must be the same effect as seen in the companys GPM. But in FY 09 graph move downward the administrative expenses increase in FY 09 and GCS increases as compare FY08

Lahore Business School

Page 26

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit Operating Profit
8554289 10820734

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

253776920 352514873

0.0321 0.0307 0.0183 0.0380 -0.0088

7525548 2213713 2
-6353344

411057592 583213959
719282176

0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 -0.0100 -0.0200 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON OPM of PSO has doubled from the FY 07 to FY 08 which is a good sign for companys operations. That might because of increasing oil prices but decrease in FY09 because of increase the CGS and Other operating Expenses and Distribution and Market Cost as compare FY08 SHELL & PSO COMPARISON OPM of PSO and Shell doubled in FY 08 because of increasing oil but decrease in FY09 Shell Normal Position and PSO increase there CGS and Other Operating expense thats reason for loss
0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 -0.0100 -0.0200 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 27

C.

NET PROFIT MARGIN

Indicates the firms profitability after taking account of all expenses and income taxes.

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax
2451070 3108469

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

111495036 132840460

0.0220 0.0234 0.0054 0.0326 0.0145

706659 5137094
2562948

130129844 157626491
177110208

0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON Shells NPM has improved a lot from FY07 to FY08 . This must be the same effect as seen in the companys GPM. But in FY 09 graph move downward the CGS, administrative expenses and sale tax increase so the profit goes down

Lahore Business School

Page 28

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax Net Profit After Tax
5655873 7524341

Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales Net Sales

253776920 352514873

0.0223 0.0213 0.0441 0.0241 -0.0093

4689798 1405379 5
-6698535

411057592 583213959
719282176

0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 -0.0100 -0.0200 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON OPM of PSO has doubled from the FY 07 to FY 08 which is a good sign for companys operations. That might because of increasing oil prices but decrease in FY09 because of increase the CGS and Other operating Expenses and Distribution Market Cost and Financial Cost.

Lahore Business School

Page 29

SHELL AND PSO COMPARISON NPM of PSO and Shell doubled in FY 08 because of increasing oil but decrease in FY09 Shell Normal Position and PSO increase there CGS Other Operating expense and financial cost thats reason for loss.

0.0350 0.0300 0.0250 0.0200 0.0150 0.0100 0.0050 0.0000 -0.0050 -0.0100 -0.0150 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO S hell

Lahore Business School

Page 30

ASSETS PROPORTIONAL RATIO a. Current Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Current Operating Assets from his Current Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA
7521096 9339181

Avg OCA / Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets
20581116 20316721 19713632 32000209 21363251 0.3654 0.4597

10193987 14209119
16700620

0.5171 0.4702
0.7817

1.0000 0.8000 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON In FY05 the current operating assets ratio is 0.3654 which will be increases in FY06 and FY07 20% and 10% due to incases the AOCA in FY06 and FY07 but FY2008 the Total Current assets Incases RS 23 billion due to increase Stock In Trade . During the FY09, the company's current assets decreased from Rs 12.725 billion in Dec'08 to Rs 12.290 billion in Dec'09 and come in normal position.

Lahore Business School

Page 31

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA Avg OCA
23,361,953 27,421,202

Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets

40737008 58034675 62513273 115878692 138689524

0.5735 0.4725

32138293 49346045
55070614

0.5141 0.4258
0.3971

1.2000 1.0000 0.8000 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON In FY05 the current operating assets ratio is 0.5735 which will be decreases in FY06 and FY07 10% and 7% as compare to FY05 In FY2008 the Total Current assets increases RS 49 billion due to increase Stock In Trade . During the FY09, the company's current assets Increased from Rs 23 billion but the AOCA also incases

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON

Lahore Business School Page 32

The Shell current operating assets position is better then PSO and increase in every year.

1.2000 1.0000 0.8000 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

b. Non Current Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Non Current Operating Assets from his Current Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA
5587840 7310756

Avg non COA / Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets
20581116 20316721 19713632 32000209 21363251 0.2715 0.3598

9821990 10757802
9091110

0.4982 0.3560
0.4255

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Lahore Business School

Page 33

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Non Current operating Assets Ratio show us the Company performance to used there non current assets for garneting the sale or Profit. The avg Non OCA of shell also increase every year to show the good sign and show long term planning of company the main A/c of Trade Debt increases in FY08 as compare FY 05, FY 06, and FY07. In FY09 A/c of Trade debts decrease but the last year good effect shown in FY09.

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA Avg non COA
17,375,055 21964640 28135682 39849938 72213494.5

Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets Current Assets

40737008 58034675 62513273 49982738 138689524

0.4265 0.3785

0.4501 0.7973
0.5207

0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Non Current operating Assets Ratio show us the Company performance to used there non current assets for garneting the sale or Profit. The avg Non OCA of PSO increase every year to show the good sign and show long term planning of company the main A/c of Trade Debt increases in FY08 as compare FY 05, FY 06, and FY07. In FY09 A/c of Trade debts decrease but the last year good effect shown in FY09.

Lahore Business School

Page 34

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The PSO non current assets are incases in high ratio compare to Shell which was only for Trade debt a/c. PSO supply petroleum items on credit basis the only reason is that the PSO is govt control company and supply petroleum items on credit basis to govt institution which is not good sgin for PSO as compare Shell.
0.9000 0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO S hell

c. Fixed Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Fixed Operating Assets from his Fixed Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA
5587840 5657958

Avg Non OCA / Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets
7597965 7855161 9894295 9444650 12290483 0.7354 0.7203

6154034 6703421
7070604

0.6220 0.7098
0.5753

Lahore Business School

Page 35

0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 1 2 3 4 5 Series1

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Fixed operating Assets Ratio show us the Company AOCOA in Fixed Assets The avg Non OCA of shell increase every year but Fixed assets not increases as AOCOA to show the not good sign the main A/c of only Trade Debt increases in FY08 as compare FY 05, FY 06, and FY07.

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA Avg Non COA
8256129 7964952

Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets

11341468 12133849 12224042 11231328 14732119

0.7280 0.6564

7906152 7852290
7310974

0.6468 0.6991
0.4963

Lahore Business School

Page 36

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 2005 2006 2007 2008

PSO COMPARISON The Shell Fixed operating Assets Ratio show us the Company AOCOA in Fixed Assets The avg Non OCA of PSO decrease every year and also Fixed assets decreases to show the not good sign for Company

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The Shell have improve more OCOA and Fixed assets compare to PSO. PSO decline his OCOA and Increase his fixed assets

Lahore Business School

Page 37

0.4500 0.4000 0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

d. Fixed Non Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Fixed Non Operating Assets from his Fixed Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA
2010124 2068605

Avg FNOA / Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets
7597965 7855161 9894295 9444650 12290483 0.2646 0.2633

2522694 2768052
3796963

0.2550 0.2931
0.3089

Lahore Business School

Page 38

0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Fixed Non operating Assets Ratio show us the Company AOCNOA in Fixed Assets The avg Non OCNOA of shell increase every year to show the good sign the main A/c of CWIP to show that company long term planning is Good

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg F NOA Avg F NOA Avg F NOA Avg F NOA Avg F NOA
3085339 3772707

Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Fixed Assets

11341468 12133849 12224042 11231328 14732119

0.2720 0.3109

4272794 3875395
5670750

0.3495 0.3451
0.3849

0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Lahore Business School

Page 39

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Fixed Non operating Assets Ratio show us the Company AOCNOA in Fixed Assets The avg Non OCNOA of PSO increase every year due to Deferred Taxation and Prepayment that is not good sign for company SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The long term planning of shell is more better then PSO

e. Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Operating Assets from his Total Assets

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA
13108936 14997138

Avg OA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.6369 0.5323

16347221 20912540
23771224

0.5596 0.5272
0.7063

Lahore Business School

Page 40

0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Operating Assets ration show consistent graph in FY 06,FY07 and FY08 and increases in FY09 due to Increases in Fixed assets that is good sign for company its show the company Operating assets like fixed assets increases so it is good sign for company

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA Avg OA
31618082 35386154

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.6071 0.5043

40044445 57198335
62381588

0.5358 0.4500
0.4066

Lahore Business School

Page 41

0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Operating Assets ration show decline graph in FY 06,FY07, FY09 and FY09 due to Increases in Total assets that is not good sign for company the operating assets incares every year but Non Operating assets also increases.

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The shell have better position of Operating assets from his Total Assets but PSO gone decline

0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 P SO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 42

F. Non Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Non Operating Assets from his Total Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA
7472180 9379361

Avg NOA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.3631 0.3329

12344684 13525854
12888073

0.4226 0.3410
0.3830

0.4500 0.4000 0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Non Operating Assets ration show increases graph in FY 06, FY08 and FY09 at avg ratio but high incases in FY07 due to long term debts
.

PSO
Lahore Business School Page 43

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA Avg NOA

20460394 25737347

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.3929 0.3668

32408475 43725333
77884244

0.4336 0.3440
0.5076

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The Shell Non Operating Assets ration show increases graph in every year due to Increases Other receivable, and loan and Advances

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON

Lahore Business School Page 44

The both companies use their assets almost equal ratio

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

g. Current Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Current Operating Assets from his Total Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA
7521096 9339181

Avg COA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.3654 0.3315

10193187 14209119
16700620

0.3489 0.3582
0.4962

Lahore Business School

Page 45

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Current Operating Assets ration shows increases graph in every year that is good sign for company and smoothness of operation.

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA Avg COA
23361953 27421202

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.4486 0.3908

32138293 49346045
55070614

0.4300 0.3882
0.3589

Lahore Business School

Page 46

0.5000 0.4500 0.4000 0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Current Operating Assets ration shows decline graph in every year that is not good sign for company and show focus of company in long term advantage. SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The current assets ration shows shell have good position compare to PSO

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 47

h. Current Non Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Current Non Operating Assets from his Total Assets Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA
5462056 7310756

Avg CNOA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.2654 0.2595

8921990 10757802
9091110

0.3362 0.2712
0.2701

0.4000 0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Current Non Operating Assets ration shows Consistent graph in every year that is good sign for company and smoothness of operation.

Lahore Business School

Page 48

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA Avg CNOA
17375055 21964640

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.3336 0.3130

28135682 39849938
72213495

0.3765 0.3135
0.4707

0.5000 0.4500 0.4000 0.3500 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Current Non Operating Assets ration shows increases graph in every year that is not good sign for company

Lahore Business School

Page 49

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The Shell have more Current Operating assets Compare to PSO
0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

i.

Non Current Operating Assets Ratio

Show the company Current Operating Assets from his Total Assets Formula= Shell Avg FOA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.2715 0.2008

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA

5587840 5657958

6154034 6703421
7070604

0.2107 0.1690
0.2101

Lahore Business School

Page 50

0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Non Current Operating Assets ration shows decline graph in every year because Fixed assets not increase as Current assets increases

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA Avg FOA
8256129 7964952

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.1585 0.1135

7906152 7852290
7310974

0.1058 0.0618
0.0477

Lahore Business School

Page 51

0.1800 0.1600 0.1400 0.1200 0.1000 0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Non Current Operating Assets ration shows decline graph in every year because Fixed assets decline every year SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The PSO have week position compare to Shell

0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSO Shell

Lahore Business School

Page 52

j.

Non Current Non Operating Assets Ratio

Asset turnover measures a firm's efficiency at using its assets in generating sales or revenue. .

Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA
2010124 2068605

Avg FNOA / Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets
20581116 28171882 29211927 39664859 33653733 0.0977 0.0734

2522694 2768052
2796963

0.0864 0.0698
0.1128

0.1200 0.1000 0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON The Shell Non Current Non Operating Assets incases in FY09 in high rate due to deferred Taxation and long term investment that is not good sign for company

Lahore Business School

Page 53

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA Avg FNOA
3085339 3772702

Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets Total Assets

52078476 70168524 74737315 127110020 153421643

0.0592 0.0538

4272794 3875395
5670750

0.0572 0.0305
0.0370

0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300 0.0200 0.0100 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

PSO COMPARISON The PSO Non Current Operating Assets ration shows decline graph in every year that is good sign for company

Lahore Business School

Page 54

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON The PSO Non Current Operating Assets ration shows decline graph in every year but Shell graph not down as PSO due to Long term investment

Lahore Business School

Page 55

Solvency Ratio a. Total debt to Capital Ratio

A measurement of a company's financial leverage, calculated as the company's debt divided by its total capital. Debt includes all short-term and long-term obligations. Total capital includes the company's debt and shareholders' equity, which includes common stock, preferred stock, minority interest and net debt Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts
3732950 5063359

Total Debts / Capital Capital Capital Capital Capital Capital

12036023 15177466 17029357 22008935 16764202 0.3101 0.3336

7568586 8397297
8493599

0.4444 0.3815
0.5067

0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON

Lahore Business School

Page 56

The weight of debts increase every year thats is not good sign for company the main reason for increase debts is short term loan and creditor which increase high rate in FY07 and FY08

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts
5486775 8392913

Capital Capital Capital Capital Capital

7201965 10108103 11548279 13547696 21224434

0.7618 0.8303

9833089 11832506
19509244

0.8515 0.8734
0.9192

1.0000 0.9000 0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 1 2 3 4 5

PSO COMPARISON The PSO have more debts from his capital compare to shell

b. Debts to Equity Ratio

Lahore Business School Page 57

The Debt to Equity Ratio is used for Measuring Solvency and researching the Capital Structure of a company. It indicates how much the company is leveraged (in debt) by comparing what is owed to what is owned. In other words it measures a company's ability to borrow and repay money. Formula= Shell 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts
3732950 5063359

Total Debts / Equity Equity Equity Equity Equity Equity

8303073 10114107 9460771 13611638 8270603 0.4496 0.5006

7568586 8397297
8493599

0.8000 0.6169
1.0270

1.2000 1.0000 0.8000 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series1

SHELL COMPARISON
Lahore Business School Page 58

Shell's debt to equity ratio increased from 1.47 percent in FY06-07 to 20 percent in FY07-08. In the FY09, the debt to equity ratio fell from 5 times in the FY08 to 3 times by the end of the FY09. The Ratio increased from -8 times in the FY08 to 3 times in the FY09, which shows that the company showed a marked improvement in its debt management capabilities.

PSO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts Total Debts
5486775 8392913

Equity Equity Equity Equity Equity

17312771 20813059 20939217 30965054 20870785

0.3169 0.4033

9833089 11832506
19509244

0.4696 0.3821
0.9348

1.0000 0.9000 0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 1 2 3 4 5

PSO COMPARISON The liabilities was increased by 41% to 70% from 60% and the time interest expense also decreased to 14.18 times from 25.79 where the owner equity increased from 1.98 to 2.37 .In the
Lahore Business School Page 59

next year debt ratio increased while time interest decreased because this was a year of overall a slight decrease in the profitability. In 2008 debt ratio increases to 76% from 71% and time interest expense almost doubled and the owner 3.1 from 2.57 that was a good sign for the company

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON THE SHEEL COMPANY HAVE BETTER POSITION TO PAY HIS DEBT FROM HIS EQUITY COMPARE TO PSO

c. Equity to Capital Ratio

Invested money that, in contrast to debt capital, is not repaid to the investors in the normal course of business. It represents the risk capital staked by the owners through purchase of the firm's common stock (ordinary shares). Its value is computed by estimating the current market value of everything owned by the firm from which the total of all liabilitiesis subtracted. On the balance sheet of the firm, equity capital is listed as stockholders' equity or owners' equity. Also called equity financing or share capital.

OR

Capital raised from owners. Formula= Equity / Capital

Shell
Lahore Business School Page 60

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Equity Equity Equity Equity Equity

8303073 10114107 9460771 13611638 8270603

Capital Capital Capital Capital Capital

12036023 15177466 17029357 22008935 16764202

0.6899 0.6664

0.5556 0.6185
0.4933

0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Series2

SHELL COMPARISON Shell's equity to capital ratio decreased in FY06-07 FY07-08. and FY09, the equity to ratio fell down because Capital increases in FY06 , FY07 and FY08 in the A/c of Short term loan, Long term Loan and Creditor but in Equity decreases in A/c of reserves and unappreciated profit.

PSO
Lahore Business School Page 61

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Equity Equity Equity Equity Equity

17312771 20813059 20939217 30965054 20870785

Capital Capital Capital Capital Capital

7201965 10108103 11548279 13547696 21224434

2.4039 2.0590

1.8132 2.2856
0.9833

3.0000 2.5000 2.0000 1.5000 1.0000 0.5000 0.0000 1 2 3 4 5

PSO COMPARISON PSO equity to capital ratio decreased in FY06-07 FY07-08. and FY09, the equity to ratio fell down because Capital increases in FY06 , FY07 and FY08 in the A/c of Short term loan, Long term Loan and Creditor, and in Equity increases in A/c of reserves.

SHELL & PSO COMPARISON PSO have better position to pay his capital form his equity because PSO increase equity every year but Shell was fell down his reserves and inappropriate Profit

Lahore Business School

Page 62

Vertical Analysis

A method of financial statement analysis in which each entry for each of the three major categories of accounts (assets, liabilities and equities) in a balance sheet is represented as a proportion of the total account. The main advantages of vertical analysis are that the balance sheets of businesses of all sizes can easily be compared. It also makes it easy to see relative annual changes within one business.

VERTICAL ANALYSIS OF BALANCE SHEET & INCOME STATEMENT SHELL PAKISTAN

Lahore Business School

Page 63

Net sales have shown an increase of 24.3% to Rs 90 billion, while the cost of sales have shown an increase of 26.6%. Due to this there has been a slight decline in the gross profit margins to 6.3% from previous 7.2%. Distribution, administrative and marketing expenses have increased marginally and were rather subdued especially so in times of inflationary pressures. Financial costs have reduced by 37%, adding impetus towards better results. Company has achieved significant growth in its pre-tax earnings, achieving Rs 1.762 billion in comparison to Rs 962 million earned in the same period last year. This improvement in profitability is mainly on the back of continued volume growth in key business segments, better product mix towards high margin products as well favorable movements in the international oil prices. However, after tax earnings declined to Rs 720 million as against a Rs 1.014 billion in the same period last year due to an exceptional increase in Income Tax following the re-introduction of turnover tax, and increase in tax from 0.5% to 1%. The company has been able to post high earnings per share than other industry players. However, it recorded a sharp decline of 81.8% in FY06-07 mainly attributable to escalating oil prices and lower demand for POL products, arising from a shift towards cheap substitutes. However, FY0708 was very positive for the company. Higher sales volume combined with very high international oil prices resulted in very high growth in EPS. In FY09, EPS increased from -Rs 75 in FY08 to Rs 37 in FY09.

Lahore Business School

Page 64

By the end of FY09, the dividend per share stood at Rs 33. This increase in DPS has been due to impressive growth witnessed in company's bottom line

VERTICAL ANALYSIS OF BALANCE SHEET & INCOME STATEMENT PSO

Lahore Business School

Page 65

Vertical analysis shows that current asset is increasing FY06 83%, FY07 84% and FY08 94% as compare to total assets 100% for consecutive three years. While current liabilities for FY06, FY07, FY08 are 67%, 68%, 74% consecutively. This shows that company is encouraging the level of current assets as well as current liabilities

Lahore Business School

Page 66

Horizontal Analysis
A procedure in fundamental analysis in which an analyst compares ratios or line items in a company's financial statements over a certain period of time. The analyst will use his or her discretion when choosing a particular timeline; however, the decision is often based on the investing time horizon under consideration.

HORIZONTAL ANALYSIS OF BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT SHELL PAKISTAN

Lahore Business School

Page 67

HORIZONTAL ANALYSIS OF BALANCE SHEET

Horizontal analysis shows that Non current assets of Fixed assets FY05 are decreases 97 % long term loan and advances 60% and Prepayments 43% while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While Non current liabilities of differed liabilities decreases 43% in FY05 , FY06 100% as base year. This shows that both Non current assets and Non current liabilities decreases in FY05

Lahore Business School

Page 68

Horizontal analysis shows that Non current assets of Fixed assets FY07, FY08 and FY09 are Increases 114 % , 119% and 127% ,long term loan and advances are Increases 107%, 113% and 123% and Prepayments are Increases 182% and 187% but no change in FY07 while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While Non current liabilities of differed liabilities Increases 103% in FY08 , FY06 100% as base year. Long term loans increases in FY08 as 25 billion. This shows that both Non current assets and Non current liabilities in FY07, FY08, and FY09 for consecutive three years are increasing

Horizontal analysis shows that current assets of FY05 are decreases 73 % and Increases inFY07, Fy08 and FY09 Increases as 103%, 140% and 119% while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While current liabilities of decreases 68% in FY05 , and Increases in FY07, FY08 and FY09 as 109%, 130% and 140% while keeping FY06 100% as base year. This shows that both current assets and current liabilities in FY07, FY08, and FY09 for consecutive three years are increasing

HORIZONTAL ANALYSIS OF INCOME STATEMENT SHELL PAKISTAN

Horizontal analysis shows that sale of FY05 and FY07 are decreases 83 % and 97% and Increases inFY08, FY09 118% and 133% while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While Gross Profit FY05 and FY07 are decreases 87 % and 64% and Increases in FY08, FY09 152% and 129% while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While Operating Profit FY05 FY 07and FY09 are decreases 79 % and 22%and 97% and Increases in FY08, 169% while keeping FY06 100% as base year While Net Profit FY05 FY 07and FY09 are decreases 78 % and 22%and 82% and Increases in FY08, 162% while keeping FY06 100% as base year This shows that in FY05, FY07, and FY09 for consecutive three years are decreasing and FY08 was Increases.

Lahore Business School

Page 69

HORIZONTAL ANALYSIS OF BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT PSO

Lahore Business School

Page 70

Horizontal analysis shows that current assets of FY08 are 200% and FY07 108 % while keeping FY06 100% as base year. While current liabilities of FY08 199% and FY07 109%, FY06 100% as base year. This shows that both current assets and current liabilities for consecutive three years are increasing.

Lahore Business School

Page 71

DUPONT Analysis
A method of performance measurement that was started by the DuPont Corporation in the 1920s. With this method, assets are measured at their gross book value rather than at net book value in order to produce a higher return on equity (ROE). It is also known as "DuPont identity". DuPont analysis tells us that ROE is affected by three things: Operating efficiency, which is measured by profit margin Asset use efficiency, which is measured by total asset turnover Financial leverage, which is measured by the equity multiplier Formula =
ROE = Profit Margin (Profit/Sales) * Total Asset Turnover (Sales/Assets) * Equity Multiplier (Assets/Equity) OR ROE = Net Income / Equity

Lahore Business School

Page 72

DUPONT Analysis of Shell Pakistan

Lahore Business School

Page 73

Shell ROE increased in Y08 and decreased in Fy09. Companys ROE goes down due to decrease in operating efficiency that is not good sign and decline in ROE in FY09 as compare FY08 was due to decrease in profit margin by Comparison with industry average ROE FY09 is 45% more. Operating efficiency (profit Margin) Operating efficiency is almost same except in FY05 and FY06 but Decline in FY07 and FY09 the reason behind Operating profit decline in FY07 and FY09, increased 222% in FY07 and 352 % in FY09 financial cost increased as compare to FY06. The factor is high price of oil in international market. But in FY08 profitability is increased due to Sale is increased and due to increased in demand of furnace oil but decline in FY09 due to high price of oil, financial charges and taxation and decline in other sale Asset Use Efficiency (Total asset control) Compare to FY05, FY07 and FY09 asset turnover in increased from FY06 to FY08 BY 21% and 30% as compare to FY06. The main reason is that the total assets increased by 103% in FY 09 and 140% in FY08 as compare to FY06 (current asset increased 148% in FY08) and decline in FY09 by 43% compare FY08. Financial Leverage (Equity multiplier) Total asset is increased 140%% and 119% increased in FY08 and FY09 respectively as compare FY05. But total equity is increased by 134% in FY08 compare FY05 and decline 81% in FY09 as compare FY 05 respectively. This shows that is FY09 increase in Assets is less than increase in equity

DUPONT Analysis of PSO

Lahore Business School

Page 74

ROE = Profit Margin * Asset Turnover * Equity Multiplier

Lahore Business School

Page 75

PSO ROE in decline in 2007 by 38% and increased 102% Y08. Companys ROE goes up due to increase in operating efficiency that is a good sign. Decline in ROE in FY07 was due to decrease in profit margin by 67%. Comparison with industry average ROE FY08 is 54% more. Operating efficiency (profit Margin) Operating efficiency is almost same except in FY07. Operating profit decline inFY07 by 62% and increased 187% in FY08 as 2006 as base year 100%.the reason was that inFY07 financial cost increased 131% as compare to FY06. The factor is high price of oil in international market. But in FY08 profitability is increased due to sale is increased 41% due to increased in demand of furnace oil. Asset Use Efficiency (Total asset control) Compare to FY06, FY07 and FY08 asset turnover in increased from FY06 to FY07 BY 10% but it is decreased by 17% in FY08. The main reason is that the total assets increased by 70% (current asset increased 85%) I n FY08 where as sale is increased by only 42%. Financial Leverage (Equity multiplier) Total asset is increased 7% and 70% increased in FY07 and FY08 respectively. But total equity is increased by 1% and 47% in FY07 and FY08 respectively. This shows that is FY08 increase in equity is less than increase in total assets

Lahore Business School

Page 76

Comparison with Sector

Current Ratio Compare to industry average current ratio of Shell is low. In 2009 PSO current ratio is 0.8488 while industry average is 1.6. Shell has liquidity problem as compare to industry average. The company has less capacity to pay its short term finance / debt. Compare to industry average current ratio of PSO is low. In 2009 PSO current ratio is 1.066 while industry average is 1.6. PSO has liquidity problem as compare to industry average. The company has less capacity to pay its short term finance / debt. Quick Ratio Compare to industry average quick ratio of Shell is low. In 2009 PSO current ratio is 0.5292 while industry average is 1.3944. Shell has liquidity problem as compare to industry average. The company has less capacity to pay its short term finance / debt. Because of high inventory stock Compare to industry average quick ratio of PSO is low. In 2009 PSO current ratio is 0.7536 while industry average is 1.3944. Shell has liquidity problem as compare to industry average. The company has less capacity to pay its short term finance / debt. Because of high inventory stock Cash Ratio PSO has cash ratio of .0222 in 2009 as compare to industry average which is very low. Shell has cash ratio of .0334 in 2009 as compare to industry average which is very low. while industry average is 0.2223 Gross Profit Margin Ratio In 2009 the gross margin ration is 0.0042 that is very low In 2009 the gross margin ration is 0.0728 that is low while industry average is 0.1652 Operating Profit Margin Ratio In 2009 the operating margin ration is -0.0088 that is very low its loss In 2009 the operating margin ration is 0.0276 that is low while industry average is 0.1576 Net Profit Margin Ratio In 2009 the Net margin ration is -0.0093 that is very low its loss In 2009 the Net margin ration is 0.0145 that is low while industry average is 0.1019
Lahore Business School Page 77

Fixed Assets Turnover Ratio Industry average is 24.84% in 2009 while PSO Company has 48%. Fixed asset turnover are increasing year to year but it is better than its industry average. Industry average is 24.84% in 2009 while Shell Company has 14.14%. Fixed asset turnover is not better than its industry average.

Fixed Assets Turnover Ratio Industry average is 3.2014% in 2009 while PSO Company has 4.688%. Total asset turnover are increasing year to year but it is better than its industry average. Industry average is 3.2014% in 2009 while Shell Company has 5.26%. Total asset turnover are increasing year to year but it is better than its industry average.

3. Conclusion and Possible Recommendations

Lahore Business School Page 78

Compared to 2007, Oil Marketing Companies enjoyed massive increase in earnings due to FIFO inventory system but this affect could be reversed in the future. Receivables from GOP and IPP are contributed to cash flow constraints which have led to financing. Although this effect is not very obvious due to higher earnings but this financing cost could be significant in times of normal oil prices. Share prices of both companies remained at standstill. This trend of investors suggests that they expect that these higher earnings and dividend announcements as temporary and they dont want to lose their money in the future. Specifically to Shell as an MNC, the reduction in margin from the government and the higher working capital requirements might affect the future performance of the company. To tackle with the fluctuation in the oil prices, the OMC has to invest in R&D for alternative energy resources as these fossil fuel resources are finite and limited and could led these firms to failure. As the operations of the two companies are almost similar except for the market share, the operational efficiencies would lead a company cut its costs and be the winner in the game. Ever increasing demand for the POL products due to the higher number of vehicles in the country provides an opportunity as well as a challenge to the companies that how they better manage the optimum fixed asset requirements and convert their capital into increasing revenues. Overall the Shell Pakistan has better managed the effect of increasing oil prices as an opportunity to the company. Its profitability ratios as well as efficiency ones has improved more as compared to the PSOs.

Lahore Business School

Page 79

Five year balance Sheets and Income Statement of Shell and PSO

Lahore Business School

Page A

Lahore Business School

Page B

Lahore Business School

Page C

Lahore Business School

Page D