Utf8''Food Manufacturing (311) - Q4, 2011

T r e n d s
o f
Y o u r
B u s i n e s s
E x c l u s i v e l y
d i s t r i b u t e d
b y
India, Q4 2011
Food Manufacturing
ISIEmergingMarketsPDF in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 on 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. DownloadPDF.
Please address all comments and enquiries to: info-in@securities.com
Downloaded by in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 at 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. ISI Emerging Markets. Unauthorized Distribution Prohibited.
Food M anufac turing
Contents
1. Macroeconomic Scenario 2. Analysis of Investment Attractiveness - Attractiveness Indicators - Driving Forces of Attractiveness - Risk-Profitability Maps 3. Analysis of Revenue - Long-term Trend. Business Cycle. Correlation - Seasonality in Revenues. Seasonal Adjusted Revenues 4. Concentration in the Sector 5. Analysis of Financial Ratios - Distributions of Financials in the sector - General Indicators - Profitability Ratios - Liquidity Ratios - Financial Cycles - Financial Leverage Ratios - Production Factors - Investment Outlays - Costs - Structure of Fixed Assets - Structure of Current Assets - Structure of Current Liabilities - Main Leverages - DuPonts Pyramid 6. Companies from the Sector - Top Players - market shares - Top Players from the Sector - Listed Companies from the Sector - Mergers and Acquisitions 7. Key Concepts - Definitions of Indices - Definitions of Selected Concepts
Page
-4 -5 - 5 - 5 - 7 -9 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 12 - 13 - 18 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 25 - 27 - 29 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 42 - 44
! This report has been compiled to the best of the authors knowledge, using information originating from verified sources. The authors of the report take no responsibility for the consequences of any decisions and actions taken as a result of the use of this report. This report refers to the Indian economy.
ISIEmergingMarketsPDF in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 on 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. DownloadPDF. Downloaded by in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 at 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. ISI Emerging Markets. Unauthorized Distribution Prohibited.
-2-
EconTrends for India is the unique tool for analyzing various Indian industries. It contains description of macroeconomic environment, analysis of investment attractiveness, detailed analysis of revenue as well as in-depth analysis of a wide scope of financial ratios. The report covers not the full sector but only its major part, since it is build on the bottom-up aggregated financial data on listed companies from the Accord Fintech database reporting on quarterly basis. Quarterly financial data from Income Statement are adjusted to assert their consistency with yearly audited figures. The Short-Term Investment Attractiveness Ranking developed for India under the EconTrends methodology is based on the so called Profitability Index, that shows forecasted dynamics of EBITDA. It serves as a proxy for dynamics of dirty cash flows in enterprises from a given industry. Fundamental components of the Profitability Index like net sales and EBITDA margin, are forecasted using econometric models. The behavior over time of all these categories is illustrated using appropriate pictograms in the Map of Forces. Profitability of a given industry is evaluated on the basis of average forecasted dynamics of EBITDA in two following quarters. Every industry has a granted profitability mark that ranges from 1 up to 5, which reflects its profitability versus other industries. Higher mark indicates higher profitability. Risk of an industry in turn is measured by the standard deviation of forecasted Profitability Index. Every industry has also an assigned risk mark that ranges from 1 up to 5, which reflects its risk versus other industries. Higher mark means here lower risk. Each industry is at the end characterized by the following two parameters its profitability and risk. They are used for evaluation of the short term investment attractiveness, that reflects preferences of investors seeking to maximize their rates of return and to minimize the risk they face. The final Short-Term Investment Attractiveness Ranking of an analyzed industry explains its relative attractiveness comparing to other sectors. The lower a position within the ranking the higher is attractiveness of an industry. C hanges in this position replicate either changes in profitability or in risk. Additionally like in the case of profitability and risk measurement the final attractiveness is graded from 1 to 5, where the highest grade means the highest attractiveness. Lower grade means worse investment-weather conditions, so either lower profitability or higher risk. The Short-Term Investment Attractiveness Ranking is presented according to the structure of the North American Industry C lassification System (NAIC S). However the used system of industry classification is not fully compatible with the National C lassification of Activities in India due to Indian statistics - specific factors.
Analysed sector:
Group
The following classes are included in the group: Food Manufacturing Animal Food Manufacturing -> Grain and Oilseed Milling -> Sugar and C onfectionery Product Manufacturing Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing -> Dairy Product Manufacturing Animal Slaughtering and Processing Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging Bakeries and Tortilla Manufacturing -> Other Food Manufacturing
Only the classes marked by an arrow are covered by EconTrends reports.

-3-
Macroeconomic Scenario
Period Nominal GDP Growth Real GDP Growth Inflation (C PI) eop Inflation (PPI) eop USD/INR exchange rate, quarter av
Datasource: ISI, EMIS, CEIC
Q2 2011 116.8 107.7 108.9 109.6 44.74
Q3 2011 116.1 106.9 109.2 109.7 45.76
Q4 2011 114.2 106.1 108.4 106.7 51.01
Q1 2012 114.8 106.5 107.2 106.5 50.31
Q2 2012 115.0 106.8 107.0 106.3 53.05
Nominal GDP Growth

130
120
110
100
90
80
70
09 09 12 08 11 08 10 11 10 08 09 08 09 10 10 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 12
Period
-> expected slight rise of GDP nominal y/y growth in Q2 2012 comparying to the value from Q4 2011 -> expected slight rise of GDP real y/y growth in Q2 2012 comparying to the value from Q4 2011 -> expected slight fall of C PI inflation (eop) in Q2 2012 comparying to the value from Q4 2011 -> expected slight fall of PPI inflation (eop) in Q2 2012 comparying to the value from Q4 2011 -> expected weakening of USD/INR exchange rate in Q2 2012 comparying to the value from Q4 2011
Growth
120 115 110 105
Inflation (CPI) eop
Growth
100 95 90 85 80 75 70
12 10 09 08 08 08 09 10 08 09 10 11 09 10 11 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Q 2
Q 2 2 0 12
Inflation (PPI) eop

115 110 105 100
Period
12
Growth
95 90 85 80 75 70
08 08 10 09 08 09 08 09 10 10 11 09 11 10 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 12
Period
Forecast
Forecast
Forecast
-4-
Analysis of Investment Attractiveness

Attractiveness Indicators
5
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 1 3 5
Current Attractiveness
Profitability
5 4 3 2 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 1 3 5
Forecasted Attractiveness
Profitability
4 3 2 1
Forecasted Attractiveness
Current Attractiveness
5 4
5 4
Risk
expected stabilisation of attractiveness in the sector -> expected stabilisation of profitability -> expected stabilisation of risk (expected stabilisation in risk mark shown on the h t)
3 2 1
Risk
3 2 1
Driving Forces of Attractiveness

- Profitability Index - y/y dynamics - Net Revenue per C ompany - y/y dynamics - EBITDA Margin - y/y dynamics
Map of forces for the sector
Current situation Forecasted situation Net revenue per company Y/Y dynamics EBITDA margin - Y/Y dynamics Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics
b e
Symbol's colour
Dynamics of profit Positive impact on profits dynamics Negative impact on profits dynamics Neutral impact on profits dynamics
b b
b b
Symbols sign
"+" "-" "o"
Positive dynamics of "driving force" Negative dynamics of "driving force" Close to zero dynamics of "driving force"
Symbols orientation
Rise of dynamics comparing to previous quarter Fall of dynamics comparing to previous quarter Stabilisation of dynamics comparing to previous quarter
Net revenue per company - Y/Y dynamics

30%
Forecast
35% 30% 25% 20% 15%
expected rise in dynamics of net revenue in Q1 2012 expected fall in dynamics of net revenue in Q2 2012
Net revenue per company Y/Y dynamics
20%
15%
10% 5%
10%
0% -5 % -1 0 %
5%
0%
10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 12
-1 5 %
Period Net revenue per company - Y/Y dynamics Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics
Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics
25%
-5-
EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics

15% 10%
Forecast
35% 30%
expected fall in dynamics of EBITDA margin in Q1 2012 expected fall in dynamics of EBITDA margin in Q2 2012
EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics
5% 20% 0% -5 % -1 0 % -1 5 % -5 % -2 0 % -2 5 %
12 11 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 12
15% 10% 5% 0%
-1 0 % -1 5 %
Period EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics
Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics
25%
-6-
Risk-Profitability Maps
Risk - Profitability Map (current situation)
3.0
risk - profitability map (current situation)
2.5
2.0
1.5 Profitability
1.0
0.5
0.0 0.0 -0.5
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
-1.0 Risk All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing
Risk - Profitability Map (current situation) Zoom

0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20 Profitability
0.10
0.00 0.00 -0.10
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
-0.20
-0.30
-0.40 Risk
All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function
Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing
-7-
Risk - Profitability Map (forecasted situation)

2.0
risk - profitability map (forecasted situation)
1.5
1.0
Profitability
0.5
0.0 0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
-0.5
-1.0 Risk All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing
Risk - Profitability Map (forecasted situation) Zoom

0.40
0.30
0.20
Profitability
0.10
0.00 0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
-0.10
-0.20
-0.30 Risk
All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function
Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing
-8-
Analysis of Revenue
Long-term Trend. Business Cycle. Correlation
Long-term trend in net revenue per company
3 500 Forecast 3 000
Ris e of long-term trend in net revenue per c ompany
2 500
[mn INR]
2 000 1 500
1 000
500
Ju n08 Se p08 D ec -0 8 M ar -0 9
Ju n10 Se p10 D ec -1 0 M ar -1 1
ar -0 8
Ju n09 Se p09 D ec -0 9 M ar -1 0
Period Net revenue per company

Dec-09 Sep-09 Jun-09 Jun-10 Mar-09 Mar-10
Long-term trend in net revenue per company

Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 Sep-10 Sep-11 Sep-12 2 906.9 Jun-11 Mar-11 Mar-12 Jun-12 2 845.7
2 026.6
1 829.8
1 903.6
2 174.4
2 302.2
2 037.2
2 185.8
2 481.2
2 665.4
2 556.3
2 592.5
2 727.7
Ju n11 Se p11 D ec -1 1 M ar -1 2
3 006.8
Ju n12 Se p12 D ec -1 2
Net Revenues per company [mn INR]
1 957.0
2 019.1
2 082.7
2 147.7
2 214.3
2 282.3
2 351.6
2 422.1
2 493.5
2 565.7
2 638.4
2 711.5
2 784.7
2 858.1
2 937.5
Longterm trend in net sales per company [mn INR]
Forecast of sector's long run growth

Long run growth of nominal GDP Implied long run growth of the sector [%] 102 6.26% 104 14.35% 106 22.44% 108 30.52% 110 38.61% 112 46.70% 114 54.79% 116 62.87%
3 015.9
3 099.6
Business cycle in net revenue per company

Pressure for rise of prices dynamics Forecast
expec ted high and inc reas ing us e of c apac ity utilis ation ratio and as s oc iated pos s ible growth in dynamic s of pric es and employment in 1 s t quarter 2 0 1 2
Pressure for fall of
prices dynamics
Ju n08 Se p08 D ec -0 8 M ar -0 9 Ju n09 Se p09 D ec -0 9 M ar -1 0 Ju n10 Se p10 D ec -1 0 M ar -1 1 Ju n11 Se p11 D ec -1 1 M ar -1 2
Period Negative part of business cycle Positive part of business cycle
Correlation of decumulated net revenue Y/Y growth with past GDP growth Lead of net sales Y/Y Value (quarterly data) + 0Q 18.42% + 1Q -9.07% + 2Q -11.60% + 3Q 8.01%
Correlation of decumulated net revenue Y/Y growth with future GDP growth Lag of net sales Y/Y Value (quarterly data) - 0Q 18.42% - 1Q 48.65% - 2Q 33.23% - 3Q -18.93%
Degree of correlation
< 1 ; 0.8 ) < 0.8 ; 0.6 ) < 0.6 ; 0.4 ) < 0.4 ; 0.2 ) < 0.2 ; 0 ) < 0 ; -0.2 ) < -0.2 ; -0.4 ) < -0.4 ; -0.6 ) < -0.6 ; -0.8 ) < -0.8 ; -1 )
Ju n12 Se p12 D ec -1 2
ar -
08
-9-
Seasonality in Revenues. Seasonal Adjusted Revenues

Seasonality in net revenue per company
3 500
Forecast
250 200 150 100 Seasonality (additive deviation)
3 000 2 500 [mn INR] 2 000
50 1 500 0 1 000 500 0

ar -0 8 Ju n08 Se p08 D ec -0 8 M ar -0 9 Ju n09 Se p09 D ec -0 9 M ar -1 0 Ju n10 Se p10 D ec -1 0 M ar -1 1 Ju n11 Se p11 D ec -1 1 M ar -1 2 Ju n12 Se p12 D ec -1 2
-50 -100 -150
Period Net revenue per company Seasonality in net revenue per company
Seasonality (per quarter) in net revenue per company

3 000 1st quarter 2 500 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter 200 150 2 000 [mn INR] 100 50 0 -50 500 -100 -150
09 10 11 08 09 10 11 09 Q 2 Q 1 Q 1 Q 2 11 08 10 08 09 10 Q 2 Q 2 Q 3 Q 3 Q 3 Q 3 Q 4 Q 4 Q 4 Q 4 Q 5 11
in Q 1 pos ivive
250
s eas onal deviation prevails in Q 2 negative s eas onal deviation

Seasonality (additive deviation)
prevails in Q 3 negative s eas onal deviation prevails in Q 4 pos ivive s eas onal deviation prevails
1 500
1 000
0
Q 1 08
Period Net revenue per company (per quarter) Seasonality (per quarter) in net revenue per company
Net revenue per company Seasonally adjusted net revenue per company
3 500 Forecast 3 000
2 500
[mn INR]
2 000
1 500
1 000
500
Se p09
Se p10
n08 Se p08
n11 Se p11
ar -1 2
ar -0 8
ar -0 9
ar -1 0
ar -1 1
Se p12
n09
n10
ec -0 8
ec -0 9
ec -1 0
ec -1 1
n12
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Period Net revenue per company Seasonally adjusted net revenue per company
ec -1 2
-10-
Concentration in the Sector

Distribution of net revenues in the sector (2011)
100%
90%
80%
Perfect Equality Line
70%
60%
50%
Gini Coefficient 90.16%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Lorenz Curve Perfect Inequality Line
0% 100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Cumulative share of companies from lower market share
Market share of top companies in the sector

Year The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index Top 1 company Top 2 companies Top 3 companies Top 4 companies Top 5 companies Number of listed and non-listed companies in the sector 2011 329 9.14% 17.52% 24.71% 31.15% 34.84% 596
Cumulative market share
Market power concentration measured by HerfindahlHirschman Index was weak in 2011 Net sales of top five companies in the sector reached the market share of 34.84% in 2011
-11-
Analysis of Financial Ratios

Distributions of Financials in the sector
Average value for the company in Q311 0 181 18.61% 18.94% 11.99% 32.42% 11.70% 38.88% 8.41% 37.28% 13.12% 5.74% 26.54% 54.70% Q411 0
DIST RIBUT ION OF PA RA ME T E RS (The distribution of financial indicators in the sector)

20% 40% 60% 80%
II
III
IV
General Indicators
N umber of c ompanies Y /Y dynamic s of net revenue per c ompany [% ]
Y/Y dynamics of total operating (excl. depreciation) cost per company [%]
179 9.93% 10.34% 0.89% 16.86% -5.94% 25.70% -9.60% 24.23% 12.84% 5.46% 26.84% 59.22% -20.43% -17.65% -68.20% -47.18% -97.46% -58.15% -103.38% -53.05% 2.58% -3.86% 12.88% 7.04% 5.91% -20.94% -11.81% -26.93% -0.89% -27.49% -7.89% 5.92% 0.47% 23.95% 22.70% 20.07% 22.62% 19.70% 16.43% 19.83% 15.20% 19.05% 10.17% 2.40% 31.14% 49.36% 44.00% 94.59% 72.02% 95.40% 145.41% 90.45% 110.68% 17.08% 6.48% 34.25%
Y /Y dynamic s of E BI T D A profit per c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of E BI T D A profit per profit-making c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of gros s profit per c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of gros s profit per profit- making c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of net profit per c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of net profit per profit- making c ompany [% ]
Profitability Ratios
E BI T D A Sales M argin [% ] N et Sales M argin [% ] E ffec tive tax rate [% ] Share of profit-making c ompanies [% ]
2010
2011
I
-23.02% -22.43% -4.07% -2.34% 0.00% 172.39% 74.62% 4.22% 19.95% -20 8 25 30 6.01% 22.59% 99.90% 71.27% 0.9 0.94% 0.67% 49.26% 58.87% 139.41% 0.00 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% -8.72% 0.90% 0.00% 0.54% 48.48% 1.88% 1.81% 0.06%
II
-10.45% -11.35% 3.77% 1.57% 0.00% 262.56% 127.63% 9.77% 47.13% 24 19 47 49 56.25% 40.05% 100.00% 266.86% 2.6 2.80% 1.38% 70.87% 102.76% 301.02% 1.99 0.00% 0.11% 4.91% -5.46% 2.80% 0.00% 1.40% 71.32% 4.28% 3.61% 0.25% 1.49%
III
4.66% 2.34% 8.49% 4.28% 8.44% 430.44% 199.73% 19.03% 126.63% 61 32 75 80 131.42% 57.06% 100.00% 770.31% 4.8 4.58% 2.58% 84.88% 196.16% 535.68% 37.85 0.12% 1.86% 121.72% 2.56% 4.86% 0.00% 2.54% 84.49% 6.91% 6.38% 0.80% 3.22%
IV
14.74% 11.16% 18.68% 11.02% 22.72% 673.02% 397.18% 45.82% 240.49% 114 63 139 124 310.94% 87.40% 100.00% 1696.25% 7.5 7.22% 5.59% 91.17% 361.34% 1292.66% 308.42 2.63% 8.61% 490.00% 30.94% 8.28% 1.54% 5.45% 92.08% 11.79% 13.23% 2.34% 5.51%
General Indicators
Y /Y dynamic s of c as h flow per c ompany [% ] Y /Y dynamic s of c as h flow per profit- making c ompany [% ]
-140.06% -139.54% 16.13% 9.23% 42.10% 242.09% 135.23% 30.08% 52.93% 13 33 80 100 74.84% 57.19% 100.00% 373.02% 2.08 3.47% 2.06% 67.75% 158.58% 381.90% 1048.75 4.26% 11.52% 631.87% 37.04% 3.62% 0.82% 2.15% 70.72% 6.49% 12.81% 1.48%
-30.06% -31.56% 15.02% 8.48% 37.82% 256.16% 141.79% 30.65% 54.64% 18 32 82 96 77.19% 56.44% 100.00% 381.08% 2.19 3.64% 2.04% 68.18% 155.07% 366.21% 1124.88 4.64% 10.54% 542.16% 31.48% 3.77% 0.29% 2.11% 70.63% 6.62% 12.96% 1.59%
Return on E quity [% ] Return on A s s ets [% ] E quity dividend ratio [% ]
Liquidity Ratios
C urrent ratio [% ] Q uic k ratio [% ] Super quic k ratio [% ] Sundry debtors to s undry c reditors ratio [% ]
Financial Cycles
D ays of c overage for C as h & E quivalent [days ] D ays of c overage for rec eivables [days ] D ays of c overage for inventories [days ] D ays of c overage for s hort term liabilities [days ]
Financial Leverage Ratios

D ebt to E quity ratio [% ] E quity to total as s ets ratio [% ] Share of loans from banks in total debt [% ] Sec ured to uns ec ured loans ratio [% ] O perating profit c overage [years ]
Production Factors
L abour intens ity of produc tion [% ] E nergy intens ity of produc tion [% ] M aterial intens ity of produc tion [% ] T otal as s ets turnover [% ] N et fixed as s ets produc tivity [% ]
Investments
I nves tment outlays per c ompany [mn I N R] Share of quoted equity inves tments [% ] I nves tment outlays as s hare in net revenue [% ] I nves tment outlays to deprec iation ratio [% ] I nves tment outlays index [% ]
Costs
Share of labor c os ts in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of s toc k inc reas e c os ts in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of energy c os ts in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of raw material c os t in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of other manufac turing expens es in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of s elling and admin. expens es in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of mis c ellaneous expens es in total operating c os ts [% ] Share of deprec iation in total operating c os ts [% ]
1.90% 2.01% 0.56% ISIEmergingMarketsPDF in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 on 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. DownloadPDF.
Sourc e: I SI , E M I S , C E I C
-12-
General Indicators
Number of companies
P eriod Value Q /Q inc reas e Y /Y inc reas e P eriod Value Q /Q inc reas e Y /Y inc reas e P eriod Value Q /Q inc reas e Y /Y inc reas e P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 2 026.6 7 .8 1 % 1 .0 5 % Q 110 2 302.2 5 .8 8 % 1 3 .6 0 % Q 111 2 665.4 7 .4 2 % 1 5 .7 8 % Q 109 1 795.9 6 .6 6 % -0 .6 9 % Q 110 2 128.9 1 1 .1 2 % 1 8 .5 4 % Q 111 2 410.5 7 .3 4 % 1 3 .2 3 % Q 111 182 2 0 Q 209 1 829.8 - 9 .7 1 % 6 .5 1 % Q 210 2 037.2 -1 1 .5 1 % 1 1 .3 3 % Q 211 2 556.3 - 4 .0 9 % 2 5 .4 9 % Q 209 1 599.1 -1 0 .9 6 % 3 .6 8 % Q 210 1 846.9 -1 3 .2 5 % 1 5 .5 0 % Q 211 2 328.6 - 3 .4 0 % 2 6 .0 8 % Q 110 182 4 8 Q 211 183 1 -1 Q 309 1 903.6 4 .0 3 % 3 .3 1 % Q 310 2 185.8 7 .3 0 % 1 4 .8 3 % Q 311 2 592.5 1 .4 2 % 1 8 .6 1 % Q 309 1 665.6 4 .1 6 % 0 .1 3 % Q 310 1 997.2 8 .1 4 % 1 9 .9 1 % Q 311 2 375.6 2 .0 1 % 1 8 .9 4 % Q 109 174 0 5 Q 210 184 2 3 Q 311 181 -2 -1 Q 409 2 174.4 1 4 .2 3 % 1 5 .6 7 % Q 410 2 481.2 1 3 .5 1 % 1 4 .1 1 % Q 411 2 727.7 5 .2 1 % 9 .9 3 % Q 409 1 915.8 1 5 .0 2 % 1 3 .7 8 % Q 410 2 245.7 1 2 .4 4 % 1 7 .2 2 % Q 411 2 478.0 4 .3 1 % 1 0 .3 4 % Q 209 181 7 4 Q 310 182 -2 0 Q 411 179 -2 -1 Q 309 182 1 9 Q 410 180 -2 2 Q 409 178 -4 4
fall of number of listed companies covered by the database in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311
Net revenue per company [mn INR]

fall of Y/Y dynamics of net revenue per company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311
Total operating cost (incl. depreciation) per company [mn INR]

fall of Y/Y dynamics of total operating cost (incl. depreciation) per company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311
Net revenue & total operating costs per company

3 000 2 500
[mn INR]
2 000 1 500 1 000 500 0

4 09 2 11 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 20 1 0 3 0 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 Q Q Q Q Q Q
Period
N et revenue per c ompany [mn I N R] T otal operating c os t (inc l. deprec iation) per c ompany [mn I N R] ISIEmergingMarketsPDF in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 on 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. DownloadPDF.
4 1
-13-
EBITDA profit per company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 371.1 2 8 .2 8 % 2 5 .4 0 % Q 110 288.2 -1 6 .4 7 % -2 2 .3 3 % Q 111 391.7 1 5 .3 4 % 3 5 .9 0 % Q 209 289.0 -2 2 .1 2 % 2 2 .3 2 % Q 210 256.3 -1 1 .0 8 % -1 1 .3 1 % Q 211 302.3 -2 2 .8 2 % 1 7 .9 6 % Q 309 300.5 3 .9 8 % 2 0 .9 1 % Q 310 282.9 1 0 .3 8 % -5 .8 6 % Q 311 316.8 4 .8 0 % 1 1 .9 9 % Q 409 345.1 1 4 .8 4 % 1 9 .2 9 % Q 410 339.6 2 0 .0 6 % -1 .5 8 % Q 411 342.6 8 .1 6 % 0 .8 9 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of EBITDA profit per company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

450 400 350 40% Y/Y dynamics of EBITDA profit per company (all 30% 20% 10% 0% -1 0 % -2 0 % -3 0 %
10 09 09 10 11 11 10 09 09 10 11 2 1 2 4 3 4 1 2 3 1 Q 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
[mn INR]
300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Q
Period
E BI T D A profit per c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of E BI T D A profit per c ompany (all c ompanies ) [% ]
EBITDA profit per profit-making company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 539.4 1 4 .9 2 % 3 6 .8 1 % Q 110 478.6 7 .3 5 % -1 1 .2 8 % Q 111 526.1 2 .0 1 % 9 .9 2 % Q 209 405.6 -2 4 .8 1 % 2 3 .2 5 % Q 210 416.9 -1 2 .8 9 % 2 .7 9 % Q 211 489.1 - 7 .0 3 % 1 7 .3 0 % Q 309 428.1 5 .5 5 % 5 .4 5 % Q 310 460.7 1 0 .5 0 % 7 .6 2 % Q 311 610.1 2 4 .7 4 % 3 2 .4 2 % Q 409 445.8 4 .1 4 % -5 .0 2 % Q 410 515.7 1 1 .9 3 % 1 5 .6 7 % Q 411 602.7 -1 .2 2 % 1 6 .8 6 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of EBITDA profit per profit-making company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

700 600 500 40% making companies) [%] 30% 20% 10% 300 200 100 0
11 10 11 10 09 09 09 1 3 4 09 10 10 2 11 1 2 1 2 3 4 Q Q 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
400
0% -1 0 % -2 0 %
E BI T D A profit per profit- making c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of E BI T D A profit per c ompany (profit- making c ompanies ) [% ]
Period
profit per company (profit-
Y/Y dynamics of EBITDA
[mn INR]
companies) [%]
-14-
Gross profit per company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 244.2 3 8 .6 4 % 3 0 .2 5 % Q 110 176.6 -2 9 .4 8 % -2 7 .6 8 % Q 111 243.1 1 1 .2 7 % 3 7 .6 7 % Q 209 205.8 -1 5 .7 2 % 2 5 .2 0 % Q 210 168.1 - 4 .8 2 % -1 8 .3 3 % Q 211 188.8 -2 2 .3 4 % 1 2 .3 3 % Q 309 210.4 2 .2 5 % 6 .0 8 % Q 310 178.7 6 .3 1 % - 1 5 .0 8 % Q 311 199.6 5 .7 2 % 1 1 .7 0 % Q 409 250.4 1 9 .0 0 % 4 2 .1 8 % Q 410 218.5 2 2 .2 8 % -1 2 .7 4 % Q 411 205.5 2 .9 6 % -5 .9 4 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of gross profit per company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

300 250 50% 40% companies) [%] 30% 20% 10% 0% -1 0 % -2 0 % -3 0 % -4 0 %
10 10 09 10 10 11 09 11 11 09 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 2 4 Q Q Q Q Q Q 2 Q Q Q 3 Q Q 4 11 09
[mn INR]
200 150 100 50 0

Q
Period
G ros s profit per c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of gros s profit per c ompany (all c ompanies ) [% ]
Gross profit per profit-making company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 367.6 1 6 .4 9 % 3 7 .4 6 % Q 110 350.6 5 .5 0 % -4 .6 2 % Q 111 360.1 -2 .1 9 % 2 .7 1 % Q 209 296.4 -1 9 .3 8 % 1 9 .3 8 % Q 210 314.8 -1 0 .2 3 % 6 .2 1 % Q 211 362.6 0 .6 9 % 1 5 .2 1 % Q 309 311.1 4 .9 7 % - 1 4 .0 1 % Q 310 349.1 1 0 .9 2 % 1 2 .2 3 % Q 311 484.9 3 3 .7 1 % 3 8 .8 8 % Q 409 332.4 6 .8 4 % 5 .3 1 % Q 410 368.2 5 .4 6 % 1 0 .7 9 % Q 411 462.8 -4 .5 4 % 2 5 .7 0 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of gross profit per profit-making company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

600 500 50% making companies) [%] Y/Y dynamics of gross 40% 30% 20% 300 10% 200 100 0
11 09 09 09 10 09 10 10 10 3 2 4 3 11 11 1 2 4 1 3 1 2 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
[mn INR]
400
0% -1 0 % -2 0 %
G ros s profit per profit- making c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of gros s profit per c ompany (profit- making c ompanies ) [% ]
Period
profit per company (profit-
profit per company (all
Y/Y dynamics of gross
-15-
Net profit per company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 179.9 3 8 .4 2 % 2 7 .2 0 % Q 110 126.8 -3 0 .8 2 % -2 9 .4 9 % Q 111 175.9 1 5 .7 9 % 3 8 .7 1 % Q 209 150.0 -1 6 .5 9 % 2 2 .9 3 % Q 210 119.8 - 5 .5 3 % -2 0 .1 4 % Q 211 126.7 -2 8 .0 0 % 5 .7 2 % Q 309 155.1 3 .4 1 % 6 .6 0 % Q 310 125.5 4 .7 9 % - 1 9 .0 8 % Q 311 136.1 7 .4 6 % 8 .4 1 % Q 409 183.3 1 8 .1 6 % 4 1 .0 8 % Q 410 151.9 2 1 .0 1 % -1 7 .1 3 % Q 411 137.3 0 .9 1 % -9 .6 0 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of net profit per company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
10 10 10 11 11 09 2 09 09 09 10 11 1 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
50% Y/Y dynamics of net profit 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% -1 0 % -2 0 % -3 0 % -4 0 % per company (all companies)
[mn INR]
Period
N et profit per c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of net profit per c ompany (all c ompanies ) [% ]
Net profit per profit-making company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] P eriod Value [mn INR] Q /Q dynamic s [% ] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] Q 109 274.7 1 6 .0 8 % 3 5 .2 2 % Q 110 254.0 4 .5 9 % -7 .5 4 % Q 111 274.4 2 .9 1 % 8 .0 5 % Q 209 218.1 -2 0 .5 9 % 1 7 .8 7 % Q 210 230.9 - 9 .0 8 % 5 .8 6 % Q 211 263.1 - 4 .1 2 % 1 3 .9 5 % Q 309 230.9 5 .8 6 % - 1 4 .0 3 % Q 310 257.4 1 1 .4 5 % 1 1 .4 5 % Q 311 353.3 3 4 .2 7 % 3 7 .2 8 % Q 409 242.8 5 .1 6 % 2 .6 2 % Q 410 266.7 3 .6 2 % 9 .8 2 % Q 411 331.3 -6 .2 3 % 2 4 .2 3 %
fall of Y/Y dynamics of net profit per profit-making company in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

400 350 300 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% per company (profit-making Y/Y dynamics of net profit
250 200 150 100 50 0

10 11 10 09 09 09 09 2 11 10 10 11 3 1 2 1 3 4 2 4 1 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
-1 0 % -2 0 %
N et profit per profit- making c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of net profit per c ompany (profit- making c ompanies ) [% ]
Period
companies) [%]
[mn INR]
[%]
-16-
Cash flow per company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] 2008 128.37 5 4 6 .7 7 % 2009 122.80 - 4 .3 4 % 2010 -49.19 -1 4 0 .0 6 % 2011 -63.98 -3 0 .0 6 %
rise of Y/Y dynamics of cash flow per company in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

150 600%
500%
400%
[mn INR]
50
300%
200% 0
100%
0% -5 0 -1 0 0 %
-1 0 0
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
-2 0 0 %
Period
C as h flow per c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of c as h flow per c ompany [% ]
Cash flow per profit-making company [mn INR]

P eriod Value [mn INR] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] 2008 180.81 1 6 8 4 .0 1 % 2009 165.05 - 8 .7 2 % 2010 -65.27 -1 3 9 .5 4 % 2011 -85.87 -3 1 .5 6 %
rise of Y/Y dynamics of cash flow per profit-making company in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

200 2000%
1500%
100
[mn INR]
1000% 50 500% 0
-5 0
0%
-1 0 0
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
-5 0 0 %
Period
C as h flow per profit- making c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of c as h flow per profit- making c ompany [% ]
Y/Y dynamics of cash flow per profit-making company [%]
150
Y/Y dynamics of cash flow per company [%]
100
-17-
Share of profit-making companies [%]
P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] Q 109 70.11% 7 .4 7 % -7 .4 0 % Q 110 64.84% -1 2 .6 9 % -5 .2 8 % Q 111 77.47% 1 0 .2 5 % 1 2 .6 4 % Q 209 71.82% 1 .7 1 % - 0 .4 9 % Q 210 64.67% - 0 .1 6 % - 7 .1 5 % Q 211 66.12% -1 1 .3 5 % 1 .4 5 % Q 309 71.43% -0 .3 9 % 8 .4 2 % Q 310 64.84% 0 .1 6 % -6 .5 9 % Q 311 54.70% - 1 1 .4 2 % - 1 0 .1 4 % Q 409 77.53% 6 .1 0 % 1 4 .8 8 % Q 410 67.22% 2 .3 9 % -1 0 .3 1 % Q 411 59.22% 4 .5 2 % -8 .0 0 %
rise of share of profit-making companies in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
09 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
Period
EBITDA Sales Margin [%]

P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] Q 109 15.33% 0 .9 7 % 1 .1 3 % Q 110 14.89% -1 .5 6 % -0 .4 4 % Q 111 13.56% 0 .6 0 % -1 .3 3 % Q 209 15.80% 0 .4 7 % 1 .4 4 % Q 210 14.14% - 0 .7 6 % - 1 .6 7 % Q 211 13.31% - 0 .2 5 % - 0 .8 2 % Q 309 16.36% 0 .5 5 % 2 .1 6 % Q 310 13.48% -0 .6 6 % -2 .8 8 % Q 311 13.12% -0 .2 0 % -0 .3 6 % Q 409 16.45% 0 .1 0 % 2 .0 9 % Q 410 12.96% -0 .5 2 % -3 .5 0 % Q 411 12.84% -0 .2 8 % -0 .1 2 %
fall of EBITDA sales margin in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
09 09 09 10 09 10 10 10 11 11 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 3 Q 4 11 11
Period
-18-
Net Sales Margin [%]

P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] Q 109 7.73% 0 .4 9 % 0 .8 8 % Q 110 7.49% -0 .9 3 % -0 .2 4 % Q 111 6.12% 0 .3 0 % -1 .3 8 % Q 209 7.99% 0 .2 5 % 1 .0 3 % Q 210 6.95% - 0 .5 4 % - 1 .0 4 % Q 211 5.87% - 0 .2 5 % - 1 .0 9 % Q 309 8.05% 0 .0 6 % 0 .7 5 % Q 310 6.39% -0 .5 7 % -1 .6 6 % Q 311 5.74% -0 .1 3 % -0 .6 5 % Q 409 8.42% 0 .3 7 % 1 .1 9 % Q 410 5.82% -0 .5 7 % -2 .6 0 % Q 411 5.46% -0 .2 7 % -0 .3 6 %
fall of net sales margin in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0%
10 09 10 09 11 09 10 10 11 11 09 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 4 3 4 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
Period
Effective tax rate [%]

P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] P eriod Value [%] Q /Q inc reas e [% ] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] Q 109 25.38% 0 .2 7 % -0 .0 3 % Q 110 26.70% 0 .6 3 % 1 .3 2 % Q 111 26.06% -0 .9 7 % -0 .6 4 % Q 209 25.59% 0 .2 1 % 0 .1 0 % Q 210 26.75% 0 .0 5 % 1 .1 7 % Q 211 26.28% 0 .2 2 % - 0 .4 7 % Q 309 25.59% 0 .0 0 % 0 .3 7 % Q 310 26.86% 0 .1 1 % 1 .2 7 % Q 311 26.54% 0 .2 6 % -0 .3 2 % Q 409 26.07% 0 .4 8 % 0 .9 6 % Q 410 27.03% 0 .1 7 % 0 .9 6 % Q 411 26.84% 0 .2 9 % -0 .2 0 %
rise of effective tax rate in Q411 comparing to the value in Q311

28% 27% 27% 26% 26% 25% 25%
09 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
Period
-19-
Return on Equity [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 19.95% 0 .0 5 % 2009 26.00% 6 .0 4 % 2010 16.13% -9 .8 7 % 2011 15.02% -1 .1 1 %
fall of return on equity in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Return on Assets [%]

fall of return on assets in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
8 9 00 0 2 2 00 01 2 2 01 1
Period
Equity dividend ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 20.14% -1 5 .1 0 % 2009 43.24% 2 3 .1 0 % 2010 42.10% -1 .1 4 % 2011 37.82% -4 .2 8 %
fall of equity dividend ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
8 9 00 00 0 2 2 2 01 2 01 1
Period
-20-
Liquidity Ratios
Current ratio [%]
P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 267.77% 3 3 .8 1 % 2009 230.71% -3 7 .0 6 % 2010 242.09% 1 1 .3 8 % 2011 256.16% 1 4 .0 8 %
rise of current ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Current ratio [%]

280% 270% 260% 250% 240% 230% 220% 210% 200%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Quick ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 146.43% 2 4 .0 6 % 2009 123.77% -2 2 .6 6 % 2010 135.23% 1 1 .4 6 % 2011 141.79% 6 .5 6 %
rise of quick ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Quick ratio [%]

150% 145% 140% 135% 130% 125% 120% 115% 110%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Super quick ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 33.27% 8 .3 7 % 2009 34.76% 1 .4 9 % 2010 30.08% -4 .6 8 % 2011 30.65% 0 .5 7 %
rise of super quick ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

36% 35% 34% 33% 32% 31% 30% 29% 28% 27%
8 9 00 00 01 0 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-21-
Sundry debtors to sundry creditors ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 50.74% 8 .5 6 % 2009 44.37% - 6 .3 7 % 2010 52.93% 8 .5 6 % 2011 54.64% 1 .7 0 %
rise of sundry debtors to sundry creditors ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
8 9 0 00 01 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Financial Cycles
Days of coverage for Cash & Equivalent [days]
P eriod Value [days] Y /Y inc reas e [days ] 2008 21 9 2009 4 -1 6 2010 13 9 2011 18 5
rise of days of coverage for cash & equivalent in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

25
20
15
10
0
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Days of coverage for receivables [days]

P eriod Value [days] Y /Y inc reas e [days ] 2008 28 3 2009 27 -1 2010 33 6 2011 32 -1
fall of days of coverage for receivables in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0 8 9 01 00 2 00 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-22-
Days of coverage for inventories [days]

P eriod Value [days] Y /Y inc reas e [days ] 2008 81 1 2009 79 -1 2010 80 1 2011 82 1
rise of days of coverage for inventories in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

82 82 81 81 80 80 79 79 78 78
0 8 9 01 00 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Days of coverage for short term liabilities [days]

P eriod Value [days] Y /Y inc reas e [days ] 2008 88 -5 2009 102 14 2010 100 -2 2011 96 -4
fall of days of coverage for short term liabilities in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

105
100
95
90
85
80
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Financial Leverage Ratios

Debt to Equity ratio [%]
P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 91.49% -5 .3 2 % 2009 92.01% 0 .5 2 % 2010 74.84% - 1 7 .1 7 % 2011 77.19% 2 .3 5 %
rise of debt to equity ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
0 8 9 01 00 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-23-
Equity to total assets ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 52.22% 1 .4 1 % 2009 52.08% - 0 .1 4 % 2010 57.19% 5 .1 1 % 2011 56.44% -0 .7 6 %
fall of equity to total assets ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

58% 57% 56% 55% 54% 53% 52% 51% 50% 49%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Share of loans from banks in total debt [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 100.00% 0 .0 0 % 2009 100.00% 0 .0 0 % 2010 100.00% 0 .0 0 % 2011 100.00% 0 .0 0 %
stabilisation of share of loans from banks in total debt in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

1 2 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 8 0 .0 0 % 6 0 .0 0 % 4 0 .0 0 % 2 0 .0 0 % 0 .0 0 %
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Secured to unsecured loans ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 276.28% 1 5 .2 3 % 2009 281.43% 5 .1 5 % 2010 373.02% 9 1 .6 0 % 2011 381.08% 8 .0 5 %
rise of secured to unsecured loans ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

450% 400% 350% 300% 250% 200% 150% 100% 50% 0%
8 9 00 00 0 2 2 2 2 01 01 1
Period
-24-
Operating profit coverage [years]

P eriod Value [year] Y /Y inc reas e [year] 2008 2.31 0 .0 4 2009 1.81 - 0 .5 0 2010 2.08 0 .2 7 2011 2.19 0 .1 0
rise of operating profit coverage in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

2 .5
2 .0
1 .5
1 .0
0 .5
0 .0
8 9 00 00 0 2 2 2 2 01 01 1
Period
Production Factors
Labour intensity of production [%]
P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 3.47% -4 .2 9 % 2009 3.50% 0 .7 9 % 2010 3.47% -0 .7 0 % 2011 3.64% 4 .9 0 %
rise of labour intensity of production in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

3 .7 % 3 .7 % 3 .6 % 3 .6 % 3 .5 % 3 .5 % 3 .4 % 3 .4 %
8 9 0 00 01 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Energy intensity of production [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 2.15% 0 .7 2 % 2009 1.90% -1 1 .6 9 % 2010 2.06% 8 .7 5 % 2011 2.04% -1 .1 1 %
fall of energy intensity of production in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

2 .2 % 2 .2 % 2 .1 % 2 .1 % 2 .0 % 2 .0 % 1 .9 % 1 .9 % 1 .8 % 1 .8 %
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
-25-
Material intensity of production [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 67.98% -0 .4 6 % 2009 67.49% - 0 .4 9 % 2010 67.75% 0 .2 7 % 2011 68.18% 0 .4 2 %
rise of material intensity of production in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 67% 67% 67%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Total assets turnover [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 143.96% -1 0 .6 6 % 2009 160.84% 1 1 .7 2 % 2010 158.58% -1 .4 0 % 2011 155.07% -2 .2 1 %
fall of total assets turnover in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Total assets turnover [%]

165% 160% 155% 150% 145% 140% 135% 130%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Net fixed assets productivity [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 305.46% -3 6 .3 0 % 2009 335.02% 2 9 .5 6 % 2010 381.90% 4 6 .8 7 % 2011 366.21% -1 5 .6 8 %
fall of net fixed assets productivity in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

450% 400% 350% 300% 250% 200% 150% 100% 50% 0%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
-26-
Investment Outlays
Investment outlays per company [mn INR]
P eriod Value [mn INR] Y /Y dynamic s [% ] 2008 696.73 2 5 .1 9 % 2009 914.74 3 1 .2 9 % 2010 1 048.75 1 4 .6 5 % 2011 1 124.88 7 .2 6 %
rise of investment outlays per company in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

1 200 35% 30% 25% 20% 600 15% 400 10% 5% 0%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
800
200
Period
I nves tment outlays per c ompany [mn I N R] Y /Y dynamic s of inves tment outlays per c ompany [% ]
Share of quoted equity investments [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 6.42% 3 .1 2 % 2009 4.01% - 2 .4 2 % 2010 4.26% 0 .2 5 % 2011 4.64% 0 .3 8 %
rise of share of quoted equity investments in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

7 .0 % 6 .0 % 5 .0 % 4 .0 % 3 .0 % 2 .0 % 1 .0 % 0 .0 %
8 9 0 00 01 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Investment outlays as share in net revenue [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 9.41% 0 .2 8 % 2009 11.49% 2 .0 8 % 2010 11.52% 0 .0 3 % 2011 10.54% -0 .9 8 %
fall of investment outlays as share in net revenue in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Y/Y dynamics of investment outlays per company [%]
1 000
[mn INR]
-27-
Investment outlays to depreciation ratio [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 440.07% -5 .1 4 % 2009 518.64% 1 7 .8 5 % 2010 631.87% 2 1 .8 3 % 2011 542.16% -1 4 .2 0 %
fall of investment outlays to depreciation ratio in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Investment outlays to depreciation ratio [%]

700%
600%
500%
400%
300%
200%
100%
0%
9 8 0 00 2 2 2 2 01 00 01 1
Investment outlays index [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 22.20% -2 .2 6 % 2009 31.07% 8 .8 6 % 2010 37.04% 5 .9 7 % 2011 31.48% -5 .5 6 %
fall of investment outlays index in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Investments structure [%] Period

Q uoted E quity [% ] U nquoted E quity [% ] O ther I nves tments [% ] 2009 4 .0 1 % 2 .6 2 % 9 3 .3 7 % 2010 4 .2 6 % 2 .6 3 % 9 3 .1 1 % 2011 4 .6 4 % 2 .2 7 % 9 3 .1 0 %
-28-
Investments structure [%] (2011)

4 .6 % 2 .3 %
9 3 .1 %
Q uoted E quity [% ]
U nquoted E quity [% ]
O ther I nves tments [% ]
Investments structure [%]

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010 Period
2011
Q uote d Equity [%]
Unquote d Equity [%]
O the r Inve stm e nts [%]
Costs
Share of labor costs in total operating costs [%]
P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 3.70% -0 .0 3 % 2009 3.67% - 0 .0 3 % 2010 3.62% -0 .0 4 % 2011 3.77% 0 .1 5 %
rise of share of labor costs in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

3 .8 % 3 .8 %
3 .7 % 3 .7 %
3 .6 % 3 .6 %
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-29-
Share of stock increase costs in total operating costs [%]

fall of share of stock increase costs in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

1 .2 % 1 .0 % 0 .8 % 0 .6 % 0 .4 % 0 .2 % 0 .0 %
8 00 9 0 2 2 2 2 01 01 00 1
Period
Share of energy costs in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 2.29% 0 .1 0 % 2009 1.99% - 0 .3 0 % 2010 2.15% 0 .1 6 % 2011 2.11% -0 .0 4 %
fall of share of energy costs in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

2 .4 % 2 .3 % 2 .3 % 2 .2 % 2 .2 % 2 .1 % 2 .1 % 2 .0 % 2 .0 % 1 .9 % 1 .9 % 1 .8 %
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Share of raw material cost in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 72.51% 2 .0 8 % 2009 70.77% - 1 .7 4 % 2010 70.72% -0 .0 5 % 2011 70.63% -0 .0 9 %
fall of share of raw material cost in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Share of raw material cost in total operating costs [%]

7 3 .0 % 7 2 .5 % 7 2 .0 % 7 1 .5 % 7 1 .0 % 7 0 .5 % 7 0 .0 % 6 9 .5 %
8 9 0 00 01 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-30-
Share of other manufacturing expenses in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 5.84% -0 .4 8 % 2009 6.14% 0 .3 0 % 2010 6.49% 0 .3 5 % 2011 6.62% 0 .1 3 %
rise of share of other manufacturing expenses in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Share of other manufacturing expenses in total operating costs [%]

6 .8 % 6 .6 % 6 .4 % 6 .2 % 6 .0 % 5 .8 % 5 .6 % 5 .4 %
8 9 00 00 0 2 2 2 01 2 01 1
Period
Share of selling and admin. expenses in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 11.75% -1 .3 0 % 2009 12.55% 0 .8 0 % 2010 12.81% 0 .2 6 % 2011 12.96% 0 .1 5 %
rise of share of selling and administration expenses in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Share of selling and admin. expenses in total operating costs [%]

1 3 .2 % 1 3 .0 % 1 2 .8 % 1 2 .6 % 1 2 .4 % 1 2 .2 % 1 2 .0 % 1 1 .8 % 1 1 .6 % 1 1 .4 % 1 1 .2 % 1 1 .0 %
8 9 0 00 00 01 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Share of miscellaneous expenses in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 1.62% -0 .6 2 % 2009 1.55% - 0 .0 8 % 2010 1.48% -0 .0 7 % 2011 1.59% 0 .1 1 %
rise of share of miscellaneous expenses in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010
Share of miscellaneous expenses in total operating costs [%]

1 .7 %
1 .6 %
1 .6 %
1 .5 %
1 .5 %
1 .4 %
9 8 00 01 0 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
-31-
Share of depreciation in total operating costs [%]

P eriod Value [%] Y /Y inc reas e [% ] 2008 2.28% 0 .2 6 % 2009 2.32% 0 .0 4 % 2010 1.90% -0 .4 2 % 2011 2.01% 0 .1 1 %
rise of share of depreciation in total operating costs in 2011 comparing to the value in 2010

2 .5 %
2 .0 %
1 .5 %
1 .0 %
0 .5 %
0 .0 %
9 8 00 01 0 00 2 2 2 2 01 1
Period
Costs structure [%] Period

I nc reas e in Stoc k [% ] Raw M aterials C os ts [% ] P ower G eneration & D is tribution C os t [% ] O ther M anufac turing E xpens es [% ] E mployee C os t [% ] Selling and A dminis tration E xpens es [% ] M is c ellaneous E xpens es [% ] D eprec iation [% ] O ther operational c os ts [% ] 2009 1 .0 1 % 7 0 .7 7 % 1 .9 9 % 6 .1 4 % 3 .6 7 % 1 2 .5 5 % 1 .5 5 % 2 .3 2 % 0 .0 0 % 2010 0 .8 2 % 7 0 .7 2 % 2 .1 5 % 6 .4 9 % 3 .6 2 % 1 2 .8 1 % 1 .4 8 % 1 .9 0 % 0 .0 0 % 2011 0 .2 9 % 7 0 .6 3 % 2 .1 1 % 6 .6 2 % 3 .7 7 % 1 2 .9 6 % 1 .5 9 % 2 .0 1 % 0 .0 0 %
raw materials costs dominate in the cost structure
Costs structure [%]

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
Incre a se in Stock [%] Powe r Ge ne ra tion & Distribution C ost [%] Em ploye e C ost [%] Misce lla ne o us Ex pe nse s [%] O the r ope ra tiona l costs [%]
2010 Period
R a w Ma te ria ls C osts [%]
2011
O the r Ma nufa cturing Ex pe nse s [%] Se lling a nd Adm inistra tion Ex pe nse s [%] De pre cia tion [%]
-32-
Costs structure [%] (2011)

1 .6 % 1 3 .0 % 3 .8 % 6 .6 % 0 .0 % 0 .3 % 2 .0 %
2 .1 %
7 0 .6 %
I nc reas e in Stoc k [% ] P ower G eneration & D is tribution C os t [% ] E mployee C os t [% ] M is c ellaneous E xpens es [% ] O ther operational c os ts [% ]
Raw M aterials C os ts [% ] O ther M anufac turing E xpens es [% ] Selling and A dminis tration E xpens es [% ] D eprec iation [% ]
Structure of Fixed Assets

Fixed assets structure [%] Period
G oodwill [% ] Freehold L and [% ] L and I mprovements [% ] Buildings [% ] P lant & M ac hinery [% ] Furniture & Fixtures & O ffic e A pplianc es [% ] V ehic les [% ] Railway T rac ks & Sidings [% ] A irc rafts & H elic opters [% ] L eas ehold L and [% ] C omputer Software [% ] T ec hnic al know-how [% ] O ther F ixed A s s ets [% ] 2009 0 .5 0 % 5 .0 1 % 0 .0 4 % 1 6 .7 8 % 6 7 .5 8 % 2 .3 0 % 1 .0 8 % 0 .0 1 % 0 .0 2 % 1 .4 7 % 1 .6 4 % 0 .1 6 % 3 .4 1 % 2010 0 .1 0 % 4 .8 7 % 0 .0 4 % 1 7 .0 2 % 6 7 .3 4 % 2 .3 0 % 1 .1 1 % 0 .0 1 % 0 .0 2 % 1 .6 5 % 1 .8 3 % 0 .1 8 % 3 .5 1 % 2011 0 .6 1 % 4 .8 7 % 0 .0 4 % 1 6 .7 4 % 6 7 .5 0 % 2 .2 2 % 1 .0 9 % 0 .0 1 % 0 .0 2 % 1 .5 5 % 1 .7 3 % 0 .1 6 % 3 .4 6 %
plant& machinery dominate in the fixed assets structure
Fixed assets structure [%]

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
Goodwill [%] Land Im prove m e nts [%] Plant & Machine ry [%] Ve hicle s [%] Aircrafts & He licopte rs [%] C om pute r So ftware [%] O the r Fix e d Asse ts [%]
2010 Period
2011
Fre e hold La nd [%] Buildings [%] Furniture & Fix ture s & O ffice Appliance s [%] Railwa y Track s & Sidings [%] Le ase ho ld Land [%] Te chnical k no w-how [%]
-33-
Fixed assets structure [%] (2011)

0 .0 % 01 .6 % 1 2 .2 % .1 %.0 % 1 .7 % 0 .2 % 3 .5 % 0 .6 % 4 .9 % 0 .0 % 1 6 .7 %
6 7 .5 % G oodwill [% ] L and I mprovements [% ] P lant & M ac hinery [% ] V ehic les [% ] A irc rafts & H elic opters [% ] C omputer Software [% ] O ther Fixed A s s ets [% ] Freehold L and [% ] Buildings [% ] Furniture & Fixtures & O ffic e A pplianc es [% ] Railway T rac ks & S idings [% ] L eas ehold L and [% ] T ec hnic al know- how [% ]
Structure of Current Assets

Current assets structure [%] Period
I nventories [% ] Sundry D ebtors [% ] C as h & Bank [% ] L oans and A dvanc es [% ] O ther c urrent as s ets [% ] 2009 4 6 .3 5 % 1 5 .6 5 % 1 5 .0 7 % 2 0 .9 8 % 1 .9 5 % 2010 4 4 .1 4 % 1 8 .2 0 % 1 2 .4 3 % 2 3 .6 4 % 1 .6 0 % 2011 4 4 .6 5 % 1 7 .6 9 % 1 1 .9 7 % 2 4 .0 2 % 1 .6 7 %
inventories dominate in the current assets structure
Current assets structure [%]

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010 Period
2011
Inve ntorie s [%]
Sundry De btors [%]
C a sh & Ba nk [%]
Loa ns a nd Adva nce s [%]
O the r curre nt a sse ts [%]
-34-
Current assets structure [%] (2011)

1 .7 % 2 4 .0 %
4 4 .7 %
1 2 .0 %
1 7 .7 %
I nventories [% ]
Sundry D ebtors [% ]
C as h & Bank [% ]
L oans and A dvanc es [% ]
O ther c urrent as s ets [% ]
Structure of Current Liabilities

Short-term liabilities structure [%] Period
Sundry C reditors [% ] U nc laimed D ividend [% ] I nteres t A c c rued But N ot D ue [% ] P rovis ions [% ] O ther Short- term L iabilities [% ] 2009 5 9 .3 1 % 0 .3 2 % 0 .5 1 % 2 7 .1 3 % 1 2 .7 4 % 2010 6 2 .4 3 % 0 .3 6 % 0 .5 2 % 2 4 .9 8 % 1 1 .7 1 % 2011 6 1 .5 5 % 0 .3 8 % 0 .6 0 % 2 5 .8 0 % 1 1 .6 8 %
sundry creditors dominate in the short-term liabilities structure
Short-term liabilities structure [%]

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010 Period
2011
Sundry C re ditors [%] Provisions [%]
Uncla im e d Divide nd [%] O the r Short-te rm Lia bilitie s [%]
Inte re st Accrue d But Not Due [%]
-35-
Short-term liabilities structure [%] (2011)

1 1 .7 %
2 5 .8 %
6 1 .5 % 0 0 .4 % .6 %
Sundry C reditors [% ] P rovis ions [% ]
U nc laimed D ividend [% ] O ther Short-term L iabilities [% ]
I nteres t A c c rued But N ot D ue [% ]
Main Leverages
Main leverages
P eriod Tot al leverage (DTL) Financ ial leverage (D FL ) E BI T D A leverage (D O L ) P eriod Tot al leverage (DTL) Financ ial leverage (D FL ) E BI T D A leverage (D O L ) P eriod Tot al leverage (DTL) Financ ial leverage (D FL ) E BI T D A leverage (D O L ) Q 109 0.83 0 .8 0 1 .0 3 Q 110 0.89 0 .8 6 1 .0 3 Q 111 0.80 0 .8 2 0 .9 8
Main leverages
1 .2 1 .0 0 .8 0 .6 0 .4 0 .2 0 .0
11 09 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 11 11 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 3 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4 11
Q 209 0.87 0 .8 3 1 .0 6 Q 210 0.85 0 .8 5 1 .0 0 Q 211 0.75 0 .8 0 0 .9 4
Q 309 0.91 0 .8 5 1 .0 8 Q 310 0.81 0 .8 4 0 .9 7 Q 311 0.72 0 .7 9 0 .9 1
Q 409 0.97 0 .8 8 1 .1 1 Q 410 0.79 0 .8 2 0 .9 6 Q 411 0.68 0 .7 6 0 .8 9
weak degree of total leverage weak degree of financial leverage weak degree of EBITDA leverage
Period
DTL DFL DO L
Leverage DFL DEL DTL EBITDA NS NP
Name of leverage Degree of financial leverage Degree of EBITDA leverage Degree of total leverage
Definition of leverage = (NP / NP) / (EBITDA / EBITDA) = (EBITDA / EBITDA) / (NS / NS) = DFL * DOL Key:
Earnings before interest, taxes, amortization and depreciation Net sales Net profit
-36-
Food Manufacturing
DuPonts Pyramid
Return on equity ROE = ROA * leverage ROE
2008
2009 2011
2010
20.0%
26.0% 15.0%
16.1%
Return on assets ROA = ROS * TAT company 2008 2011 2009 2010 ROA
leverage = Assets per
*
1.91 1.75 1.77 1.92
company / Equity per Leverage
2008 2011
2009
2010
10.4% 8.5%
13.5%
9.2%
Return on net sales TAT = Net revenue per company / Assets per company 2008 2009 2010 2011 TAT
Assets turnover
ROS = Net profit per
company / Net revenue per
ROS
company
*
1.44 1.61 1.59 1.55
2008
2009
2010
2011
7.2%
8.4%
5.8%
5.5%
Net Net revenue per company 2009 2010 2011 [mn INR]
Net profit per company (*)
profit
Net revenue per company (*)
Assets per company (**) [mn INR]
Assets per company 2008 2009 2010 2011
Equity per company (**) [mn INR]
Equity per comapny 2008 2009 2010 2011
[mn INR]
per
/ /
5 145 4 951 5 739 6 882
company
/
7 963 9 102 10 673
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
536
670
530
583
7 407
2 687
2 578
3 283
3 884
(*) Net profit per company or net revenue per company from a given year
(**) Value of assets per company or equity per company from the end of year
-37-
Companies from the Sector

Top players - Market Shares
Market shares of top listed companies from the sector Q4 2011
Company ITC Ltd. Ruchi Soya Inds. Ltd. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Nestle India Ltd. Gokul Refoils and Solvent Ltd Britannia Industries Ltd. Adani Enterprises Ltd. Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd. KS Oils Ltd. Net sales 241 532.3 238 328.0 220 896.8 75 144.6 60 059.6 47 761.1 46 553.6 42 804.0 40 533.3 37 793.8 Market share 10.43% 10.29% 9.54% 3.25% 2.59% 2.06% 2.01% 1.85% 1.75% 1.63% Net sales dynamics 17.02% 56.38% 15.36% 19.78% 41.67% 18.50% -9.25% -19.28% 4.94% -15.78% Net profit 58 294.9 1 157.6 26 390.4 9 615.5 -1 007.7 1 769.7 2 408.7 482.0 -902.9 -7 022.4
D ata on net s ales and net profit are in mn I N R and repres ent s tandlone values from 4 las t quarters
Top listed companies and their market shares (Q4 2011)

0
I T C L td. Ruc hi Soya I nds . L td. H indus tan U nilever L td. N es tle I ndia L td. G okul Refoils and Solvent L td Britannia I ndus tries L td. A dani E nterpris es L td. S hree Renuka Sugars L td. Bajaj H indus than L td. KS O ils L td. 3 .2 5 % 2 .5 9 % 2 .0 6 % 2 .0 1 % 1 .8 5 % 1 .7 5 % 1 .6 3 %
500
1 0 .4 3 % 1 0 .2 9 % 9 .5 4 %
1000
1500
2000
0%
20%
40%
60%
-38-
Food Manufacturing
Top Players from the Sector

Main indicators DuPont pyramid
Effective Net Profit [mn INR] net profit [mn INR] [mn INR] dynamics of of revenue cutting Equity ROE leverage ROA TAT ROS Assets Y/Y increase cost tax rate leverage increase improve of tax shield Y/Y net
Data from 2011

Strategic conclusions Potential for:
Public
com-
pany
Market
Net
*)
share in
Revenue
dynamics of
Share of net revenues of top 10 companies in the sector 46.76%

49 876.1 22.82% 159 532.7 160 524.7 31.26% 1.01 31.07% 1.32 23.56% 31.38%
2011
[mn INR]
revenues
ITC Ltd. (Mar,2011)
9.14%
211 675.8
16.61%
++ o +
o o +
++ ++ +
+ o ++
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Mar,2011)

21 532.5 2.41% 26 339.2 26 339.2 81.75% 1.00 81.75% 7.37 11.10% 21.13%
8.38%
194 011.1
10.71%
Ruchi Soya Inds. Ltd. (Mar,2011)

2 132.1 23.62% 21 573.3 56 236.4 9.88% 2.61 3.79% 2.96 1.28%
7.19%
166 488.2
23.20%
35.01%
Bunge India Pvt Ltd. (Mar,2011)

1 283.1 172.64% 3 894.2 3 942.4 32.95% 1.01 32.55% 37.84
6.44%
149 166.4
93.70%
0.86%
33.29%
o
0.08% 22.31%
+ + ++
++ +
+ o
Adani Wilmar Ltd. (Mar,2011)

70.3 -55.28% 6 736.1 17 256.3 1.04% 2.56 0.41%
3.69%
85 402.5
39.79%
4.95
Nestle India Ltd. (Mar,2011)

9 615.5 17.45% 12 739.5 22 448.2 75.48% 1.76
3.23%
74 908.2
19.76%
42.83%
3.34
12.84%
30.72%
+
1.57 -6.31%
o ++ ++
+ o
KS Oils Ltd. (Mar,2011)

-3 549.6 -258.17% 11 413.3 35 784.2 -31.10% 3.14
2.43%
56 249.2
38.65%
-9.92%

8.6 -20.90% 2 760.8 12 936.3 0.31% 4.69 0.07% 3.76 0.02% 8.15%
Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetable Pvt Ltd. (Mar,2011)

120.0 -76.81% 31 399.1 83 367.2 0.38%
2.10%
48 626.0
22.45%
+
2.66 0.14% 0.58 0.25% 36.64%
++ ++ +
o o
o ++
Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd. (Mar,2011)
2.09%
48 504.0
68.79%
Allanasons Ltd. (Mar,2011)

391.0 2 187.1 26.87%
2.07%
47 825.2
28.22%
2 432.3
17.88%
1.11
16.07%
19.66
0.82%
34.57%
o
42 126.7 21.98% 2.15 19.88% 8.33 4.45% 28.13%
+ o o
+ +
++ +
Average
4.68%
108 285.7
36.19%
8 148.0
-14.54%
27 857.5
The data for 2010 and 2011 are from the Accord Fintech database. Hence, the quality of presented data is strictly limited by the quality of data in the Accord Fintech database. *) Public companies represent only these PLC that are listed on NSE (National Stock Exchange) or BSE (Bombay Stock Exchange) The date below the company's name represents the end of fiscal year.
In duPont Pyramid stock variables are not averaged over time for calculation purposes due to lack of these data
++ + o
High potential Medium potential Low potential
-39-
Food Manufacturing
Listed companies from the sector (from BSE & NSE)

Financial Indicators (2011)
DuPont's pyramid
Average Effective Book tax rate ROE [bn INR] [mn INR] (y/y) leverage ROA TAT ROS last year P P/E P/BV L value %P Value [mn INR] Liquidity volume s market U L U daily Company'
Data from 2011

Market Indicators (31/03/2012)
Price Beta () Market multiples
Main indicators
Market
Required return rate
Market
Net
share in
Revenue
Net Profit
Company's name (End of fiscal year)
2011
[mn INR]
[mn INR]
ITC Ltd. (Mar,2011)

159 532.7 0.1 1 755.4 226.9 24.2% 35.2 31.26% 1.006 31.07% 1.319 23.56% 31.38% 1.5 1 755.8 226.9 24.3% 35.2
NSE
BSE
9.14%
211 675.8
49 876.1
11.0 11.0
0.48 0.48
0.48 0.47
9.5% 9.3%
9.5% 9.3%
+++ +++
0.9 885.5 885.2 409.9 44.3% 0.1 410.1 44.4% 41.1 41.1
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Mar,2011)

26 339.2 81.75% 1.000 81.75% 7.366 11.10% 21.13%
NSE
BSE
8.38%
194 011.1
21 532.5
33.6 33.6
0.34 0.34
0.34 0.34
9.2% 9.1%
9.2% 9.1%
+++ +++
0.1 30.3 30.2 90.9 0.0 91.3 -13.3% -13.8%
Ruchi Soya Inds. Ltd. (Mar,2011)

21 573.3 9.88% 2.607 3.79% 2.961 1.28% 35.01%
NSE
BSE
7.19%
166 488.2
2 132.1
14.2 14.2
1.4 1.4
1.12 1.15
0.55 0.56
11.1% 10.6%
9.7% 9.5%
+++ +++
0.1 0.0 446.5 446.5 4 630.6 4 631.4
Nestle India Ltd. (Mar,2011)

12 739.5 75.48% 1.762 42.83% 3.337 12.84% 30.72%
NSE
BSE
3.23%
74 908.2
9 615.5
25.8% 26.4%
46.4 46.4
35.0 35.1
0.48 0.67
0.31 0.44
9.5% 9.7%
9.1% 9.3%
+++ +++
0.1 0.0 3.3 3.4
KS Oils Ltd. (Mar,2011)

11 413.3 -31.10% 3.135 -9.92% 1.572 -6.31%
NSE
BSE
2.43%
56 249.2
-3 549.6
7.9 7.9
-76.7% -76.6%
0.3 0.3
1.61 0.85
12.2% 10.1%
+++ +++
36.64% 0.1 0.0
Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd. (Mar,2011)

31 399.1 0.38% 2.655 0.14% 0.582 0.25%
NSE
BSE
2.09%
48 504.0
120.0
7.1 7.1
31.1 31.1
-59.1% -59.1%
59.2 59.1
0.2 0.2
2.16 2.15
1.05 1.05
13.5% 12.6%
10.9% 10.5%
+++ +++ ++ +++
NSE 4 378.4 14.03% 1.879 7.47% 5.510 1.36%

31.72% 0.0 0.0 10.3 10.3 77.9 78.0 -21.4% -20.9% 16.7 16.7 2.3 2.3 -0.05 -0.19 -0.03 -0.12 3.45% 26.67% 0.0 0.0 70.8 70.8 593.0 592.5 59.4% 59.0% 48.8 48.7 15.7 15.7 0.35 0.34 0.20 0.20 9.2% 9.1% 8.9% 8.8%
Gokul Refoils and Solvent Ltd (Mar,2011)
BSE
1.96%
45 340.5
614.4
Britannia Industries Ltd. (Mar,2011)

4 513.0 32.19% 1.956 16.46% 4.773
NSE
BSE
1.82%
42 137.1
1 452.9
+++ +++
7.58% 33.26%
Rei Agro Ltd. (Mar,2011)

23 611.8 11.96% 2.632 4.54% 0.599
NSE
BSE
1.61%
37 238.8
2 824.5
0.0 0.0
11.7 11.8
12.3 12.4
-55.4% -54.9%
4.2 4.2
0.5 0.5
1.10 0.48
0.53 0.23
11.0% 9.3%
9.7% 8.9%
+++ +++
2.403 14.44% 20.94%
Dabur India Ltd. (Mar,2011)

11 011.6 42.81% 1.234
NSE
BSE
1.41%
32 643.7
4 714.1
34.70%
0.1 0.0
185.6 185.2
106.6 106.4
10.0% 9.6%
39.4 39.3
16.9 16.8
0.34 0.33
0.29 0.28
9.2% 9.0%
9.1% 8.9%
+++ +++
21.28% 3.042 6.95% 29.72%
Average
30 651.2 26.87% 1.987
0.3 0.0
+++ ++ +
3.93%
90 919.7
8 933.3
340.7 340.6
- high liquidity - average liquidity - low liquidity
618.8 618.7
-6.2% -6.2%
33.9 33.9
11.7 11.7
0.79 0.66
0.41 0.38
10.5% 9.9%
9.5% 9.3%
+++ +++
There are given both market indidators for each company, top value represents value on NSE (National Stock Exchange), botton for BSE (Bombay Stock Exchange). < 0 - Acyclical company (required return rate is not calculated) The date below the company's name represents the end of fiscal year. All financials are audited and standalone.
-40-
Food Manufacturing
Mergers and Acquisitions

Last mergers
Seller's Name Buyer's Name Announcement date (Status of a deal) Taken over company Taking over company
The largest buy/sell offers
Value of a deal [mn USD] (Status of a deal) Cemex SAB de CV May-10,2012 Parampara Food Products Pvt Ltd
Announcement date
Target Company
550.01 (announced)
Nov-22,2010
Murli Industries Ltd.
General Mills
393.58 (announced) Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar & Inds. Ltd. Apr-30,2012
Oct-30,2009
Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd
Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Roquette Freres Biols' Starch Business
354.97 (announced) Wockhardt, Ltd. Groupe Danone Apr-20,2012
Aug-03,2011
Wockhardt's Nutrition Business
Namsang Tea Estate
Rossell India Ltd.
329.01 (announced) Grupo Equipav Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd.
Feb-21,2010
Equipav S.A. Aucar e Alcool
Mar-26,2012
Shivprabha Sugars
Tilaknagar Industries Ltd.
240.01 (announced) Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd.
Nov-11,2009
Vale do Ivai S.A.
Dec-21,2011
Amrit Banaspati Co.Ltd's Edible Oil and Fat Business
Bunge India Pvt Ltd.
180.89
Apr-30,2012
Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Biols' Starch Business
Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Biols Roquette Freres Ltd.
Nov-01,2011
Vallabhdas Kanji Ltd's Olam International Bulk Spices and Ltd Private Label Assets
75.99 (completed)
Mar-28,2011
Marico Ltd's Sweekar Oil Marico Ltd Brand
Cargill India Pvt. Ltd
Aug-31,2011 (completed)
Hemarus Technologies Ltd
Olam International Limited
73.81 (completed)
Aug-31,2011
Hemarus Technologies Ltd
Olam International Limited
Aug-19,2011 (announced)
Geepee Agri Pvt Ltd
Archers Daniels Midland Company
61.61
Dec-21,2011
Amrit Banaspati Co.Ltd's Amrit Banaspati Co.Ltd, Edible Oil and Fat Amrit Corp. Ltd. Business
Bunge India Pvt Ltd.
Aug-03,2011 (announced)
Wockhardt's Nutrition Business
Groupe Danone
52.06 (completed)
Jul-07,2011
Jay Mahesh Sugar Industries Ltd
NSL Sugars Ltd
Jul-07,2011 (completed)
Jay Mahesh Sugar Industries Ltd
NSL Sugars Ltd The last mergers refer to the transactions affecting analysed sector. The data source is ISI Dealwatch
The largest buy/sell offers refer to the transactions affecting analysed sector. The data source is ISI Dealwatch
The status of presented deals may change or some of deals may drop out from the subsequent reports (e.g. due to cancelations of them)
-41-
Key Concepts
Definitions of Indices
Quarterly financials
Definition of index
Number of reporting listed companies Net sales ----------------------------Number of companies Net Sales - EBIT ----------------------------Number of companies EBIT + Depreciation ----------------------------Number of companies EBITDA --------------------------------------------Number of profit-making companies Profit before tax ----------------------------Number of companies Profit before tax --------------------------------------------Number of profit-making companies Profit after tax ---------------------------Number of companies Profit after tax --------------------------------------------Number of profit-making companies EBITDA -------------Net sales Profit after tax ---------------------Net sales Profit befor tax - Profit after tax ------------------------------------------Profit befor tax Number of profit making companies --------------------------------------------Number of companies V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V SV4 ----SV4 SV4 ----SV4 SV4 ----SV4 V ----V
Number of companies
Net revenue per company [mn INR]
Total operating cost (incl. depreciation) per company [mn INR]
General indices Profitability ratios
V - Value for a given quarter SV4 - Sum of values over the last four quarters AV4 - Average of values over the last four quarters
Yearly financials
Definition of index
Net cash flow --------------------------Number of companies Net cash flow --------------------------------------------Number of profit-making companies Profit after tax -------------------------Shareholders' funds Profit after tax ----------------------Total assets Equity dividend for ordinary and prefered shares -----------------------------------------------------Profit after tax Current assets -----------------------Short-term liabilities Current assets - Inventory ------------------------------Short-term liabilities Cash & Bank ------------------------Short-term liabilities Sundry debtors -----------------------Sundry creditors V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V
General indicators Profitability ratios Liquidity ratios
Current ratio [%]
Quick ratio [%]

V - Value for a given year
-42-
Yearly financials
Definition of index
(Receivables + Inventories - Short term liabilities) * 360 -----------------------------------------------------------------Net sales Receivables * 360 ------------------------Net sales Inventories * 360 ---------------------------Net sales Short term liabilities * 360 ----------------------------------Net sales Total debt ----------------------Shareholders' funds Shareholders' funds -----------------------Total assets Secured and unsecured loans from banks ------------------------------------------------Total debt Secured loans ----------------------Unsecured loans Total debt --------------EBITDA Cost of employees ----------------------Net sales Power generation and distribution costs -------------------------------------------Net sales Raw material costs -------------------------------------------Net sales Net sales -----------------Total assets Net sales -----------------Net block Investments -------------------------Number of companies Quoted equity investments ----------------------------------Investments Investments ---------------------Net sales Investments ---------------------Depreciation Investments - Depretiation ----------------------------------Net block Cost of employees ------------------------Total operating costs Stock increase costs --------------------------Total operating costs Power generation and distribution costs -----------------------------------------------Total operating costs Raw material costs -----------------------------------------------Total operating costs Other manufacturing expenses ------------------------------------Total operating costs Selling and administration expenses -----------------------------------------Total operating costs Miscellaneous expenses ----------------------------Total operating costs Depreciation ------------------------Total operating costs V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V ----V V --V V --V V --V V --V V ----V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V V --V
Financial cycles Financial leverage ratios Production factors Investment outlays Costs
Total assets turover [%]
Investment outlays to depretiation ratio [%]
Share of raw material cost in total operating costs [%] Share of other manufacturing expenses in total operating costs [%] Share of selling and administration expenses in total operating costs [%] Share of miscellaneous expenses in total operating costs [%]

V - Value for a given year
-43-
Definitions of Selected Concepts

EconTrends for India are based to large extent on the structure of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Analyses made for respective industry divisions, groups, classes and sub-classes are consistent with this classification. However the used system of industry classification is not fully compatible with the National Industrial Classification in India due to Indian statistics specific factors. Moreover the reports are based on the bottom-up aggregation of individual companies financial data from the Accord Fintech database, which provides the financials not for all, but for all major companies from the non-financial sector. The measurement units in several observations in the database have been adjusted to ensure appropriate consistency and accuracy of the data. Quarterly financial data from Income Statement are adjusted to assert their consistency with yearly audited figures. Hence the report covers not the full sector but only its major part. It is worth emphasizing that the aggregated financials from a given year/quarter apply to companies whose fiscal year/quarter ended in that year/quarter. Aggregated financials are calculated only for listed companies reported on quarterly basis to assert maximum consistency between quarterly and yearly figures.
Seasonal adjustment
Seasonal adjustment is an econometric procedure consisting of elimination of seasonal deviations that impair the effectiveness of econometric modeling. This statistical procedure is based on appropriate, specialized econometric tools (the Tramo/Seats method). The software applied performs seasonal adjustment according to the Indian calendar (e.g. public and religious holidays, etc.), to set off the impact of differences in the number of working days in particular quarters. Forecasts of financial parameters in the given sectors are derived based on forecasts of deseasonalised trend. The accuracy of the seasonal adjustment procedure is additionally supported by verification of key statistical tests, inclusion of incidental factors and drastic leaps in production volume, as well as testing the model.
Seasonal deviations
Seasonal deviations are obtained by using the Tramo/Seats econometric procedure. A seasonal deviation shows the average deviation of the value of revenue at a given quarter from the long term trend. Seasonal variation informs us about an additional changeability associated with a particular season of the year, which is a result of temporarily increased or decreased revenue. Skilful assessment of seasonal deviation may be one of the advantages of a firm, which will be able to assess the level of revenue in a given quarter, that in turn will result in better production planning. However, a bad assessment of seasonal changes may be a source of additional risk. The graph of seasonal deviation for the period shows deviation from the long term trend in a given quarter (quarterly values are arranged chronologically in years i.e. January '98, '99 etc.), which allows for precise forecasting of deviation in the analyzed quarter. In the above materials we can see two methods of presenting seasonality. The first is the additive one, when the revenues are decomposed as a sum of long term trend and nominal value seasonal deviations. The second way of presenting seasonality is the multiplicative one, where seasonal deviations are calculated as the percentage deviations from the long term trend (in that case a deviation of 103 means a deviation of 3% from the value of the trend, and e.g. 98 a deviation of -2%).
Forecasting models
Forecasting models used in EconTrends have a hierarchical structure. The first layer consists of models that transmit behavior of macroeconomic variables like nominal GDP growth, increases in prices to the behaviors of financial parameters like net sales per company and EBITDA margin in all analyzed economic divisions. EBITDA margin should be understood as earnings before interest, taxes, amortisation and depreciation. The next and last layer of models translates the behavior of the above parameters in economic divisions into the groups within them. The econometric models that are used in respective layers have a linear structure and belong to a well known group of ADL (Autoregressive Distributed Lags) models. The long term relation between GDP growth and growth of sales in a given sector (called implied long term growth) is also developed on the ground of these models.
-44-
Risk-profitability maps
Risk-profitability maps show the location of sectors depending on the value of profitability and risk they achieve. Sectors singled out by being encircled by a red ring are most useful efficient for investors, due to the relatively highest return at the lowest variability of profit (relatively high value of the Sharps index). On the basis of the coordinate values of efficient sectors, the preferences of investors on the market are shown by a grey dotted line visible on the graphs this is a level line of the linear function of utility for investors (Investors Utility Function). The level line shows preferences of the majority of investors with regard to achieved profitability at a given risk. Sectors, which are placed above the linear function of usefulness are preferred by investors due to the possibility of achieving a high profitability, at a particular level of risk. Sectors lying below the level line are not as attractive for investors, due to the relatively high variability in profit as against their profitability.
The forces map The forces map shows decompositions of the profitability index into particular driving forces. The idea of the strengths map is to show the effect of particular variables on the dynamics of profit both in current and forecasted situation. Concentration measures
Several concentration measures are used to examine the degree of the market power concentration within the analyzed sectors.
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index Several concentration measures (known as to examine the degree of size of firms power concentration The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index are used HHI) is a measure of the the market in relationship to the within the analyzed sectors. The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (known It is defined as the of the the industry and an indicator of the amount of competition among them.as HHI), is a measure sum of size of firms of the market shares of each individual firm: ie the average of competition among by market squares in relationship to the industry and an indicator of the amountmarket share, weighted them. It is defined as the it can the squares to 10,000 moving from each large amount ie the small firms to a share. As such,sum of range from 0of the market shares of a veryindividual firm: of very average market share, weighted by market share. As such, it can range from 0 generally moving a loss of market single monopolistic producer. Decreases in the Herfindahl index to 10,000 indicate from a very large amount of an increase in competition, whereas increases imply the Decreases in the Herfindahl index power and very small firms to a single monopolistic producer. opposite. generally indicate a loss of market power and an increase in competition, whereas increases imply the Lorenz Curve opposite. The Lorenz curve in turn, is a graph showing the proportion of the distribution assumed by The Lorenz curve in turn, is a graph showing the proportion of the distribution assumed by the bottom the bottom % market share values. It is used to represent market shares distribution, where it shows % market share values. It is used to represent market shares distribution, where it shows for the for the bottom x% of companies in the sector, what percentage y% of the market share they have. bottom x% of companies in the sector, what percentage y% of the market share they have. The The percentage of companies is plotted on the x-axis, the percentage of market share on the y-axis. percentage of companies is plotted on the x-axis, the percentage of market share on the y-axis. It is It is considered it to be a measure of inequality of the market shares within the given sector. The Gini considered it to be a measure of inequality of the market shares within the given sector. coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion in the market shares defined as the field between the Gini coefficient diagonal and the Lorentz curve. It is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1. A low Gini The Gini coefficient more equal market shares, while a high Gini coefficient indicates more unequal coefficient indicates is a measure of statistical dispersion in the market shares defined as the field between the corresponds to Lorentz curve. (all defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1. A distribution. 0diagonal and the perfect equality It is companies having exactly the same market share) low 1 coefficient to perfect inequality (where one monopolist has all the market share, more and Ginicorresponds indicates more equal market shares, while a high Gini coefficient indicates while unequal distribution. 0 corresponds the market). It is worth noting that exactly the same market everyone else has zero share in to perfect equality (all companies havingconcentrations measures share) and 1 corresponds to perfect inequality (where one monopolist sector consists of a only few presented above may be of limited use if the dataset for an analyzed has all the market share, while everyone else has zero share in the are calculated for listed and non-listed companies reporting on companies. Concentration measuresmarket). yearly basis. It is worth noting that concentrations measures presented above may be of limited use if the dataset for an analyzed sector consists of a only few companies. Y/Y Increase (Q/Q Increase), Y/Y Dynamics (Q/Q dynamics)
Y/Y Increase (Q/Q Increase), Y/Y Dynamics (Q/Q dynamics). Increases are calculated as absolute differences with respect to the preceding year (Y/Y) or preceding quarter (Q/Q). Dynamics are calculated as relative [%] differences with respect to the preceding year (Y/Y) or preceding quarter (Q/Q).
Forecasts
Forecasts presented in EconTrends for India relate to a period of two quarters ahead in relation to the end of the time period for which statistical data are available.
-45-
The business cycle The business cycle shows fluctuations of business activity for a given sector around a long-term trend representing the potential level of production for the sector. Positive values of the business cycle indicate a possibility of price dynamics increase pressure, increase of employment or rebound in investments, since the capacity utilization ratio remains currently high. Negative values of the business cycle indicate a possibility of price dynamics decrease pressure, decrease of employment or deterioration in investment activity, since the capacity utilization ratio remains relatively weak. The long-term trend
The long-term trend indicates so-called potential level of production for a given sector i.e. a level at which there is no significant tension for a rise/fall in price dynamics and employment within the sector. Distributions of Financials Distributions of Financials present critical values of the distributions of various financials in the analyzed sector. The presented critical values represent quartiles of the empirical distribution i.e. they are calculated for 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the total population of companies from the given sector in a given year. These distributions make possible easy comparison of an analyzed company to other companies in the sector, looking at it from various financial angles.
DuPont Pyramid
DuPont Pyramid is a very useful tool to decompose Return on Equity (ROA) into various ratios like: Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Sales (ROS) and Total Assets Turnover (TAT). It enables easy drawing of conclusions about the efficiency of an analyzed company in various areas of its activity.
Market multiples (P/E, P/BV)
Market multipliers (P/E, P/BV) - are widely used for the valuation purposes. Price to Earnings (P/E) is calculated by dividing closury company's capitalisation in the quarter after analysed quarter by the earnings (net profits) from the last audited year. For the calculation of Price to Book Value (P/BV) the ending year book value is taken.
Betas and Required Rates of Return
Betas and Required Rates of Return - are calculated for listed companies under CAPM model.
L =
U =
Cov (R i , R M Var (R M )
- Leveraged Beta,
L
1 + (1
Ri = R f + (RM R f )
)D
E
- Unleveraged Beta, - Required Rate of Return, where:
Ri
R i
- rate of return from investments in shares of an analysed company, - required (by investors) rate of return from investments in the shares of an analysed company; i.e. the expected rate of return w hen the market stays in equilibrium under CAPM assumptions, - rate of return of a stock market index (BSESN, NSEI), - expected rate of return of the stock market index (BSESN, NSEI), - risk-free rate of return (Yield of 364-days Treasury Bills) - debt to equity ratio, - effective tax rate.
RM
R M
D E
Liquidity
Liquidity (of public company) - ranked accordingly to the averaged daily shares' turnover from the last year
-46-

Utf8&#39;&#39;Food Manufacturing (311) - Q4, 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Utf8&#39;&#39;Food Manufacturing (311) - Q4, 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

T r e n d s

ISIEmergingMarketsPDF in-iimlsingh from 59.165.151.3 on 2012-07-07 07:40:55 EDT. DownloadPDF.

Please address all comments and enquiries to: info-in@securities.com

Food M anufac turing

Food M anufac turing

Only the classes marked by an arrow are covered by EconTrends reports.

Food M anufac turing

Q2 2011 116.8 107.7 108.9 109.6 44.74

Q3 2011 116.1 106.9 109.2 109.7 45.76

Q4 2011 114.2 106.1 108.4 106.7 51.01

Q1 2012 114.8 106.5 107.2 106.5 50.31

Q2 2012 115.0 106.8 107.0 106.3 53.05

Nominal GDP Growth

120 115 110 105

Inflation (CPI) eop

Inflation (PPI) eop

Food M anufac turing

Analysis of Investment Attractiveness

Driving Forces of Attractiveness

"+" "-" "o"

Net revenue per company - Y/Y dynamics

35% 30% 25% 20% 15%

Net revenue per company Y/Y dynamics

Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics

Food M anufac turing

EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics

EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics

Period EBITDA Margin - Y/Y dynamics Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics

Profitability index - Y/Y dynamics

Food M anufac turing

risk - profitability map (current situation)

0.0 0.0 -0.5

Risk - Profitability Map (current situation) Zoom

0.00 0.00 -0.10

All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function

Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing

Food M anufac turing

Risk - Profitability Map (forecasted situation)

risk - profitability map (forecasted situation)

Risk - Profitability Map (forecasted situation) Zoom

All sectors classes belonging to selected division Investors' utility function

Most efficient sectors Selected sector (Group): Food Manufacturing

Food M anufac turing

Ris e of long-term trend in net revenue per c ompany

Period Net revenue per company

Long-term trend in net revenue per company

Net Revenues per company [mn INR]

Longterm trend in net sales per company [mn INR]

Forecast of sector's long run growth

Business cycle in net revenue per company

Pressure for fall of

Ju n08 Se p08 D ec -0 8 M ar -0 9 Ju n09 Se p09 D ec -0 9 M ar -1 0 Ju n10 Se p10 D ec -1 0 M ar -1 1 Ju n11 Se p11 D ec -1 1 M ar -1 2

Period Negative part of business cycle Positive part of business cycle

Food M anufac turing

Seasonality in Revenues. Seasonal Adjusted Revenues

250 200 150 100 Seasonality (additive deviation)

3 000 2 500 [mn INR] 2 000

50 1 500 0 1 000 500 0

-50 -100 -150

Seasonality (per quarter) in net revenue per company

s eas onal deviation prevails in Q 2 negative s eas onal deviation

Food M anufac turing

Concentration in the Sector

Utf8''Food Manufacturing (311) - Q4, 2011

Utf8''Food Manufacturing (311) - Q4, 2011