Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Demo
Illustration:
By my younger sister
For me.
Objective:
The objective of this project was to analyze the financial and qualitative position of
Heidelberg, Aramit and Meghna Cement.
So far used:
“Financial Ratios”
“Common size Statements”
“Qualitative Analysis”.
Tools used:
1. Liquidity Analysis
a) Current Ratio
b) Quick Ratio
2. Asset management ratio
a)Inv. Turnover
b)DSO
c)FATO
d)TATO
3. Debt Management Ratio
a) Debt Ratio
b) TIE
4.Profitability Ratio
a)PM
b)BEP
c)ROA
d)ROE
5. Market Value Ratios
a)EPS
b)P/E
c)BVPS
d)M/B
Equity Multiplier
Du Pont system
6. Common size Balance sheet.
7. Common size income statement.
8. Percentage change analysis balance sheet.
9. Percentage change analysis income statement.
Parameters Variables:
Found by adding the total asset of three companies and divide the companies’ asset by the value
of each year.
Found by adding companies five years total asset and divide the companies yearly asset by the
value for each year.
Found by adding industries five years total asset and divide the industries yearly asset by the
value for each year.
4. Grade points:
Comment GP
Poor 1
Low 2
Ok 3
Good 4
Very good 5
Ratio analysis:
1. Liquidity Analysis
A) Current ratios:
2.50
2.00
1.50 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
1.00 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
0.50
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
1.00
0.85
0.78
0.44
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
Heidelberg Cement
0.80 Aramit cement
0.60 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
0.40
0.20
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
0.44
0.40
0.35
0.27
12.00
10.00
8.00
Heidelberg Cement
6.00 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
4.00
IndIndustry average
2.00
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
8.81
6.26
5.49
3.81
DSO Trend
60
50
40
Heidelberg Cement
30 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
20
IndIndustry average
10
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
DSO average
43.09
38.14
33.63
31.63
FATO Trend
3.0
2.5
2.0
Heidelberg Cement
1.5 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
1.0
IndIndustry average
0.5
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
FATO average
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.2
TATO Trend
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
Heidelberg Cement
0.8 Aramit cement
0.6 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
0.4
0.2
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
TATO average
1.0
0.9
0.9 0.9
1.2
0.8
Heidelberg Cement
0.6 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
0.4
IndIndustry average
0.2
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
0.86
0.74
0.63
0.52
TIE Trend
4 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
3
Meghna Cement Mills
2 IndIndustry average
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
TIE average
2.56
2.12
1.97
1.50
4. Profitability Ratio
A) PM
PM Trend
0.200
0.100
0.000
Heidelberg Cement
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Aramit cement
‐0.100
Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
‐0.200
‐0.300
‐0.400
PM average
0.031
0.024
0.017
‐0.144
BEP Trend
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
0
Meghna Cement Mills
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐0.05 IndIndustry average
‐0.1
‐0.15
‐0.2
BEP average
0.081
0.067 0.065
‐0.045
ROA Trend
0.1500
0.1000
0.0500
Heidelberg Cement
0.0000 Aramit cement
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐0.0500 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
‐0.1000
‐0.1500
‐0.2000
ROA average
0.035
0.026 0.024
‐0.089
D) ROE
ROE Trend
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐1
Heidelberg Cement
‐2 Aramit cement
‐3 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
‐4
‐5
‐6
ROE average
0.064 0.101
‐1.377
EPS Trend
120
100
80
60
Heidelberg Cement
40 Aramit cement
20 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐20
‐40
‐60
EPS average
29
27
25
‐25
P/E Trend
100
50
0
‐50 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐100 Heidelberg Cement
‐150 Aramit cement
‐200 Meghna Cement Mills
‐250 IndIndustry average
‐300
‐350
‐400
‐450
P/E average
14
1
‐43
‐86
BVPS Trend
500
450
400
350
300 Heidelberg Cement
250 Aramit cement
200 Meghna Cement Mills
150 IndIndustry average
100
50
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
BVPS average
433
353
286
42
D) M/B
M/B Trend
12
10
8
Heidelberg Cement
6 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
4
IndIndustry average
2
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
M/B average
4.82
1.64 1.61
1.03
Equity Multiplier
90
80
70
60
Heidelberg Cement
50
Aramit cement
40
Meghna Cement Mills
30
IndIndustry average
20
10
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
27.51
3.91 4.42
2.15
Du Pont:
Heidelberg Cement: Du Pont analysis (Weighted Over all).
Ratio name Ratio Industry average Comment
PM 0.031 0.017 Very Good
TATO 0.87 0.933 Low
Equity Multiplier 2.15 4.42 Low
ROE 0.06 -0.013 Good
TATO Trend
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
Heidelberg Cement
0.8 Aramit cement
0.6 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
0.4
0.2
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
TATO average
1.0
0.9
0.9 0.9
PM Trend
0.200
0.100
0.000
Heidelberg Cement
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Aramit cement
‐0.100
Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
‐0.200
‐0.300
‐0.400
PM average
0.031
0.024
0.017
‐0.144
ROE Trend
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐1
Heidelberg Cement
‐2 Aramit cement
‐3 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
‐4
‐5
‐6
ROE average
0.064 0.101
‐1.377
Equity Multiplier
Equity Multiplier Trend
90
80
70
60
Heidelberg Cement
50
Aramit cement
40
Meghna Cement Mills
30
IndIndustry average
20
10
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
27.51
3.91 4.42
2.15
Cash to total asset:
25.0
20.0
15.0 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
10.0 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
5.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
3.4
2.9 3.0
0.7
Current asset to total asset:
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0 Heidelberg Cement
25.0 Aramit cement
20.0
Meghna Cement Mills
15.0
10.0 IndIndustry average
5.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Current asset to total asset:
44.0
35.1
30.8
24.2
Fixed asset to total asset:
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
Heidelberg Cement
50.0
Aramit cement
40.0
Meghna Cement Mills
30.0
20.0 IndIndustry average
10.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fixed asset to total asset:
73.4
69.1
63.6
55.3
Current liability to total asset:
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0 Heidelberg Cement
40.0 Aramit cement
30.0 Meghna Cement Mills
20.0 IndIndustry average
10.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Current liability to total asset:
55.1
Long‐term liability to total asset:
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0 Heidelberg Cement
25.0 Aramit cement
20.0 Meghna Cement Mills
15.0
IndIndustry average
10.0
5.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Long‐term liability to total asset:
31.6
28.6
19.7
11.0
Equity to total asset:
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0 Heidelberg Cement
40.0 Aramit cement
30.0 Meghna Cement Mills
20.0 IndIndustry average
10.0
0.0
1 2 3 4 5
Equity to total asset:
47.9
37.4
26.4
14.4
Market share:
1. Market share trends:
Market share :
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40 Heidelberg Cement
0.30 Aramit cement
0.20 Meghna Cement Mills
0.10
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Market share :
Heidelberg Cement Aramit cement Meghna Cement Mills
38%
56%
6%
Financing Arrangement:
1. Industry financing arrangement:
Industry financing arrangement
Current liability Long‐term liability Equity
37%
43%
20%
a) Heidelberg Cement:
Heidelberg Cement (average)
Current liability Long‐term liability Equity
39%
50%
11%
Heidelberg Cement (trend):
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
Current liability
40.0
Long‐term liability
30.0
Equity
20.0
10.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
b) Aramit cement:
Aramit cement (Average)
Current liability Long‐term liability Equity
16%
54%
30%
Aramit cement (trend):
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
Current liability
40.0
Long‐term liability
30.0
Equity
20.0
10.0
0.0
1 2 3 4 5
Meghna Cement Mills (Average)
Current liability Long‐term liability Equity
26%
43%
31%
Meghna Cement Mills (trends):
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
Current liability
25.0
20.0 Long‐term liability
15.0 Equity
10.0
5.0
0.0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
300
250
200
Heidelberg Cement
150
Aramit cement
100 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
50
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
128
69
Heidelberg Cement ‐1
Aramit cement Meghna Cement
‐5 IndIndustry average
Mills
400
350
300
250
Heidelberg Cement
200 Aramit cement
150 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
100
50
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
204
115
0 3
700
600
500
400 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
300
Meghna Cement Mills
200 IndIndustry average
100
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
250
142
74
Heidelberg Cement Aramit cement ‐5
Meghna Cement IndIndustry average
Mills
600
500
400
Heidelberg Cement
300 Aramit cement
Meghna Cement Mills
200
IndIndustry average
100
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
305
166
21
250
200
150 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
100 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
50
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
54
30
‐61
140
120
100
80 Heidelberg Cement
Aramit cement
60
Meghna Cement Mills
40 IndIndustry average
20
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
106
94 94
92
Other income:
8.0000
7.0000
6.0000
5.0000
Heidelberg Cement
4.0000 Aramit cement
3.0000 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
2.0000
1.0000
0.0000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
1.119119579
0.639297442
0.212190161
0.00716595
Financing cost:
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
Heidelberg Cement
5.00
Aramit cement
4.00
Meghna Cement Mills
3.00
IndIndustry average
2.00
1.00
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
5.64
5.19
4.47
3.59
400
350
300
250
Heidelberg Cement
200 Aramit cement
150 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
100
50
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
157
88
5 2
1200
1000
800
Heidelberg Cement
600 Aramit cement
400 Meghna Cement Mills
IndIndustry average
200
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
‐200
302
202
77 76
Risk:
RISK STV CV %
Heidelberg Cement 0.023 0.365 36.5%
Aramit cement 0.432 -0.314 31.4%
Meghna Cement Mills 0.010 0.101 10.1%
Ranks:
H
Heidelbe
erg Cement
3.00
5. Market V
Value Ratios
4.90
4.Profitaability Ratio
5.00
3.. Debt Manageement Ratio
2.65
2.. Asset manageement ratio
3.20
1. Liquidity Analysis
A
Aramit Ce
ement LLimited
5.00
5. Market Value Ratios
1.00
0
4.Pro
ofitability Ratio
o
1.35
3. Debt Man
nagement Ratio
o
2.60
2. Asset man
nagement ratio
o
1.00
0
1. Liq
quidity Analysis
M
Meghna Cementt Mills
2.00
5. Marrket Value Ratiios
4.50
4.P
Profitability Rattio
1.65
3. Debt Maanagement Rattio
4.40
2. Asset management rattio
3.80
1. LLiquidity Analysis
O
Over all Ran
nk (out of 5))
Heidelberg Cement 3.9
Aramit Cement
C Limited 1.7
Meghna Cement
C Mills 3.6
O
Over all R
Rank (ou
ut of 5)
Meghna Ceement Mills
Aramit Cement Limited
Heidelbeerg Cement
Over all Rank (out o
of 5)
Qualitative Analysis:
Heidelberg Cement
Matrix:
Aramit Cement
Matrix:
Meghna Cement
Matrix:
Heidelberg Cement:
This is the most potential firm in the industries though they have to manage well their liquidity
and their asset.
They are having a tremendous market growth in the industry in last few years. They are the
market leader now.
Sales should be increased a little bit to increase their asset turnover.
They should also increase Debt in their financing structure, so they can increase their ROE
…………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….
Aramit Cement:
Meghna Cement: