Capital Structure- Debt Equity Ratio of Tesco Morrisons and Sainsbury

This document provides an analysis of the capital structure and debt equity ratio of Tesco, Morrisons, and Sainsbury. It explores the concept of capital structure, discusses the types of capital structure, and explains the debt equity ratio. The document also includes a literature review on the topic, research questions, and future perspectives on capital structure.

Capital Structure- Debt
Equity Ratio of Tesco
Morrisons and Sainsbury

Contents
Contents...........................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
Types of Capital Structure:..........................................................................................................3
Debt / Equity Ratio:.....................................................................................................................3
Literature review..............................................................................................................................6
Methodology..................................................................................................................................11
Calculation of all ratios..............................................................................................................11
Research questions.....................................................................................................................17
Analysis of questions and three consecutive years of data analysis..........................................17
Results of Analysis....................................................................................................................23
Alternative research...................................................................................................................28
Future perspective on Capital structure.....................................................................................30
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................31
References......................................................................................................................................34

INTRODUCTION
Background
Capital structure is the mixture of debt and equity that a company used to finance its activity. Equity
include equity share, preferred share, retained earnings and other long term debt while debt include
bonds and loan. It includes the way a company funds its operations and growth. Debt is external
source of the company and it is due to the money lender with interest. Equity is owner's own capital
and is not burden for the company. By issuing equity, firm get investment by giving ownership to
investor in the company without the need to payback (Abdulla, 2017).
Types of Capital Structure:
Equity Capital: Equity capital is shareholders own capital and include equity share, preference
share, retained earning etc. These fund increase the creditworthiness of the firm and does not create
burden of interest on firm as the firm is not bound to give them dividends on shares. The cost of
these funds are low as compare to debt funds. Equity shareholders get dividend for their investment
and also get ownership in the business.
Debt Capital: Debt funds are outsider's fund as these include loan and bonds. The cost of these funds
are high and it decrease the creditworthiness of the firm. They are liability for the firm and create
burden of interest on the firm. Debt capital holders cannot become owner of the company, they are
just creditor for the company and get interest for their investment. They are preference for the
company as they get interest before the shareholders.
Debt / Equity Ratio:
It is the financial ratio that show proportion of debt and equity used to fund company's operation and
growth. Calculation is done by dividing company liability with equity (An, Li and Yu, 2016). The
components needed for calculation are financial statement and balance sheet of the company. The
calculation is done on market value of both equity and capital. The debt includes only long term
debt to calculate financial leverage of the company. This ratio measures the firm's debt to the value
of its assets. The reason behind this is to know that to what extent a company is taking debt to
leverage of assets. Higher debt / equity ratio indicates higher risk as it shows that company is
financing its growth with debt capital. If the company is using debt to finance growth and could
generate profit than it has without that finance. If the leverage increases more profit than the cost or
interest than shareholders would get benefit. But if the cost is more than the profit than it leads to
decrease the value of shares. The cost of debt is depending on the market conditions. The economist
refers all the liabilities as debt and addition of equity and liabilities are equals to total value of

assets. Hence it an accounting identity. It is calculated by previous year data and used to assess the
financial soundness of the firm.
About companies
Morrison’s is the fourth largest retail supermarkets in United Kingdom. It is public limited
company. This company is founded by William Morrison and founded in 1899. Headquarters in
Bradford, England, UK. Till 2020 there are 494 stores across Wales, England and Scotland. Number
of employees work in this company is 110000. Morrison start with butter and egg stall in Rawson
Market in England. This company is a part of FTSE 100 Index on London Stock Exchange.
Recently, in last summer Amazon tie-up a wholesale deal with Morrison supermarket. Current
operations in this company is store format, online retail and home delivery service. Slogan of
Morrison is 'Morrison’s Make it' to create brand heritage with new logo. Main business of this
company is offering grocery and fresh food. This company offers products and manufacture food
like World foods, Nutmeg clothing, meat, fish, bakery and flowers.
Sainsbury's is the second largest retail supermarket in the United Kingdom. This company is
founded by John James Sainsbury in year 1869 in Holborn, London, United Kingdom. It is public
limited company. Headquarters in London, England, UK. As of March 2019, there are 1428 shops
across London. Holding company of Sainsbury is Sainsbury's Supermarkets, Sainsbury's Bank and
Sainsbury's Argos. The revenue of the company is 2900.7 crore in 2019. number of employees in
this organisation is 116400. Share price of Sainsbury's is 244 and is part of FTSE 100 Index on
London stock exchange. The purpose of Asda and Sainsbury's is to merge their company but due to
increase in price, the Competition and Markets Authority not allowed them to merge (Ardalan,
2017). In Novemeber 2020, company stated to close their supermarket and the 3500 job were at risk.
Some of the Sainsbury's supermarket selling fuel, operates cafe, local market and internet shopping.
Aim - “To investigate the impact of capital structure on firm's profitability in the context of retail
sector – A study on Tesco, Morrisons and Sainsbury.”
Objectives –
 To analyse the concept of capital structure of the organization.
 To evaluate the factors that affects capital structure of the companies.
 To evaluate the ways to attain optimum capital structure of the business.
 To analyse the interrelationship between capital structure and profitability of the
organization.
Research Questions:
 What is the concept of capital structure of the firm?
 What are the factors affecting capital structure of organization?

 What are the ways to attain optimum capital structure of the business?
 What is the interrelationship between profitability and capital structure of the organization?

Literature review
Modigliani and Miller performed an innovative study regarding theories of capital structure,
however suggested that perhaps the it was the concept that the firm’s capital structure has little to do
with the company's value throughout the entire economy (Armenter and Hnatkovska, 2017).
Scholars have extensively researched the issue of the firm’s capital structure. The trade-off
hypothesis was suggested by Robichek and others. If businesses determine the capital structure,
potential tax evasion impact and the liability insolvency cost should be weighed. The agency's
expense hypothesis was suggested by Jesen and Mecklingas it divides the expense of equity
agencies, which are induced by improprieties between board and stakeholders, between two firms
and the expense of a loan agency which is induced by improprieties between borrowers and
stakeholders. In its first behaviour of the building of assets, Ross introduced asymmetric details.
Ross recommended that individuals had internal knowledge about potential business incomes and
investment costs, while analysts are not aware of the scheme of rewards for management because
then stakeholders can determine the company's stock valuation only implicitly by means from the
management. The organizational debt ratio or arrangement of asset-liability seems to be a signalling
device that transmits internal market knowledge. The risk of bankruptcy is adjusted with the
performance of the service and positively linked to the equity size, the higher indebtedness ratio is
considered an indication of great quality by foreign buyers, The company's worth and the debt share
are compared positively. The priority funding hypothesis was suggested, assuming that equity
investment would communicate unfavourable market knowledge and that foreign financing would
pay for different expenses in greater part. Companies are typically funded by international finance,
debt finance and financing decision. Giannetti argued that perhaps the working capital of firms in
some developing countries is influenced by another element at business level, mostly in light of the
business's effect on the financial performance. They claim that the key considerations impacting the
financial organizational culture are the valuation including its company's properties, the scale as
well as the rate of tax towards non-debt. As per Frank and Goyal, medium corporate leverage, book
capital requirements, debt protection capacity, productivity, dividend payments, asset regression
coefficients, as well as the fixed influence of a firm or management are all factors influencing the
corporation's leverage (Bandyopadhyay and Barua, 2016).
Their analysis in 2008 indicates that a strong link occurs between income, development as
well as other metrics and composition of resources again from viewpoint of company-level
parameters. From a business point of view, there are reciprocal effects between the level of
performance across commodity markets as well as the capital structure of various industries. In the
words they feel that debt protection potential (net assets / Total Assets Book), risk (point difference

throughout the operating income/total assets book) and corporate size are now the firm's
management variables which decide the framework of resources (logarithm of total sales). Tax rate
(annual effective tax rate), growth potential (assets ratio relative to the book value), revenue (total
assets proportion to income), liquidity (to existing assets ratio) and business indicator in dummy.
The Business's corporate-level factors include: MTB(asset valuation to purchase price ration),
profitability(((pre-tax benefit + interest)/total asset value book), size(total asset value ledger)
Logarithm, collateral value(collateral) dummy contingent dividend payments(or 1 special dividend
throughout the current year) as well as the fluctuating period and c changing fixed impact (Baum,
Caglayan and Rashid, 2017).
From the viewpoint of national impacts of the capital system, Korajczyk and Levy was using the
company's gross turnover, short-term inflation rates, maturity allocation as well as credit extensions
in order to calculate market stability. The adjustment of the market financial leverage is now in the
economic cyclical mode, which really is aligned with either the finance order principle; whereas in
the business cycle version that liquidity position is in line with commercial theory, also with
economically tightened company responsible for 10 percent of the random sample. It also argue that
in lots of countries the regulatory climate has a direct effect on the financial structure of a business.
In particular, key perspectives consider the impact on capital system directly and indirectly from the
organizational characteristics (financial sector structures) – bond production, creditors power
security, compliance perfection, stock control security, stock position ratio, financial speculation
rate, including GNP rate of increase (Bulathsinhalage and Pathirawasam, 2017). As per the
organization expense hypothesis, scientists have done a great deal of study from the viewpoint of the
effect of management share capital on financial performance, as well as the findings are not similar.
Negative associations can sometimes be substantially positive and could also appear in a U-shape.
This is the respective research literature. The relationship between controlling shares and
responsibilities as well as results demonstrated a detrimental relationship to the leverage ratio in the
managing shareholder, R&D, performance, interest rate risk and executive compensation. The debt
ratio is positively related. The effect of the corporate strategy on the organisational working capital
was analysed. The findings indicate that management, business governance, performance
outcomes, R&D as well as strategic equity have a significant negative relationship to the financial
leverage. A significant relationship mostly with financial leverage lies in the amount of capital
allocation. This has also been noticed that major shareholders and financial leverage of management
are U-shaped. It indicates that managers own just under 1% of securities and leverages would rose
as shareholdings go up, while managers hold many as 5%. The growth in management stakes would

limit corporate leverage. There are no important ties between management portfolios as well as the
leverage level while managers possess upwards of 1% but much less under 5%.
Cash compensation responsiveness, shares, shares, firing and allowance for stock awards and
choices available is significantly higher than the salary incentives and promotions. Pension funding
sensitivity In order to determine the exposure to compensation results, stocks as well as options,
from Core and Guay are being used and adjustments in managers' real assets are proportional to
changes in market linked assets (Chadha and Sharma, 2016). Frank and Goyal maintain that the
association between PPS and corps leverage is substantially negative, but also that manager equity
portfolios contribute to business leveraging to different degrees. Company profits influences
managers' propensity for risk by executive fund exposure to market and market income volatility
that indicate that the sensitivity of their investments is adversely linked to short-term leverage and
also that portfolios are affected by stock income. The sensitivity to short-term debt is strongly
correlated. They claim that the compensation success sensitivity (PPS) is highly negatively linked to
corporate leveraging however because of the interaction among PPS including individual firms'
bankruptcy costs. The effect wherein the management' equity ratio as well as the percentage of
government stocks are associated greatly with the financial leverage. The research also shows what
the development, size, debt-free tax security and productivity of the group are major factors
determining the financial performance of listed companies in UK. It has shown that coded business
administrators are responsible for adjusting the amount of debt capital to self-interest. Legal
personal shares have a limiting influence on top executives' freedom to adapt their economic
position in compliance with their own purpose, albeit at a high degree. Where the top business
seems to have a significant level of equity, shareholdings of the legal individual often have a
significant role to play in supporting the self-interest of managers as well as the rights of other
shareholders (Daskalakis, Balios and Dalla, 2017). Group authorities are responsible for focusing on
financial performance. Capital value and composition of capital are relational partnerships that
affect each other. Many books have explored the effect on manager compensation of the capital
system. Theories and observational research were taken by researchers. In particular, there is a
strong connection between the financial structure and also the management salaries, which is driven
by excessive borrowing costs that raise the company's insolvency costs, which contributes to
unfavourable rewards for managers. These research support the assertion that perhaps the capital
system impacts executive pay by its effect on the cost of financial distress of intellectual resources.
From such an executive salaries effect on the organisational structure, it has been shown by Meng
Science that the organisation is controlled by the compensation packages and the corporate balance
sheet. The endogenously linked considerations are primarily the viability and business of the group.

Structure of governance and appropriate development risk assessment expertise. Executive pay even
has an effect on the capitalistic system where there is board protection.
In short, there really is no research on the effect of executive pay on the domestic capital system but
mostly on the influence of the employment structure mostly on compensation packages, although
the interaction among employee pay and capital structures is discussed in current domestic and
international language. Effect is primarily upon on cash balance impacts of management equity
holdings, particularly domestic research barely affects the financial performance by the manager pay
structure. When a leadership defence exists, the management which strives to optimise the resources
about its own prefers a more restrictive financial performance, in order to escape the possibility of
default of intellectual capital. Between executive pay standard and financial leverage there seems to
be a strong negative association (Detthamrong, Chancharat and Vithessonthi, 2017). The
organisation has a governance defensive conduct where the monitoring of shareholders is
challenging or unregulated. Reducing the composition of the capital, instead, raises the amount of its
own wages and maximises its very own interest. The administration of state-owned corporations
seems to have a higher level of defence, relative to private firms. The annual pay is relatively
constant and is an appraisal and acknowledgment of the efforts of senior management over the year.
The holder of equity is a long-term reward relative to the yearly salary, encouraging management to
give greater attention to that same stock valuation of the company. If senior managers' shareholder
ratios are reasonably large, their priorities can to a degree align with investor objectives. Focus on
long-term growth and business success of the organisation. The annual compensation ensures that
executives earned both annual salaries as well as the securities pay their commitment to the success
of the company over a certain period and the stock often prevents short-term actions at the cost of
the potential growth. The salaries of coted bank managements are essentially the annual
compensation and bonuses for shareholding. Through both the literature analysis, it can be observed
that the key variables are focused on business size, debt assured power, non-debt tax cover,
profitability, prospects for growth, etc. as academic journals the factors that influence the financial
performance. There really is no literary knowledge on the effect on national capital system of
executive pay, but more about the influence on employee pay of capital systems, while recent
national and international literature examines the impacts of corporate governance mostly on
stakeholders ’ perception. Particularly the domestic discourse rarely includes the effect of the
management equity system on capital structure, even on the discount rate (Devos, Rahman and
Tsang, 2017). As businesses expand, so many more real assets are accumulated. For outside persons
to provide worth better than intangible assets, measurable properties, such as land, plant and
machinery, including the acquisition's goodwill value, which minimise the estimated distress

expenses. In addition, where a substantial majority of the company's assets is observable, assets can
act as leverage, minimising the likelihood that the lender will incur the financial risk of that same
Agency (like risk shifting). In liquidation, properties can still hold more value. The higher the
amount of real assets mostly on budget (fixed assets split by total assets). The borrowers need to be
more eager and the collateral must be more expensive to provide loans. Moreover, it is hard for
lenders to swap high risk assets with highly risky assets in terms of tangibility. A favourable
association among tangibility and equity is projected by lower estimated distress costs and less debt-
related organisation issues. Besides that, while lending from banking firms such concrete properties
may be guaranteed as leverage.

Methodology
In this research, secondary sources are used to collect the reliable data such as balance sheet, income
statement as well as cash flow statement (Di Pietro, Palacín Sánchez and Roldán, 2017). In order to
make research more effective and valuable some important other sources of information are also
used such as government journals, articles, academic books etc. which gives the clear understanding
about capital structure. For more authenticity about research researcher also implement the primary
sources of data collection in which 25 respondents from both companies were asked the same
questions which gives the results regarding their understanding about capital structure of Morrison’s
and Sainsbury.
Timeline.
Activity 1th
Wee
k
nd
2
Wee
k
rd
3
Wee
k
4th
Wee
k
th
5
Wee
k
6th
Wee
k
th
7
Wee
k
8th
Wee
k
th
9
Wee
k
th
10
Week
11t
h
W
ee
k
Selecting
the
research
topic
Literature
Review
Conducting
research
Methodolo
gy
Identified
factors

Preparing
Questionna
ire
Facts and
data are
collected
Analysed
the
collected
data
Rechecked
the
information
before
submitting.
Submit the
report.
Gantt chart.
Task Mode Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
Auto
Scheduled Formulation of topic 1 day Fri 12/6/19 Fri 12/6/19
Auto
Scheduled
Formulation of aims, objectives
and research questions 2 days Mon 12/9/19 Tue 12/10/19 1
Auto
Scheduled Research methodology 3 days Wed 12/11/19 Fri 12/13/19 2
Auto
Scheduled Data collection 5 days Mon 12/16/19 Fri 12/20/19 2,3

Auto
Scheduled
Analysis and interpretation
of data 7 days Mon 12/23/19 Tue 12/31/19 4
Auto
Scheduled
Draw conclusion and
recommendation 1 day Wed 1/1/20 Wed 1/1/20 5
Auto
Scheduled Draw reflection 2 days Thu 1/2/20 Fri 1/3/20 6
Auto
Scheduled End of project 1 day Mon 1/6/20 Mon 1/6/20 7

Calculation of all ratios
Profitability Ratio:
Gross profit ratio: Gross profit / net
sales x 100
Sainsbury Morrison’s
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Gross profit 2452 2288 2016 554 652 629
Net sales 30154 29007 28993 18135 17735 17536
Gross profit ratio
8.131
591
7.887
751
6.953
403
3.054
866
3.676
346
3.586
907
Net profit ratio: Net profit / net sales x
100
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Net profit 156 186 309 152 233 348
Net sales 30154 29007 28993 18135 17735 17536
Net profit ratio
0.517
344
0.641
225
1.065
774
0.838
158
1.313
786
1.984
489
Operating profit ratio: Operating profit
/ net sales x 100
Sainsbury Morrison
1

2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Operating profit 518 601 650 439 432 421
Net sales 30154 29007 28993 18135 17735 17536
Operating profit ratio
1.717
848
2.071
914
2.241
92
2.420
733
2.435
861
2.400
776
Efficiency Ratio:
Stock Turnover ratio: cost of goods sold /
average Inventory
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
COGS 27938 26719 27000 17262 17083 17536
Average stock 1810 1929 1732 686 713 660
Stock turnover ratio
15.43
536
13.85
122
15.58
891
25.16
327
23.95
933
26.56
97
Accounts receivable turnover ratio:
Sales/accounts receivable
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Sales 30154 29007 28993 18135 17735 17536
Accounts receivable 4104 4268 4762 247 344 353
Accounts receivable turnover ratio
7.347
466
6.796
392
6.088
408
73.42
105
51.55
523
49.67
705
Accounts payable turnover ratio:
Purcahse/accounts payable
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
2

Purchase 5600 7400 6010 190 204 254
Accounts payable 4420 4373 4275 2886 3070 3051
Accounts payable turnover ratio
1.266
968
1.692
202
1.405
848
0.065
835
0.066
45
0.083
251
Liquidity ratio
Current ratio: Current assets/current
liabilities
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Current assets 7857 7550 7582 1275 1340 1319
Current liabilities 10302 11849 12047 3080 3349 3396
Current ratio
0.762
667
0.637
185
0.629
368
0.413
961
0.400
119
0.388
398
Quick ratio: Quick assets/current
liabilities
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
Quick assets 6047 5621 5850 589 627 659
Current liabilities 10302 11849 12047 3080 3349 3396
Quick ratio
0.586
973
0.474
386
0.485
598
0.191
234
0.187
22
0.194
052
Investment ratio
Return on capital employed: EBIT
/Capital Employed*100
Sainsbury Morrison
2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020
3

EBIT 544 620 645 547 422 545
Capital employed 11699 16162 15890 7382 7317 7524
ROCE
4.649
97
3.836
159
4.059
157
7.409
916
5.767
391
7.243
488
Questionnaire
Question asked from Morrison staff members.
Do you know the capital structure of your company?
1. Yes 15
2. No 10
According to you which factors impact the capital structure of Morrison?
1. Profitability 9
2. Cost of Capital 8
3. Nature of Business 8
According to you what are the ways which can be used to attain the stable capital structure of
Morrison’s?
1. Dependence on Debts 10
2. Necessity of Equity 15
Do you believe that there is any interrelationship between profitability and capital structure of
the Morrison’s?
1. Yes 20
2. No 10
Are you satisfied with the ongoing capital structure of company?
1. Yes 17
2. No 8
Question asked from Sainsbury staff members.
Do you know the capital structure of your company?
1. Yes 17
2. No 8
According to you which factors impact the capital structure of Sainsbury?
4

1. Profitability 10
2. Cost of Capital 7
3. Nature of Business 8
According to you what are the ways which can be used to attain the stable capital structure of
Sainsbury?
1. Dependence on Debts 13
2. Necessity of Equity 12
Do you believe that there is any interrelationship between profitability and capital structure of
the Sainsbury?
1. Yes 18
2. No 7
Are you satisfied with the ongoing capital structure of company?
1. Yes 16
2. No 9
Research questions
Q1. Define the clear concepts of capital structure of each company?
Q2. Elaborate the major factors impacting the capital structure of every company?
Q3. Discuss the main methods to accomplish the capital structure of selected companies?
Q4. What are the essential points of interrelationship among profit structure and capital structure
of companies?
Analysis of questions and three consecutive years of data analysis
Sainsbury
Income Statement
2020 2019 2018
Fiscal Year Ends
3/31/202
0
3/31/201
9
3/31/201
8
Turnover 28993 29007 28456
Expenses 28343 28406 27938
EBITDA 1901 1882 1275
EBIT 645 620 544
5

Operating Profit
(reported) 650 601 518
Operating Profit
(adjusted)
Investment Income -29 4 12
Exceptional Items 0 19 5
Net Interest -366 -422 -126
Pre-tax Profit 255 202 409
Tax 103 16 100
Profit After Tax 152 186 309
Minority Interests
Profit For Financial
Year 129 168 291
Ordinary Dividends -270 -247 -235
Non-Equity Dividends
Retained Profit -141 -79 56
Per Share Data
Dividend per Share 11.2 10.2 9.7
Normalized EPS 5.8 6.79 12.54
Reported EPS 5.8 7.5 12.7
Interpretation: One of the three significant financial reports that used disclose the cash flow for a
sales transaction is a net income, with other two primary statements becoming the share price
and the balance sheet (Ghasemi and Ab Razak, 2016). Often known as the declaration of benefit
and loss or the statement of sales and cost, the statement of revenue reflects mainly over a given
time on the profits and expenditures of the business. On the basis of above income statement this
can be stated that net profit for year 2018 was of 309 which reduced and became of 152 Million
for next year 2020. This shows that their performance has been dropped for current year as
compared to year 2020. The reason behind this is because of less amount of income and higher
number of expenses.
6

Balance Sheet
2020 2019 2018
Fiscal Year Ends
3/31/202
0
3/31/201
9
3/31/201
8
Assets
Non-Current Assets
Intangible 1012 1043 1072
Tangible 13737 14186 9898
Investments 981 850 772
Other 4621 4374 2393
Total non-current assets 20351 20453 14135
Current Assets
Stock 1732 1929 1810
Debtors 4762 4268 4104
Cash and Securities 1055 1283 1933
Total current assets 7582 7550 7857
Total Assets 27937 28011 22001
Liabilities and Equity
Liabilities
Current 12047 11849 10302
Non-Current 8117 8380 4288
Total Liabilities 20164 20229 14590
Equity
Share Capital 2473 2457 2437
Reserves 4804 4829 4478
Shareholders’ Funds
Minorities
Total Equity 7773 7782 7411
Total Liabilities and Equity 27937 28011 22001
7

Interpretation: A balance sheet is a financial report that it was at a particular point in time records
the assets, liabilities and stock value of a corporation and provides a framework for calculating
return rates and assessing the cash position. This is an income report that offers a description of
what is owned and owed by a company, as well as the money paid by investors. In accordance of
above prepared balance sheet this can be stated that total assets of above company have been
dropped in an effective manner as in year 2019 this was of 28011 million which dropped and
became of 27937 million for year 2020. This is so because of less purchasing of assets during
current year 2020. While in the context of liabilities, this can be assessed that company’s total
liabilities are same as previous year it indicates that didn’t take too much amount of loan.
Cash Flow
2020 2019 2018
Fiscal Year Ends
3/31/202
0
3/31/201
9
3/31/201
8
Operating Activities 1482 1111 1437
Investment Returns &
Financing
Taxation -110 -68 -72
Investing Activities -426 -481 -470
Net Outflow/Inflow 946 562 895
Financing -1072 -1170 -244
Net Cash Increase 946 562 895
Foreign Exchange
Adjustments
Opening Balance 1120 1728 1077
Closing Balance 994 1120 1728
Investment Ratios
Cash Flow Per Share 55.55 42.25 56.18
CAPEX PS -26.4 -24.35 -28.85
8

Interpretation: The net amount of currency and cash assets that are passed into and out of a
company is cash flow. The ability of a corporation to build profits for investors is measured at
the most basic level by its capacity to achieve sufficient cash flow or, more precisely, optimize
long-term free cash flows (FCF). Positive cash flow reveals that the net reserves of a corporation
are growing, allowing it to repay obligations, reinvest in the company, return cash to
shareholders, pay costs and provide a hedge against potential financial difficulties. Profitable
acquisitions should be taken advantage of by businesses with high financial stability. By
avoiding the cost of financial difficulties, they even do well in recessions. On the basis of above
prepared cash flow statement this can be stated that there is negative cash flow in investing and
financing activities. While in the aspect of operating activities this can be inferred that there is
positive cash flow in all three years which is a positive aspect.
9

Morrison plc’s financial statements:
Income statement for three years:
2020 2019 2018
Fiscal Year Ends
1/31/202
0
1/31/201
9
1/31/201
8
Turnover 17536 17735 17262
Expenses 17081 17303 16823
EBITDA 1070 923 875
EBIT 545 422 457
Operating Profit
(reported) 455 432 439
Operating Profit
(adjusted)
Investment Income 1 1 2
Exceptional Items 66 -33 3
Net Interest -87 -97 -64
Pre-tax Profit 435 303 380
Tax 87 70 69
Profit After Tax 348 233 311
Minority Interests
Profit For Financial
Year 348 233 311
Ordinary Dividends -302 -289 -129
Non-Equity Dividends
Retained Profit 46 -56 182
Per Share Data
Dividend per Share 6.68 6.28 5.51
Normalized EPS 12.25 10.72 12.93
Reported EPS 14.44 9.67 13.03
10

Norm Discontinued
EPS
Investment Ratios
Profit Margin 0.03 0.02 0.02
DPS Growth 0.06 0.14 0.08
Dividend Cover 1.95 1.66 2.78
Norm EPS Growth 0.14 -0.17 -0.07
Reported EPS Growth 0.49 -0.26 0.01
Others
Market Cap at B/S Date 4375.81 5547.64 5229.68
Interpretation: On the basis of above income statement this can be stated that net profit for year
2019 was of 233 which increased and became of 348 Million for next year 2020. This shows that
their performance has been increased for current year as compared to year 2020. The reason
behind this is because of less amount of expenses and higher number of income.
Balance sheet for three years
2020 2019 2018
Fiscal Year Ends
1/31/202
0
1/31/201
9
1/31/201
8
Assets
Non-Current Assets
Intangible 381 404 428
Tangible 8089 8023 7997
Investments 39 47 53
Other 1089 813 705
Total non-current assets 9598 9287 9183
Current Assets
Stock 660 713 686
Debtors 353 344 247
11

Cash and Securities 305 261 327
Total current assets 1319 1340 1275
Total Assets 10920 10666 10462
Liabilities and Equity
Liabilities
Current 3396 3349 3080
Non-Current 2983 2992 3132
Total Liabilities 6379 6341 6212
Equity
Share Capital 471 454 434
Reserves 4070 3871 3816
Shareholders’ Funds
Minorities
Total Equity 4541 4325 4250
Total Liabilities and Equity 10920 10666 10462
Net Borrowings 2416 2424 2403
Investment Ratios
Net Tangible Asset Value Per
Share -129.94 181.23 161.86
ROCE 7.243 5.767 6.191
In accordance of above prepared balance sheet this can be stated that total assets of above
company have been increased in an effective manner as in year 2019 this was of 10666 million
which raised and became of 10920 million for year 2020. This is so because of less sales of
assets during current year 2020. While in the context of liabilities, this can be assessed that
company’s total liabilities are same as previous year it indicates that didn’t take too much
amount of loan.
Cash flow statement for three years:
2020 2019 2018
12

Fiscal Year Ends
1/31/202
0
1/31/201
9
1/31/201
8
Operating Activities 913 857 818
Investment Returns &
Financing
Taxation -87 -76 -74
Investing Activities -467 -431 -380
Net Outflow/Inflow 359 350 364
Financing -318 -413 -363
Net Cash Increase 359 350 364
Foreign Exchange
Adjustments
Opening Balance 264 327 326
Closing Balance 305 264 327
Investment Ratios
Cash Flow Per Share 34.29 32.41 31.16
CAPEX PS -21.17 -19 -20.94
On the basis of above prepared cash flow statement this can be stated that there is negative cash
flow in investing and financing activities. While in the aspect of operating activities this can be
inferred that there is positive cash flow in all three years which is a positive aspect.
Results of Analysis
Gross profit ratio: Gross profit margin is a measure used by economists to determine the
sources and uses of cash by measuring the cash flows over from retail sales after deducting the
cost of goods sold (COGS). Gross profit margin is often alluded to it as the gross margin ratio
and is often expressed in percentage of revenue. On the basis of above done ratio this can be
inferred that gross margin in year 2019 was of 7.88% which reduced and became of 6.95%. This
shows that company failed to manage their cost of goods sold lower. As well as this is the main
reason due to which gross margin of company has been dropped in an effective manner. On the
13

other hands, in terms of Morrison company’s aspect this can be stated that their ratio is of 3.67%
for year 2019 which remained same for next year 2020 at 3.62%. Though in comparative manner
their performance is poor which needs to be increase so that they can be beat their competitors.
Net profit ratio: As a proportion of sales, the net profit margin is proportional with how much
net gain or profit is produced. Net profit margin is the percentage of a corporation or industry
segment's net income to sales. Usually, net profit is calculated as a percentage but can be
interpreted in matrix value as well. The net profit margin indicates how much of every dollar of
sales received by a corporation turns into profit. In terms of such ratio this can be stated that in
year 2019, this was of 1.56% which reduced and became of 1.51% for next year 2020. This is so
because of less amount of net margin for year 2020 compared to year 2019. In order to increase
their financial performance, they need to increase their net profit higher as much as possible.
While in the context of above ratio this can be stated that Morrison has net margin of 1.31% and
1.98% for both year 2019-20. Similar to above ratio this company’s ratio is poor compared to
above Sainsbury’s plc. The reason behind this is because of less amount of net profit for both
years compared to above mentioned company.
Operating profit ratio: Operating margin determines how much profit a firm earns from a
revenue dollar after accounting for variable manufacturing expenses, such as labour or materials,
and before paying debt or tax On the basis of above computed ratio of operating profit margin
this can be stated that their operating margin has been dropped in an effective manner compared
to past year. This is so because of higher amount of cost of sales for year 2020 compared to year
2019.
In the comparative manner this can be stated that above company is able to produce effective
amount of operating margin for both years which is of 2.43% and 2.97% for both year 2019 &
2020. This shows that they effectively managed their operating profit in less amount of time and
cost as well.
Stock turnover ratio: Stock turnover is a ratio representing how many times over a given
timeframe a firm has sold and position update. In order to measure the days, it takes to sell the
product on hand, a business will then split the days in the cycle by the cash conversion rule.
Inventory turnover measurement will help organizations make smarter choices on pricing,
production, marketing and buying fresh inventory. In accordance of above measured ratio this
can be stated that company’s performance in terms of managing the inventories has been
14

enhanced in an effective manner in year 2020. As in year 2019, company’s ratio was of 13.85%
which increased and became of 15.58% this shows that company effectively managed their stock
in order to convert them into finished goods. In comparative manner this can be stated that above
company failed to manage effective amount of stock during both years compared to Sainsbury.
This is so because of higher cost of sales as well as long amount of time period to convert into
finished goods during both years.
Accounts receivable turnover ratio: The turnover ratio of receivables is an accounting method
used to calculate the success of a company in obtaining its accounts receivable or amount given
by consumers. The ratio demonstrates how efficiently a firm uses and handles the credit that it
provides to consumers and how easily it receives or pays for short-term debt. The turnover ratio
of receivables is also known as the accounts receivable ratio of transactions. In accordance of
above measured ratio this can be stated that company’s performance in terms of managing the
debtors has been dropped in an effective manner in year 2020. As in year 2019, company’s ratio
was of 46.04 times which reduced and became of 35.74 times, this shows that company
effectively managed their debts in order to collect their debts. In comparative manner this can be
stated that their efficiency to recover debt from their debtors is much better than Sainsbury plc
for both years. As well as Morrison plc’s efficiency to recover their debts has been dropped by a
little margin for year 2020 compared to year 2019.
Accounts payable turnover ratio: A short-term liquidity indicator used to calculate the rate
where a business pays off its vendors is the account payable turnover ratio. Accounts payable
churn indicates how many days throughout a period a business paid off its way of supporting.
Accounts payable are brief debt owed to the customers and lenders by a corporation. The paid
turnover ratio of accounting demonstrates how successful a company is at paying off its vendors
and brief liabilities. In accordance of above measured ratio this can be stated that company failed
to pay their debts in an effective way in year 2019 compared to year 2020. This is so because in
year 2019, their ratio was of 0.016 which increased and became of 1.40. It indicates that they
have managed their creditors in more effective manner in year 2020 and paid their creditors in
less amount of time. In comparative manner this can be stated that Morrison plc is not able to
pay their creditors in an effective manner compared to Sainsbury. It is so because Morrison’s
ratio is of 0.066 and 0.083 for both year 2019 & 2020. The reason of such poor performance is
because of higher amount of net purchase which has been done on credit basis.
15

Current ratio: The current ratio is a financial ratio which assesses the liquidity of a business to
charge brief or due responsibilities in one year. It shows investors and analysts how a business
achieves the current value of assets to meet its current debt obligations. In terms of such ratio,
this can be stated that ideal current ratio should be of 2:1 times while above company failed to
manage such ideal form in both years. This is so because in year 2019, it was of 0.64 times
which reduced and became of 0.63 times. The rationale behind this was because of more amount
of current liabilities instead of current assets. Similar to above company’s this company’s
performance is also poor and lower than ideal ratio. As in year 2019, their ratio was of 0.40
which reduced and became of 0.39 times for year 2020. This indicates that they failed to keep
their short term expenses lower as much as possible compared to Sainsbury.
Quick ratio: The fast ratio is an indication of the short-term liquidity situation of a firm which
tests the willingness of a company with the most cash reserves to satisfy its short-term
commitments. It shows the willingness of the company to use its near-cash reserves (assets that
can be easily turned to cash) directly to pay off its financial obligations, it is often referred to as
the acid test ratio. An acid test is a fast test developed, thus the name, to yield immediate results.
This ratio is also same to above mentioned liquidity ratio. In terms of above company’s ratio this
can be inferred that they failed to manage ideal form of quick ratio which is of 1.5:1 times. In
year 2019 this was of 0.47 times which increased by a little margin and became of 0.48 times for
next year 2020. The reason is same as previous year which is because higher amount of current
liabilities. While in comparative manner this can be stated that Morrison plc has less amount of
ratio which is less than Sainsbury. This is so because of less amount of current assets compared
to current liabilities. In such aspect above company needs to keep their current assets higher as
much as possible so that they can make payment of their short term expenses.
ROCE: Return on capital invested (ROCE) is a financial ratio that can be used in determining a
business's viability and capital performance. In other terms, the ratio will help you explain how
much a business is producing income from its resources.
The ROCE ratio is another of the profitability ratios that can be used when assessing a business
for acquisition by financial analysts, customers, and prospective buyers. In the context of above
ratio this can be stated that in year 2019 this was of 0.012 which increased and became of 0.016
for year 2020. It is so because of more number of total assets in year 2019 compared to year
16

2020. Though value of ratio is too lower which need to be increase for upcoming year so that
they can beat their competitors.
Efficiency of Both companies
Morrison’s
Global markets are steadily lifting itself out of recession's predictions of doom. Although
they seek to rebound, most companies throughout the UK results showed reasonable resilience.
Due to the negative pressure exerted by the administration's introduction of rigorous government
spending, business investment and trust have been relatively poor. The very worst results of the
downturn have been used in the past few years, so corporations would have to modify and build
strategies that would concentrate on maintaining current customers while also gaining new
clients. Throughout the middle of any of the massive company’s failure, WM Morrison
Supermarkets plc (pursuant to section simply Morrison) was a big success which decided to keep
successful while the rivals and corporations in general suffered a lot. Evaluating Sainsbury's
quarterly earnings towards Morrison, Sainsbury surpasses the other distributors in respect of
strong inventory management and fast consumer debt repayment. Sainsbury's current liabilities,
though, are fewer than Morrison so they can strive to exercise their negotiation power entirely
towards distributors. Some other benefit of Sainsbury resides in use of the non-current resources
and working capital, as accounting reports including such revenue to capital expenditures,
revenue to non-current resources show that the extended business structure of Sainsbury has
fought tirelessly and led to operating margins. The benefit ratio, however, shows Sainsbury's
vulnerability. Financial performance is of considerable importance in the retail industry, which
influences the patent portfolio and potential direction of companies. While Sainsbury's revenue
rises across its gross profit margin, Morrison sales margin cannot match. It is mainly due to both
the transition in policy toward higher and lower by the company. The "basics" categories have
been extended to 650 items and carried out in so many stores, as announced by Investors
Sainsbury. In reality, Sainsbury has prospective liquidity issue. Sainsbury's financial expenses
are increasing as it raises interest payments to grow throughout long-term operations, such as
space development and joint venture investment. Especially in comparison to Morrison,
Sainsbury's ROE as well as EPS are poor, mostly caused only by marketing policy and estate
strategic partnership losses. Depending according to the above review, they consider that
Sainsbury holds a strategic role throughout the Retail industry as just a major retailer. In pursuit
17

of management planning, in reaction to effect on the financial environment as well as the
preferences of consumers, Sainsbury implements a low cost strategy by introducing promotional
campaigns and marketing its own that certain, particularly the "bare essentials" collection. It
emphasizes on meeting the needs of consumers for eating healthy and growing its accessibility
through the creation of different networks. Sainsbury's historical statistics show that perhaps the
industry is profitable and its performance would be on an increasing trajectory in addition to
investing; thus, they should keep an upbeat analysis of the customer future of the company. In
addition, its asset value represents the consumer trend, despite high non-current resources,
excellently capital investment including low cash levels due to rapid capital investment through
market entry. And the pattern of the transfer of assets & liabilities from 2018 to 2020 is
representative of the growth and advancement of Sainsbury.
Sainsbury:
In order to penetrate the UK market, this report analyses the success of Sainsbury and
provides suggestions on the takeover of the firm by Morrison. It is proposed that we must make a
bid for Sainsbury, depending on the aforementioned results. With a 16 percent market share in
2009, Sainsbury is the third biggest supermarket in the UK. Its great competitive edge is focused
on diversified target markets, long-established market awareness, a wide customer base and a
large network of networks. Sainsbury pursues a low price approach to adapt with the latest
supermarket market pattern and worries about the evolving lifestyle and preferences of
consumers. Sainsbury is on the growth route, able to deal with its rivals. Evaluating Sainsbury
against Morrison, we find that effective financial performance and adequate use of funds are the
financial strength of Sainsbury. Its vulnerability lies in the issue of sustainability and possible
liquidity. The key factor underlying low profit and big loans needed by the development plan is
the reasonable price policy, which results in a potential liquidity crisis. We assume, nevertheless,
that Sainsbury's economic decline is appropriate and can be overcome. We forecast that
Sainsbury's net profit would rise gradually because of its upward trajectory in productivity and
the appeal of the low price policy. Actually, the funding crisis is not capable of posing a danger
to the business and can be strengthened when Sainsbury finishes growth and generates great
benefit by buying back debt and improving the capital structure. In addition, once the transaction
is completed, Morrison can supply money for the growth of Sainsbury and that we can profit
from the strategic advantage of Sainsbury.
18

Alternative research
In order to make research more reliable and understandable for the user a better method
such as cost accounting of both companies rather than ratio analysis. This method will clearly
define the actual cost for both companies included in different operations and total income
received on these operations within an accounting year. The method of cost analysis is beneficial
in determining the overall performances of company as well as also define how much customers
and employees are satisfied with companies’ policies and services.
Cost accounting is indeed a component of management accounting whereby, through
examining at all costs inside the production process, measures the total cost involved with
creating a product or delivering a service. It is conducted for the purpose of planning of the
expenditure and study of profitability. In deciding which goods, divisions or facilities are much
more competitive but which some prove helpful, the knowledge obtained by this method is
important for employees. Cost accounting requires fixed and variable costs being calculated.
Operating costs are expenditures that, irrespective of the output volume, recur every month.
Leasing, depreciation, cost of borrowing and rent expenditures are examples. Variable expenses
are incurred, like materials, labour, including upfront costs, that vary significantly with increases
in the composition of production. The more quantities of a device produced, more and more
price there has been involved with the labour and materials which goes into manufacturing the
goods, when these expenses are connected to manufacturing. To assess the equivalence point, but
instead eventually the benefit, both fixed including variable costs involved with a product line.
The BEP describes the point where profits cover the expenses. While using the break-even point
as that of the reference point towards profit calculation, profit is calculated. Profit is all revenue
above the breakeven stage. It is known as cost-volume-benefit assessment to calculate the
amount of units which need to be produced to hit the breakeven point but instead generate profit.
There have been some additional advantages of this methods which support the internal manager
of companies to make better prediction of cost for the upcoming time. The same are discussed
below:
Proper classification of expenses: Cost is a somewhat common concept that requires to also be
categorized in order to see it used further. The tracking and identification of these costs is
involved in financial reporting. Customer service, actual expenses, factory expenses, sale ends up
19

costing, etc., are some expenses. Such identification assists the organisation to monitor the
expenses of any such programs and operations and to assess their productivity. In improving
productivity, this also improves with the support of this method in Morrison and Sainsbury.
Cost controls: An successful organization focuses on maintaining product costs, overhead costs,
and numerous other operating costs. Accounting for expenses helps them to do everything that
can support to reduce the overall cost of companies on different operations. For instance, in order
to achieve full productivity in their managing inventory, the EOQ process, which would be an
accounting method, can be implemented. Similarly, their efficacy can also be enhanced by
evaluating employment costs and equipment efficiency. In order to achieve cost efficiency,
standard costing often categorizes overhead costs into fixed, adjustable or manageable,
unpredictable.
Price determinations: The fundamental distinction regarding fixed and variable costs is
rendered by costing system. It was then used against administration to decide the cost of products
as per the quality of the object. This enables organisations to select the most effective price, not
really too strong and not even that small, for the good or service. For instance, consider a
situation where the economy is suffering from depression, to withstand these conditions, the
entrepreneur has to decrease the costs of his goods. So that he can start by attempting to handle
his operating expenses, so that he can adjust his rates.
Future perspective on Capital structure.
The capital structure is created by a complicated number of choices. The composition of
capital governs the revenue streams slotted by the corporation and assigns level of risk and rights
of control to different parties. Capital budgeting decisions, judiciously sought, must good life in
capital sector. The as a whole combination of stocks and bonds, the aspects, conditions, and
integration needs of interest payments, the utilization of polling control between equity courses,
the positioning of particular strategy, as well as a number of issues relating to specific
components of transactions claims are critical decisions (including hybrids such as convertibles
and debt substitutes such as leasing). Finance academics' approach to problems of working
capital represents a development of learning over period. The outcome is an eclectic collection of
hypotheses that contend with several influences that form investment decisions that are often
competitive. A summary of the present incarnation of the economic literature is given in this
section. The principle of cash flows in financial planning relates to a planned change to funding
20

corporate operations by a mix of equity and liability. There are many contrasting concepts of
financial leverage, each of which discusses the connection somewhat differently among debt
funding, financing decision, as well as the company's current value. Management must determine
the needs of the organization for money. A business usually needs money for four things:
investments, value creation, transactions, and shareholder’s money supply.
Management must assess the necessary liquidity that such four items would need to be
financed. The degree of volatility mostly on account of "what if" situations should be planned.
For example, if there is a 20 percent to 30 percent decrease in business operation, plan the capital
structure. In order to determining the credit score including its organization is sufficient to ensure
immediate access to the money. If the performance is not sufficient, the organization would also
have to make reasonable financial performance changes. Manager have to clearly determine
whether the credit history of the organization is careful to make sure unrestricted access to the
money. If the performance is not sufficient, the organization would also have to make
appropriate working capital changes. stablish a clearly established structure for decision-making.
While working with multiple liquidity situations, this will direct the leadership. They also try in
making a system often ensures that actions mostly on financial performance are not even an
instant response to a shift in the situation. Rather, the decisions are based on something like a
clearly laid structure that makes the best use of available capital for future growth and
development. For enterprises, all works when they service is very well accepted by customers.
During a decline, issues arrive. The business still has to run during the recession and therefore
needs money. But in loss for companies it becomes really hard for a business to raise money.
Consequently, the company should still compensate for the hard days, regardless of the
improving industry in the region, but not extend the abilities far enough. In terrible years, a
business with higher interest throughout the mix will be better off. Without assessing their
capacity to borrow them, among the biggest errors businesses make is generating revenue via
debt financing in future time that help to increase the return on capital invested in different
options. In any business, there seems to be a risk and danger however, varies from business to
business, from company to company, from the nature of the product or support supplied and so
on. For example, relative to the retail sector, a business that would be in the service sector would
have less natural variations. Therefore, relative to the utility sector, a design marketing store
would typically concentrate much more on optimum debt ratio. Also in unfavourable
21

circumstances, lower mortgage asset levels will cause businesses feel good more about
corporation's order to accomplish obligations. In determining the financial performance, the
essence of the business plays a vital role. For example, the gross margin of existing businesses
would be at greater risk in a market in which there was no obstacle to competition.
Consequently, businesses would be reluctant to use securities carrying a specified amount. The
total expenses also affect the financial performance to some degree. If a corporation uses a really
high fraction of the global amount of fixed costs, the uncertainty of future income can be
exacerbated. There are far more risks of a business loss if the leverage ratio is strong, as well as
the company may really go to the point of bankruptcy. To have a perfect combination of
financial performance, administration should also maintain a similar strategy.
Conclusion
In last of research it has been concluded that many scholars have questioned the comparison
between the conventional trade-off paradigm as well as the efficient market hypothesis. it
was found that some businesses follow the conventional theory of trade-offs, although some
oppose the stakeholder theory, because none of these can be dismissed. Is not whether the
obligation would have any income gain on account is not inferred. Long-term debt relies heavily
on the productive marginal tax15 of the business. On the opposite, when no net tax advantage in
terms of debt as well as equilibrium has been found, debt is followed by poor profitability reports
that overrides interest rate shielding or other debt advantages. In summary, with both the bond
issuing notice, the share value may be said to rise and fall just after capital issuing notice. In the
last it is also founded that the price of stock is increased in the context of issuing the debts
announcement which makes companies to reallocate their capital in such a manner that will
resolve the problem of future that can impact the performance of both companies. Agency
models estimate that debt is directly correlated to the valuation of the company, the risk of
default, the net income, the reach of compliance, the profitability of leverage, the interest margin,
the expense of investigating the opportunities in the market and the possibility of restructuring
after definition. On the other hand, leverage tends to have an inverse association with potential
for growth and indeed the value of prestige for management. This is also advocated that interest
is closely correlated to the sum of equity of management equity. On the other hand, found no
such association between leveraging as well as the amount of control of management capital.
This powerful indicator that the composition of capital is insignificant to a company's value. The
22

valuation of two similar businesses would maintain the same when the valuation would never be
influenced by the option of funding for the financing of the properties. A company's valuation
depends on projected lifetime profits. And that is when deductions are not eligible. This proposal
says that a company's financial leverage raises its worth and decreases WACC. This is because
there is tax available information. This definition that perhaps the financial leverage an industry
provides an ideal market doesn't matter as its earnings potential as well as the wealth of
shareholders decide the market value of the company. Many businessmen believe that lending
saves taxes but that too many debts will result in economic distress, i.e. cost problems. The best
conceived theory implies that competitiveness and monetary leverage have a clear inverse
association. High profits usually mean low debt. But only the contrary relation will be expected
by the best conceived principle. Higher earnings mean more usable debt service sums and much
more income shielding revenues. They would suggest higher ratios of goal debt. The idea sounds
theoretical, but company would like to eliminate financial instability and bankruptcy cases in
reality. The theory of agencies describes a scenario during which a manager (a superior) transfers
decision-making power to an employee (the subordinate) who earns a payment on apparent
authority through conducting some action. The outcomes of the representatives influence the
wellbeing of the manager in some way, such as sales income, production or profit of
participation. In inducing the agent to take the behaviour that maximizes the interests of the
principle, the headmaster attempts to balance an incentive system with a knowledge system. As
far as debt funding is worried, debt providers are very worried regarding their stake in the
company and the associated risks throughout the funding of the firm's earnings. More obligations
are less assets with the financial leverage and thus imply a more associated complication. The
issue with this calculation is it's too wide in scope which giving operating obligations and loan
assets appropriate amount. For the debt-to-equity level, the very same problem applies. Current
as well as non-current operating responsibilities, particularly either one, reflect responsibilities
that will always be like the business. There seem to be no fixed instalments of principal and
interest payments added to administrative obligations, unlike loans. The return on capital
employed, but at the other side, contrasts the debt component with the dressed appropriately
including its profitability of a business, so it provides a truer view. A low percentage implies a
healthy capital cushion, that is much more attractive than a large proportion of the loan,
calculated as a proportion.
23

24

References
Books and Journals
Abdulla, Y., 2017. Capital structure in a tax-free economy: evidence from UAE. International
journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern finance and management.
An, Z., Li, D. and Yu, J., 2016. Earnings management, capital structure, and the role of
institutional environments. Journal of Banking & Finance, 68, pp.131-152.
Ardalan, K., 2017. Capital structure theory: Reconsidered. Research in International Business
and Finance, 39, pp.696-710.
Armenter, R. and Hnatkovska, V., 2017. Taxes and capital structure: Understanding firms’
savings. Journal of Monetary Economics, 87, pp.13-33.
Bandyopadhyay, A. and Barua, N.M., 2016. Factors determining capital structure and corporate
performance in India: Studying the business cycle effects. The Quarterly Review of
Economics and Finance, 61, pp.160-172.
Baum, C.F., Caglayan, M. and Rashid, A., 2017. Capital structure adjustments: do
macroeconomic and business risks matter?. Empirical Economics, 53(4), pp.1463-1502.
Bulathsinhalage, S. and Pathirawasam, C., 2017. The effect of corporate governance on firms’
capital structure of listed companies in Sri Lanka. Journal of Competitiveness, 9(2).
Chadha, S. and Sharma, A.K., 2016. An empirical study on capital structure in Indian
manufacturing sector. Global Business Review, 17(2), pp.411-424.
Daskalakis, N., Balios, D. and Dalla, V., 2017. The behaviour of SMEs' capital structure
determinants in different macroeconomic states. Journal of Corporate Finance, 46,
pp.248-260.
Detthamrong, U., Chancharat, N. and Vithessonthi, C., 2017. Corporate governance, capital
structure and firm performance: Evidence from Thailand. Research in International
Business and Finance, 42, pp.689-709.
Devos, E., Rahman, S. and Tsang, D., 2017. Debt covenants and the speed of capital structure
adjustment. Journal of Corporate Finance, 45, pp.1-18.
Di Pietro, F., Palacín Sánchez, M.J. and Roldán, J.L., 2017. Regional development and capital
structure of SMEs.
Ghasemi, M. and Ab Razak, N.H., 2016. The impact of liquidity on the capital structure:
Evidence from Malaysia. International journal of economics and finance, 8(10), pp.130-
139.
Ghosh, A., 2017. Capital structure and firm performance. Routledge.
Herciu, M. and Ogrean, C., 2017. Does Capital Structure Influence Company
Profitability?. Studies in Business and Economics, 12(3), pp.50-62.
Kumar, S., Colombage, S. and Rao, P., 2017. Research on capital structure determinants: a
review and future directions. International Journal of Managerial Finance.
Le, T.P.V. and Phan, T.B.N., 2017. Capital structure and firm performance: Empirical evidence
from a small transition country. Research in international business and finance, 42,
pp.710-726.
Li, H. and Stathis, P., 2017. Determinants of capital structure in Australia: an analysis of
important factors. Managerial Finance.
M’ng, J.C.P., Rahman, M. and Sannacy, S., 2017. The determinants of capital structure:
Evidence from public listed companies in Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. Cogent
Economics & Finance, 5(1), p.1418609.
25

Matias, F. and Serrasqueiro, Z., 2017. Are there reliable determinant factors of capital structure
decisions? Empirical study of SMEs in different regions of Portugal. Research in
International Business and Finance, 40, pp.19-33.
Naseem, M.A., Zhang, H. and Malik, F., 2017. Capital structure and corporate governance. The
Journal of Developing Areas, 51(1), pp.33-47.
Nasimi, A.N., 2016. Effect of capital structure on firm profitability (An empirical evidence from
London, UK). Global Journal of Management and Business Research.
Nhung, N.T.P., Lien, N.P. and Hang, D.T.T., 2017. Analyze the determinants of capital structure
for Vietnamese real estate listed companies. International Journal of Economics and
Financial Issues, 7(4), pp.270-282.
Pratheepan, T. and Yatiwella, W.B., 2016. The determinants of capital structure: Evidence from
selected listed companies in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Economics and
Finance, 8(2).
Rehman, O.U., 2016. Impact of capital structure and dividend policy on firm value. Journal of
Poverty, Investment and Development, 21(2), pp.308-324.
Serfling, M., 2016. Firing costs and capital structure decisions. The Journal of Finance, 71(5),
pp.2239-2286.
Sheikh, N.A. and Qureshi, M.A., 2017. Determinants of capital structure of Islamic and
conventional commercial banks. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern
Finance and Management.
Siddik, M., Alam, N., Kabiraj, S. and Joghee, S., 2017. Impacts of capital structure on
performance of banks in a developing economy: Evidence from
Bangladesh. International journal of financial studies, 5(2), p.13.
Sofat, R. and Singh, S., 2017. Determinants of capital structure: an empirical study of
manufacturing firms in India. International Journal of Law and Management.
Sun, J., Ding, L., Guo, J.M. and Li, Y., 2016. Ownership, capital structure and financing
decision: Evidence from the UK. The British Accounting Review, 48(4), pp.448-463.
Vo, X.V., 2017. Determinants of capital structure in emerging markets: Evidence from
Vietnam. Research in International Business and Finance, 40, pp.105-113.
Yapa Abeywardhana, D., 2017. Capital structure theory: An overview. Accounting and finance
research, 6(1).
Zhou, Q., Tan, K.J.K., Faff, R. and Zhu, Y., 2016. Deviation from target capital structure, cost of
equity and speed of adjustment. Journal of Corporate Finance, 39, pp.99-120.
26