DBS Group Holdings Ltd: Financial Analysis and Economic Condition in Singapore

This document provides a financial analysis of DBS Group Holdings Ltd, including horizontal and vertical analysis, profitability ratios, liquidity ratios, leverage ratios, and dividend-related ratios. It also comments on the economic condition of the financial and banking sector in Singapore. The document includes a brief company background and identifies the profits of the company. The document is relevant for finance and banking students and professionals.

1
Name:
Course
Professor’s name
University name
City, State
Date of submission

2
SECTION A
1. DBS GROUP HOLDINGS LTD
2. Company Background
DBS Bank is a financial services provider and a multi-national bank headquartered in Marina
Bay in Singapore. It was established in 1968 by the government of Singapore as a takeover bid
for the industrial financing of Economic Development Board. It was previously known as
Development Bank of Singapore Limited before the name was changed in 2003. This was
because it was changing its role as a regional bank. It has its activities mostly in South East Asia
with key people being Peter Seah Lim as the chairman of the Board and Piyush Gupta as the
chief Executive Officer (CEO). It is the largest bank in South East Asia by asset base with an
equivalent of $518 billion as at 31 Dec 2017. Its revenue in 2016 was a rise to $ 10.28 billion.
The operating income in 2016 was $ 6.517 billion and this was a marginal increase of $470
million from the year 2015. The net income dropped in 2016 to $ 3.07 billion. The number of
employees by 2017 was at 24,174 which is among the biggest taskforce in financial and banking
service providers in south East Asia. Some of the major competitors are Bank of Singapore,
United overseas bank and OCBC Bank (Bonsall et al, 2017).
3. Horizontal and Vertical analysis of DBS bank
Horizontal analysis – Profit and Loss for 2014-2018
Horizontal analysis for profit and loss for 5 years beginning in 2014 to 2018.

3
Details 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 %
In
millions$
Ni millions
$
$ $ $
Income
Interest income 6720 7080 7568 8986 9811 7%
Interest expense 1616 1691 2007 2791 2725 11%
Net interest income 3425 5389 5561 9827 9827 13%
Non-interest income 2410 2643 2980 3899 4039 6%
Total income 8927 8032 8541 11924 1321
1
5%
Total expenses 3007 3117 3227 3669 3741 8%
Profit before allowances 4213 4915 5314 6279 7111 9%
Profit before taxes 4418 4480 4335 6569 7231 7%
Net Profit attributable to
employers
3672 3844 3720 4238 4371 11%
Balance sheet for DBS Group Holdings
Selected balance sheet items 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
Total assets 517,711 481570 457834 440,666 402,008
Customer loans 323,099 301,51
6
283,289 275,588 248,654

4
Total liabilities 467,909 434,60
0
415,038 400,460 364,322
Equity 34.50B 33.72B 31.45B 29.07B 28.95B
As per the horizontal and vertical analysis, the total assets from 2013 to 2017 has been on an
upward trajectory.
The total liabilities also are on the rise since 2013.
Net profit has been fluctuating in different years, however, it has remained on a steady rise since
2013.
Revenue has also been increasing for the bank (Abbott, et al, 2016).
4. Identify the profits
The profits for the company keeps on fluctuating as the years continue. The profits before
allowances in 2014 was 4915, while in 2016 it was 5314 and 2017 was 6279 million. This shows
an increase in the profitability levels of the company. The profits before allowances are on a
steady rise( Drever et al,2015). Net profits attributable to the employers are in 2014, $3672
million, in 2015 it is $ 3844 million, in 2016 it is $3720 million, in 2017 it is 4238 million and in

5
2018 the profits are $4371 million. This is a good attribute to the company and is the best for the
investors (Acharya, and Ryan, 2016).
Net Profit
attributable
to
employers
3672 3844 3720 4238 4371
Profit
before
allowances
4321 4915 5314 6279 7655
a. Comment on the economic condition for the financial and banking sector in
Singapore
The economic condition for the financial and banking sector has been a good ride. Singapore has
seen a steady rise in its GDP buoyed by a number of sectors with leading being the banking and
financial industry. The financial and banking industry has seen a growth in loan uptake with
most banks recording an increase in profits for the five years from 2013-2018. Most of the banks
that have been listed in the stock market have witnessed a steady growth in the share price and

6
capitalization value (Lapan, and Marcotte, 2015). It is important to note that the financial sector
plays a very important role in growth of the economy of Singapore acting as a facilitator and
mover of money.
b) Financial ratios for the 5 years
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Profitability Return on
Assets = Net
Income/averag
e total assets
8927
440,666
= 0.0202
8032
457834
=0.0175
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.0230
12345
552,887
= 0.0223
Gross profit
rate=gross
profit/ net sales
4213
8927
=0.472
4915
8032
=0.611
5314
8541
=0.622
6279
11924
=0.5265
7111
12345
=0.576
Liquidity Current ratio=
current assets /
current
liabilities
402,008
364,322
= 1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.10
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Acid Test
Ratio= quick
assets / current
402,008
364,322
=1.1
440,666
400,460
=1.1
457834
415,038
=1.10
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106

7
liabilities
Leverage
ratio
Debt ratio=
total liabilities /
total assets
402,008
364,322
=1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.101
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
On perusal of the above, it can be inferred the following:
Profitability
(i) The profitability of the company has seen an uptrend. Further, the return on assets of the
company has seen an uptrend on year on year basis which is beneficial for the company. The
ratio symbolize that how well the company is utilizing its assets to generate revenue. The
graph depicting the trend has been presented here-in-below:

8
(ii) The profitability of the company has seen an uptrend. Further, the gross profit margin of the
company has seen an uptrend on year on year basis which is beneficial for the company. The
ratio symbolize that how well the company is maintain its direct cost. The higher the
margin, the better the company is taken care off. The graph depicting the trend has been
presented here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0.0202
0.0175 0.0177
0.023 0.0223
Return on Asset Ratio
Series1 Linear (Series1)
Year
%
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0.472
0.611 0.622
0.5265 0.576
Gross Profit Ratio
Series1 Linear (Series1)
Year
%

9
Liquidity
(i) The ratio measures the solvency position of the company and ability of the company to meet
its short term obligation. The ratio compares current asset to current liability. The ideal ratio
is 2:1. Further, it is a measure of liquidity and shows whether the company shall be able to
meets its liability in the short term. The graph depicting the trend has been presented here-
in-below:
(ii) The ratio measures the extreme solvency position of the company and ability of the
company to meet its short term obligation. The ratio compares quick assets (assets which
can be easily converted to cash) to current liability. The ideal ratio is 1:1. Further, it is a
measure of liquidity and shows whether the company shall be able to meets its liability in
the near short term. The graph depicting the trend has been presented here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.103
1.1
1.103
1.108
1.106
Current Ratio
Series1
Year
Ratio

10
Leverage Ratio
The ratio measures the extent to which the assets of the company are sufficient to meet the
overall obligations of the company. It depicts the financial position of the company and show
case whether the asset of the company shall be sufficient to pay off all the obligations of the
company. The graph depicting the trend has been presented here-in-below:
c) Profitability ratios
Details Ratio Year Industry
average
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Profitability Return on
Assets = Net
Income/average
8927
440,666
= 0.02
8032
457834
=0.017
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=
0.023
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.1 1.1 1.1
1.108
1.106
Acid Test Ratio
Series1 Linear (Series1)
Year
Ratio

11
total assets 5 0.0223
Gross profit
rate=gross
profit/ net sales
8927
440,666
=0.02
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
=0.019
Expense
ratio
Operating
expenses/
average value of
fund assets
3007
2895
=1.038
3117
2907
=1.072
3227
3145
=1.026
3669
3372
=1.088
3741
3450
=1.084
=1.073
Return on
Assets
Net income/
average total
assets
8927
440,666
=0.02
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
= 0.02
Return on
Equity
net income/
Equity
34.50B 33.72B 31.45B 29.07B 28.95B =31.45B
5. Identify dividends
a. For the preceding 5 years calculate the divided related ratios and comment on the ratios
as shown below in sample analysis.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.103
1.101
1.103
1.108
1.106
Leverage Ratio
Series1 Linear (Series1)
Year
Ratio

12
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Dividend
Ratio
Dividend yield ratio =
dividend paid/ total market
capitalization
402,00
8
364,32
2
= 1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.10
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Dividend payout ratio = total
dividends / net income
402,00
8
364,32
2
=1.1
440,666
400,460
=1.1
457834
415,038
=1.10
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Price earnings ratio= price /
earnings per share = net
income- preferred dividend/
weighted average number of
shares outstanding
402,00
8
364,32
2
=1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.101
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Earnings per share ratio= net 402,00 440,666 457834 481570 517,711

13
income- preferred dividend/
weighted average number of
shares outstanding
8
364,32
2
= 1.103
400,460
=1.10
415,038
=1.103
434,600
=1.108
467,909
=1.106
Dividend cover ratio = 402,00
8
364,32
2
=1.1
440,666
400,460
=1.1
457834
415,038
=1.10
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
402,00
8
364,32
2
=1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.101
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Dividend Ratio
Dividend Yield Ratio

14
The ratio depicts the return on actual share price of the company received by the shareholders
during the years. It represents the return paid and in the present case yield is similar on year on
year basis symbolizing that company has a consistent dividend policy. The graph depicting the
trend has been presented here-in-below:
Dividend Payout Ratio
The ratio depicts the position of dividend paid in the year compared to net profit of the company.
The ratio shows that company is paying more than what is earning during the year. Hence the
ratio reflects whether the dividend exceeds the profit earned. The results are not in favour of the
company. The graph depicting the trend has been presented here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.096
1.098
1.1
1.102
1.104
1.106
1.108
1.11
Dividend Ratio
Year
Ratio

15
Earnings per share Ratio
This is one of the significant ratio which measures the earning per share. If the ratio is too high it
is goods for the company. In the current case, the ratio is not very high. The graph depicting the
trend has been presented here-in-below:
Dividend Cover Ratio
It represents the dividend paid to shareholders during the year. Further, the higher the ratio, the
better the shareholder is taken care off. The graph depicting the trend has been presented here-in-
below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.096
1.098
1.1
1.102
1.104
1.106
1.108
1.11
Dividend Pay out Ratio
Year
Ratio

16
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.096
1.098
1.1
1.102
1.104
1.106
1.108
1.11
Dividend Cover Ratio
Year
Ratio
b. Use any of the below 4 ratios for commenting on dividends compare to the industry or
competitor average
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1.096
1.098
1.1
1.102
1.104
1.106
1.108
1.11
Earning Per Share Ratio
Year
Ratio

17
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Dividend
Ratio
Dividend yield ratio
= dividend paid/ total
market capitalization
402,008
364,322
= 1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.10
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Dividend payout ratio
= total dividends / net
income
402,008
364,322
=1.1
440,666
400,460
=1.1
457834
415,038
=1.10
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Price earnings ratio=
net income- preferred
dividend/ weighted
average number of
shares outstanding
402,008
364,322
=1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.101
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Earnings per share
ratio= net income-
preferred dividend/
weighted average
number of shares
outstanding
402,008
364,322
= 1.103
440,666
400,460
=1.10
457834
415,038
=1.103
481570
434,600
=1.108
517,711
467,909
=1.106
Dividend cover ratio = 402,008 440,666 457834 481570 517,711

18
364,322
=1.1
400,460
=1.1
415,038
=1.10
434,600
=1.108
467,909
=1.106
a) DBS Bank long term financial position and short term financial position
DBS Grp holding short and long term financial position is to improve the financial position
of the company while maximizing shareholders value. Stability and liquidity ratios are measured
using the current liabilities and current assets to see the value of the company in both short and
long term positions (Santos, and Rosati, 2015). To understand and value a company, the financial
analysts and investors have to assess its financial position and stability. The company’s assets
and liabilities are very safe. The current ratios and return on investments are the best and the
yardsticks are very healthy (Council, and Britain, 2015). The balance sheet of the company has
been increasing in the asset section in 2013, the assets of the company were valued at 402,008
while in 2017, and the assets were at 517,711. This is a tremendous growth in the long term
position of the company and shows a company that is going on well with the company
(Davidson, et al, 2015).
Trade creditors, commercial banks and creditors for expenses are short term lenders who are
concerned with the liquidity position or the short term financial position of the bank. It is also a
measure of the short term working capital of the company and utilized by the bank (Feng and
Tweedie, 2017). The long term creditors and shareholders are interested in interest payment and

19
prospectus of dividend. The short term reveals the measure of the ability to meet the short term
obligations of the company, whether the working capital was properly utilized and is the
financial position of the company improving (Francis, et al, 2015).
b) Stability and liquidity ratio
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Profitability Return on Assets = Net
Income/average total assets
8927
440,666
= 0.02
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
Gross profit rate=gross
profit/ net sales
8927
440,666
=0.022
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
Liquidity Current ratio= current
assets / current liabilities
402,008
364,322
=1.038
440,666
400,460
=1.072
457834
415,038
=1.026
481570
434,600
=1.088
517,711
467,909
=1.084
Acid Test Ratio= quick
assets / current liabilities
402,008
364,322
440,666
400,460
=1.072
457834
415,038
=1.026
481570
434,600
=1.088
517,711
467,909
=1.084

20
=1.038
Leverage
ratio
Debt ratio= total
liabilities / total assets
364,322
402,008
=1.038
400,460
440,666
=1.072
415,038
457,834
=1.026
434,600
481,500
=1.088
467,909
517,711
=1.084
c) Use any of the below 4 ratios for commenting on stability and liquidity compare with the
industry or competitor
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Liquidit
y
Debt to equity ratio= total
liabilities/ total shareholders’
equity
8927
440,666
8032
457834
8541
481570
11924
517,711
12345
552,887
Gearing ratio = Capital Gearing
Ratio
8927 8032 8541 11924 13211
Current ratio / working capital
ratio = current assets / current
liabilities
3007 3117 3227 3669 3741
Absolute liquid ratio = absolute
liquid assets/ current liabilities
4213 4915 5314 6279 7111

21
4418 4480 4335 6569 7231
Efficiency
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Efficiency Asset turnover ratio = net
sales/ average total assets
8927
440,666
8032
457834
8541
481570
11924
517,711
12345
552,887
Current asset turnover ratio =
net sales/ average total assets
402,008
364,322
=1.038
440,666
400,460
=1.072
457834
415,038
=1.026
481570
434,600
=1.088
517,711
467,909
=1.084
Creditors turnover ratio 402,008
364,322
=1.038
440,666
400,460
=1.072
457834
415,038
=1.026
481570
434,600
=1.088
517,711
467,909
=1.084
Cash cycle 8927
440,666
=0.02
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
Stock and inventory turnover
ratio
34.50B 33.72B 31.45B 29.07B 28.95B

22
Efficiency
Asset Turnover Ratio
The ratio measures how efficiently company is able to utilize its asset to generate revenue. The
higher the ratio, the better the company is taken care off.
Current Asset Turnover Ratio
The ratio measures how efficiently company is able to utilize its current asset to generate
revenue. The higher the ratio, the better the company is taken care off. The graph depicting the
status is detailed here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0.98
1
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.1
Current Asset Turnover Ratio
Year
Ratio

23
Creditor Turnover Ratio
The ratio measures how efficiently company is able to utilize its creditor and liability to its aid.
The lower the ratio, the better the company is taken care off. The graph depicting the status is
detailed here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0.98
1
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.1
Creditor Turnover Ratio
Year
Ratio
7. ROA, ROE and ROI and Risk Ratios with comparison to industry average
The efficiency ratios with comparison to the industry average
Details Ratio Year
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

24
Efficiency Return on investment =
investment revenue-
investments cost/ investment
cost
8927
440,666
=0.022
8032
457834
=0.017
5
8541
481570
=0.0177
11924
517,711
=0.023
12345
552,887
=0.0223
Return on Assets = annual
total income/ average total
assets
402,008
364,322
=1.038
440,666
400,460
=1.072
457834
415,038
=1.026
481570
434,600
=1.088
517,711
467,909
=1.084
Return on Equity = net
income/ shareholders’ equity
8927 8032 8541 11924 13211
Risk 3007 3117 3227 3669 3741
Return on Investment
The figures depicts that there has been positive return on investment for the company. Further,
the said return is increasing on year. The ratio shows cents earned on dollar invested. The
graphical presentation has been depicted here-in-below:

25
Return on Asset
The figures depicts that there has been positive return on asset for the company. Further, the said
return is increasing on year. The ratio shows cents earned on dollar of asset. The graphical
presentation has been depicted here-in-below:
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
ROI
Year
Ratio

26
8. Asset value par share and current market share price
The company is involved in educational programs in India in partnership with Tata
Corporation, creating a hub that in partnership with the government in order to boost small
business enterprises in Taiwan and social enterprise fairs in promoting public education. To
understand and value a company, the financial analysts and investors have to assess its financial
position and stability. The company’s assets and liabilities are very safe (DeTienne, et al, 2015).
The current ratios and return on investments are the best and the yardsticks are very healthy.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0.0202
0.0175 0.0177
0.023 0.0223
Return on Asset Ratio
Series1 Linear (Series1)
Year
%

27
9. Non-financial parameters
Brand preference- DBS Group Holdings Limited is a big brand in Singapore. It is has
continued to attract the new customers and retain the previous ones which had been there
originally (Baker, and Ricciardi, 2014). There is good customer experience, innovation, and
customer loyalty and brand awareness. It is has a good employee relations and is known to have
the best salaries in the industry (Gaynor et al,2016). It has about 26,000 employees.
KPI- profitability. Profitability is a key indicator. There are financial and non-financial
indicators in profitability. The strengths are the internal attributes and support successful
outcome. It has nice a very vibrant young staff who are very innovative in products and services.
The companies CSR is nurturing social enterprises in different countries in South East Asia. The
company is involved in educational programs in India in partnership with Tata Corporation,
creating a hub that in partnership with the government in order to boost small business
enterprises in Taiwan and social enterprise fairs in promoting public education (Ge, et al,2018).
The threats is in increased competition from other banks and other micro lending
institutions. It is also on the changing dynamics of the financial and banking sectors around the
world. The PESTLE analysis is also a non-financial parameter to measuring DBS bank
(Petersen, et al, 2015). The political environment is very stable. Singapore is among the world’s
most politically stable countries with a vibrant democracy and rule of law to support businesses.
The economic environment is also stable as Singapore is considered an Asian tiger. The social
environment is also favorable to conduct business (Alexander,et al,2018. The technological
environment encourages great innovations in the banking and financial sector. The bank has a
very low staff turnover showing that it is a very good employer and its staff are comfortable to

28
work in the organization. Its services are also quality services therefore making it a good
company.
Q10. Make a comparative analysis, where-ever possible
The social environment is also favorable to conduct business. The technological
environment encourages great innovations in the banking and financial sector. The bank has a
very low staff turnover showing that it is a very good employer and its staff are comfortable to
work in the organization. Its services are also quality services therefore making it a good
company.
Section B
Q1. Strategic decisions that DBS took to change the financial impact of the company
In its strategy to become the leading financial institution in Singapore, DBS has acquired
the Post Office Savings Bank(POSB) which is an old bank established in 1877 in the raffles
place by their former colonial masters the British Colonial government.
It was a huge acquisition since by 1976, POSB had more than a million depositors. The
bank was renamed in 1990 as POSB before it was acquired by DBS by 1998. The sum total for
acquisition of POSB was $1.6 billion giving DBS a dominant market share in the industry with
more than four million customers. It has the highest number of branches in Singapore and the
highest number of Automated teller machines (ATM) all over the country. The company’s

29
performance has been increasing since it is a dominant player in the banking and financial sector.
Since 1998 after the acquisition of POSB, DBS bank has had a very significant growth in both
financial performance and market share percentage. The growth of the bank was catapulted by
the additional one million depositors that were acquired from POSB. The ability to increase in
profits were advanced by DBS ability to innovate and get new products to the market (Leuz and
Wysocki, 2016).
International operations in many south east countries has also impacted the financial
performance of the bank. Starting operations in China, India, Indonesia, Hong Kong and Taiwan
has also impacted how the financial performance has been conducted (Macve, 2015).
Q2. Critics on the brand reputation as reported by the press
As the leading bank in South East Asia, most of the businessmen use its online platform
to conduct their businesses. DBS bank has been investing a lot of financial resources on
upgrading their network systems and promoting an online platform culture in all countries of
operations but this has not been without hiccups. The concerns on the high tariffs in the banking
sector a whole has been on the spot light with DBS bank being the most affected because it is the
most used by most of the customers. This has led to a dip in its reported quarterly profits below
the estimated profits.
Although it has one of the best products and services, critics argue that the bank charges
are higher than average bank charges. Its online banking platform was faced by some huge
challenges at the inception stage and therefore has led to an upgrade of the system of operations.

30
This has created a worrying trend in impact of market sentiment impact that is indirect to the war
trade in banking industry (Snider, and Davies, 2018). The impact of negative criticism has led to
a decrease in net interest income and the general profit after tax. The biggest impact in the
business is in regards to market sentiment and this shows up in the banking investment income.
Q3. Corporate report on governance and the company’s executive and non-executive
directors
Group Board of Directors
Peter Seah Lim Huat
– Non- Independent chairman and non-executive director
Peter Seah joined the board of DBS in November 2009 and after six month assumed the
role of non-executive chairman on 1 may 2010. He is the chairman of the audit committee, risk
management committee, management development committee, compensation committee and
nominating committee. He is also the chairman of the group’s executive committee and DBS
(Hong Kong) Limited. He also come with wealth of experience as a banker for 33 years before
retiring as the CEO and Vice chairman of overseas Union Bank in 2001. He is the current
chairman of Singapore health services Pte limited and Singapore airlines limited.
Piyush Gupta
Chief Executive Officer- DBS Group

31
Since his appointment as the chief executive, the bank was named as the best bank in the
world by the global Finance and The banker in 2018 named it as the global bank for the year
2018. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Arts (Economics) and a post graduate diploma in
management. He holds many accolade in leadership and has been honored in 2014 and 2016 for
his outstanding leadership.
Bonghan Cho
Director and independent director DBS grp and DBS bank
He was appointed on April 26 2018 and is a member of the audit committee and the
nominating committee. He holds a Ph. D and MS in computer science and specialized in
artificial intelligence (A.I). He has received various recognition in the advancement of the
artificial intelligence and the software industry and has even won the republic of South Korea
president’s award in his field.
Euleen Goh Yiu Kiang
Non-independent director and Non-Executive director DBS Bank and DBS Grp Holdings
She was appointed as a director on December 2008. She holds various positions including
chairperson Board Risk Management and a member of the management and compensation
development committee. She is also the chairperson of DBS foundation an establishment that

32
was founded to strengthen the company’s corporate social responsibility and sustainability. She
is a chartered accountant with keen interest in banking and taxation.
Ho Tian Yee
Lead Independent Director-DBS Bank and DBS Grp Holdings.
He was appointed to the board on 29 April 2011. He is a member of the executive
committee, the board risk management and chairman of the nominating committee. He has over
30 years in management of global financial markets. He holds a degree in Economics and a
master’s in Business Administration from Chicago University.
Nihal Kavirathe
Independent director
He was appointed to the board in April 2011. He is a director in DBS foundation, a
member of the risk management committee, management and compensation committee. Nihal
has held various positions in very many companies and holds a degree in Economics.
Ow Foong Pheng
Non-independent director and Non-Executive director.
She was appointed a director on April 2012. She is a member of the Nominating
committee and the Audit committee. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Arts with a major in
economics and philosophy.

33
Andre Sekulic
Independent director DBS Bank
He was appointed to the board on 26 th April 2012. He is also the chairman of the
management and compensation committee and a member of the audit committee. He has over 35
years’ experience in financial services and banking all across the globe and a lot of experience in
regulatory intervention in Australia.
Danny Teoh Kay
Independent Director- DBS Group Holdings & DBS Bank
He was appointed a member of the board in October 2010. He is the chairman of DBS
audit committee and a member of Board Risk management and Nominating committee. He is
also a member of the DBS foundation and a DBS corporate social responsibility (Brinkman, and
Morgan, 2010).
He has more than 27 years working for audit firm KPMG. He is a qualified chartered accountant
and an associate member of institute of chartered accountant (Schaltegger, and Burritt, 2017).
Tham Sai Choy
Independent director
He was appointed to the board in September 2018. He is also a member of the risk
management committee and the audit committee. He has over 36 years of experience in audit
firms KPMG and played a key role in data analytics, digital transformation and cybersecurity. He

34
holds a bachelor’s degree in economics and is a member of the chartered institute of accounting
(Poynton, et al, 2015).
Oliver Lim Tse Ghow
Independent director
Oliver was appointed the director in November 2017. He is a member of the compensation
board, management development committee, risk management committee and executive
committee. He is a civil engineer and holds a first class honors in civil engineering from London
imperial college.
Q4. Strategic financial and non-financial goals and visions for DBS Bank
All businesses should have goals, mission and visions based on financial and non-
financial analysis. The management and the board establishes goals and visions for the company
as both short term and long term. The following are the goals of the bank. Reaching crucial or
key non-financial goals will improve the company’s chances of achieving financial objectives
such as profitability and revenue.
Financial and Non-financial analysis
Customer satisfaction- a high degree of customer satisfaction increases the chance for
repeat business. Satisfied customers are likely to come back, tell their friends of the experiences,
generate additional customers and have positive feedback (Schiebener, and Brand, ,2015).
Reporting and planning systems present a possible company growth and forecast of numbers on

35
quarterly basis. The vision for the company is to increase in profitability and asset base for the
company. DBS bank also has a vision of increasing the branches in some of the countries it has
established itself like China, Hong Kong and Indonesia. It has to increase its brand visibility and
accessibility to all its branches (Williams, and Dobelman, 2017). A company’s main objective is
to increase the shareholders’ value and maximization of profits. DBS Bank has been named as
the best bank in the world in 2018.
This will maximize the shareholders’ value through increase in its share value. Employee
training and development leads to growth of revenue and business expansion. They give staff
member’s opportunities to improve on their skills and managerial capabilities. Career
development is also an important part of the non-financial analysis as employees are the engine
behind which the company runs. They expect each employee to plan to acquire skills as the
company grows. The long range vision of the company is to reach a positive cash flows.
Conclusion
Profits are to be realized in the company’s strategic vision and goals. A continued growth
process will lead to increase in revenues, cash flows and profits. The objective of the company is
to increase the profits of the company. The long term creditors and shareholders are interested in
interest payment and prospectus of dividend (Xu, and Gursoy, 2015). The short term reveals the
measure of the ability to meet the short term obligations of the company, whether the working
capital was properly utilized and is the financial position of the company improving.

36
References
Abbott, L.J., Daugherty, B., Parker, S. and Peters, G.F., 2016. Internal audit quality and financial
reporting quality: The joint importance of independence and competence. Journal of Accounting
Research, 54(1), pp.3-40.
Acharya, V.V. and Ryan, S.G., 2016. Banks’ financial reporting and financial system
stability. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(2), pp.277-340.
Alexander, A., Kaluve, R., Prabhu, J.S., Korlimarla, A., Manjunath, S., Patil, S., KS, G. and
Sridhar, T.S., 2018. Abstract P4-10-12: Treatment decision making, and strategies for coping
with financial stress in Indian women diagnosed with breast cancer and their families.

37
Baker, H.K. and Ricciardi, V., 2014. Investor behavior: The psychology of financial planning
and investing. John Wiley & Sons.
Bonsall IV, S.B., Leone, A.J., Miller, B.P. and Rennekamp, K., 2017. A plain English measure
of financial reporting readability. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 63(2-3), pp.329-357
Brinkman, P.T. and Morgan, A.W., 2010. Financial planning: strategies and lessons learned:
financial planning is more important than ever as colleges and universities face serious if not
unprecedented financial challenges. Planning for Higher Education, 38(3), pp.5-15.
Council, F.R. and Britain, G., 2015. FRS 102: The Financial Reporting Standard Applicable in
the UK and Republic of Ireland. Financial Reporting Council Limited.
DeTienne, D.R., McKelvie, A. and Chandler, G.N., 2015. Making sense of entrepreneurial exit
strategies: A typology and test. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(2), pp.255-272.
Drever, A.I., Odders‐White, E., Kalish, C.W., Else‐Quest, N.M., Hoagland, E.M. and Nelms,
E.N., 2015. Foundations of financial well‐being: Insights into the role of executive function,
financial socialization, and experience‐based learning in childhood and youth. Journal of
Consumer Affairs, 49(1), pp.13-38.
Feng, T., Cummings, L. and Tweedie, D., 2017. Exploring integrated thinking in integrated
reporting–an exploratory study in Australia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), pp.330-353.
Francis, B., Hasan, I., Park, J.C. and Wu, Q., 2015. Gender differences in financial reporting
decision making: Evidence from accounting conservatism. Contemporary Accounting
Research, 32(3), pp.1285-1318.

38
Gaynor, L.M., Kelton, A.S., Mercer, M. and Yohn, T.L., 2016. Understanding the relation
between financial reporting quality and audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice &
Theory, 35(4), pp.1-22.
Ge, W., Li, Z., Liu, Q. and McVay, S.E., 2018. When does internal control over financial
reporting curb resource extraction? Evidence from China. Evidence from China (March 30,
2018).
Lapan, R.T. and Marcotte, A.M., 2015. Financial planning strategies of high school seniors:
Removing barriers to career success.
Petersen, J.A., Kushwaha, T. and Kumar, V., 2015. Marketing communication strategies and
consumer financial decision making: The role of national culture. Journal of Marketing, 79(1),
pp.44-63.
Poynton, T.A., Lapan, R.T. and Marcotte, A.M., 2015. Financial planning strategies of high
school seniors: Removing barriers to career success. The Career Development Quarterly, 63(1),
pp.57-73.
Santos, L.R. and Rosati, A.G., 2015. The evolutionary roots of human decision making. Annual
review of psychology, 66, pp.321-347.
Schiebener, J. and Brand, M., 2015. Decision making under objective risk conditions–a review
of cognitive and emotional correlates, strategies, feedback processing, and external
influences. Neuropsychology review, 25(2), pp.171-198.

39
Snider, J.H. and Davies, K.J., 2018. Success Strategies for Small Financial Planning
Firms. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), p.13.
Xu, X. and Gursoy, D., 2015. A conceptual framework of sustainable hospitality supply chain
management. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 24(3), pp.229-259.