Comparative Financial Analysis Report: Adalta Limited & Acrux Limited

This report undertakes a comparative financial analysis of Adalta Limited and Acrux Limited, two companies operating in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. The analysis employs fundamental analysis techniques, examining the companies' performance through their finan...Read More

Running head: BUSINESS FINANCE
Business Finance
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

BUSINESS FINANCE
Table of Contents
Executive summary:...................................................................................................................1
Introduction:...............................................................................................................................3
Discussion:.................................................................................................................................3
Analysis of solvency position:...................................................................................................3
Analysis of long term solvency:.................................................................................................3
Analysis of efficiency psoition:.................................................................................................3
Analysis of profitability position:..............................................................................................3
Analysis of market value:...........................................................................................................3
Recommendation:......................................................................................................................3
Conclusion:................................................................................................................................3
References list:...........................................................................................................................4

BUSINESS FINANCE
Introduction:
The report is prepared for evaluating and comparing the performance and operations
of two companies listed on Australian stock exchange. Financial performance of companies
is done by using the technique of fundamental analysis. For the evaluation of performance,
two companies operating under the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and life science industry
are chosen. Adalta limited and Acrux limited are the two companies for which the analysis is
done by extracting the information from latest year financial statements.
Adalta limited is a public biotechnology company of Australia that is primarily
involved in commercialization and development of i body technology platform and having an
initial focus on treating of fibrotic diseases. It is a highly innovative development company
engaged in development of drugs having the potential to treat the challenging medical
conditions. Acrux limited is a pharmaceutical company that helps in development and
commercialization of generic and specialty topical pharmaceuticals. Some of the marketed
products of company involve Evamist, Axiron and Lenzetto. A range of generic products is
currently being developed by company for US market by leveraging manufacturing sites, on
site laboratories and commercial and clinical experience that helps in bringing affordable
products to the market. Comparison of performance of these two companies is done in terms
of five aspects by determining the liquidity ratios, financial leverage ratios, efficiency
turnover ratios, market value ratios and profitability ratios.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Discussion:
Analysis of short term solvency position:
Short term solvency ratios intend to measure the ability of organization to meet their
short term financial obligations. Solvency position of Adalta and Acrux limited is analyzed
by computing current ratio, quick ratio and cash ratio. Current ratio is obtained by dividing
current assets by current liabilities. Current ratio of Adalta limited stood at 6.426 in year 2016
as against 23.475 in year 2017 indicating a considerable increase in figure. Acrux limited on
other hand, has its current ratio computed at 5.95 in year 2016 compared to 11.778 in year
2017. This increase in current ratio of Adalta is attributable to increase in amount of current
assets as well as current liabilities. It can be inferred from figures that the ability of company
to finance the short term obligations using current liabilities has increased (Burns 2016).
Quick ratio of Adalta stood at 6.426 in year 2016 as against 23.475 in year 2017 and
that of Acrux limited stood at 5.95 in year 2016 compared to 11.778 in year 2017
respectively. It is suggested from the figures that for both the organization, there are enough
liquid assets available for making the payment of short term obligations. For every one dollar,
company has $ 23.47 and $ 11.77 of quick assets for making payment of short term liabilities.
It can be seen that the value of current ratio is same as value of quick ratio as Acrux limited
and Adalta limited does not have any amount of inventories. However, the ideal ratio is
dependent upon the industry in which company is operating. It is required to make
comparison of the ratio with the industry standard. Organizations operating in life cycle and
pharmaceuticals industry have a shorter operating cycle depicting that they do not required
higher quick ratio.
Cash ratio on other hand increased from 2.256 in year 2016 to 18.068 in year 2017 for
Adalta. This increase in figure is indicative of the fact that ability of firm to make payment of

BUSINESS FINANCE
its current liabilities using cash and cash equivalent has increased. For Acrux limited, cash
ratio stood at 5.117 in year 2016 as against 10.105 and this depicts that there is availability of
cash and cash equivalent for making payments. A high cash coverage ratio is indicative of the
fact that company is more liquid and can easily fund their debt amount. Enough cash is
available on part of both the organization with Adalta limited having more cash available
compared to Adruz limited. Furthermore, Adalta limited has more cash as well as current
assets for financing its short term obligations compared to Acrux limited. Therefore, Adalta
limited is more liquid compared to Acrux limited as indicated by the figures of short term
solvency ratio.
Analysis of long term solvency:
Evaluation of long term solvency of companies is done by the computation of debt
ratio, equity ratio and debt to equity ratio. Debt ratio of Adalta limited has decreased from
0.156 in year 2016 compared to 0.043 in year 2017. This decline in debt ratio is attributable
to increase on amount of total assets at higher rate compared to increase in total liabilities.
Debt ratio for Acrux limited on other hand has reduced from 0.178 in year 2016 to 0.071 in
year 2017. This fall is witnessed in light of increasing total liabilities by considerable amount
compared to fall in total assets. It can be inferred from the figures that value of debt ratio for
Adalta limited is less as against Acrux limited. This implies that financial leverage of Acrux
limited is low compared to Adalta limited. However, increase in total amount of liabilities is
not a problem as long as operations of company are generating enough revenues. A lower
value of debt ratio is regarded as favorable as it implies a more stable business. Therefore, the
financial position of Adalta limited is more stable compared to Acrux limited.
Equity ratio is an investment leverage ratio that intends to measure the amount of
assets financed by equity compared to the availability of total assets in business. This

BUSINESS FINANCE
increase in value of equity ratio is because of increase in total assets and total liabilities. It is
preferred by organization to have higher equity ratio as it depicts that it is worthy to make
investment in company and company is less risky to lenders (Cole and Sokolyk 2016). Now,
looking at the values of equity ratio for Adalta limited, it can be seen that there has been an
increase in figures from 0.844 in year 2016 compared to 0.957 in year 2017. On other hand,
equity ratio for Acrux limited stood at 0.822 in year 2016 compared to 0.929 indicating that
ratio has increased in recent year. This increase in ratio is attributable to increase in value of
total equity at a higher rate compared to decline in total assets. However, equity ratio of
Acrux limited is more than that of Adalta limited at value of 0.929 and 0.957 in year 2017
respectively. Therefore, the long term solvency position of Adalta limited is comparatively
better than Acrux limited depicted from equity ratio figures. Thus implies that shareholders of
Adalta limited is contributing to the company for financing its assets in higher proportion
compared to Acrux limited. However, the total amount of equity of Acrux limited is
significantly higher than Adalta limited. Lower equity ratio on other hand, is indicative of
higher risk to creditors and they are more prone to losses as they pay large portions of their
earnings in making payment to creditors. Hence, it is preferable to have higher equity ratio
that enable them to obtain loans from financial institutions and improve the credit worthiness
of company.
Looking at values of debt to equity ratio for Adalta limited, it can be seen that ratio
has reduced from 0.184 in year 2016 to 0.044 in year 2017. This fall in ratio is attributable to
the fact that there has been increase in amount of total equity as well as total liabilities. Debt
to equity ratio for Acrux limited on other hands stood at 0.216 in year 2016 compared to
0.077 in year 2017. This figure is indicative of the fact that there is considerable decline in
the debt to equity ratio that is driven by fall in total amount of total liabilities from $ 9482000
in year 2016 compared to $ 3381000 in year 2017. Having a lower debt to equity ratio

BUSINESS FINANCE
implied that the business is financially stable. When comparing the financial position of both
the organizations using debt to equity ratio, it can be inferred that company with higher debt
to equity ratio is regarded as good when the debt obligations are is serviced using leverage
that helps in increasing the return generated from equity. In this case, debt to equity ratio of
Acrux limited is favorable as against Adalta limited. Therefore, from the above analysis, the
overall long term solvency position of Adalta limited is favorable compared to Acrux limited.
Analysis of efficiency position:
Efficiency position of company is evaluated by analyzing the accounts receivable
turnover, asset turnover ratio and accounts payable turnover. This particular ratio intends to
measure the efficiency of business to collect its receivables. Higher ratio implies that
receivables are collected by organization at more frequent basis and there is more likelihood
that credit sales would be collected (Moffett et al. 2014). Accounts receivable turnover for
Adalta limited has been computed at 0.832 in year 2016 compared to 1.056 in year 2017.
This increase in value is attributable to a significant increase in revenue generated and
increase in accounts receivable. Efficiency of Adalta limited in collecting its receivables has
increased in year 2017. For Acrux limited, accounts receivable turnover ratio has reduced
from 5.971 in year 2017 compared to 4.256 in year 2016. It can be seen that revenue
generated by Acrux limited in year 2017 has reduced considerably whilst increase in total
amount of account receivable. A fall in ratio provides an opportunity to collect old accounts
receivable that is unnecessarily tying up in the business. Such lower ratio might be due to
absence of any credit policy and they might have customers who are not making payment on
time.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Assets turnover ratio indicates the ability of organization to produce sales efficiently
and companies having higher ratio would require can carry out their operations with fewer
amounts of assets and equity (Perotti and Wagenhofer 2014).
Now, looking at the figures of assets turnover ratio for Adalta limited, value has
declined considerably from 0.54 in year 2016 compared to 0.243 in year 2017. This fall in
ratio is due to declining revenue and increase in considerable amount of total assets. Such fall
in the ratio is reflective of the fact that company requires more assets for generating more
sales and thereby depicts that the assets are not utilized efficiently. Assets turnover ratio for
Acrux limited on other hand is computed at 0.535 in year 2016 compared to 0.506 in year
2017. It is indicated by the figure that there has been fewer fall in the asset turnover ratio
indicating that assets are not as efficiently utilized in year 2017 as it was utilized in year
2016. Assets are not used optimally for generating revenue. Comparing the ratio of these two
companies, it can be seen that asset turnover ratio for Adalta limited is significantly lower
than Acrux limited and therefore, the assets are not efficiently utilized by former in
generating revenue.
Accounts payable turnover ratio is implies the time taken by organization for making
payments to their suppliers. A fall in ratio is indicative of the fact that payment to suppliers
are made slowly as the financial condition is not suitable enough to make payment. It is
always preferable on part of organization to have higher ratio compared to lower ratio.
Accounts payable turnover ratio for Adalta limited stood at 7.908 in year 2016 as
against 12.587 in year 2017. This figure indicates that there is increase in ratio depicting that
the ability of company for making payment to its suppliers have increased and higher ratio
can be used by organization for negotiating favorable credit terms in future. The payment to
suppliers is made on prompt basis by organization depicting that enough money is available

BUSINESS FINANCE
for making the payment. Such availability of enough money is because of increase in total
amount of revenue generated from operations of business (Kovács and Gál 2017). This
increase in accounts payable ratio is also attributable to credit terms allowed to suppliers by
organization. Adalta limited does not provide longer credit period to the suppliers for making
the payment. Furthermore, it is always desirable to have higher ratio. Now, looking at the
value of ratio for Acrux limited, it can be seen that it is computed at zero. This is because no
cost of services has been incurred by organization in the recent years. From the analysis of
above figures pertaining to efficiency ratios, it can be inferred that Acrux limited is more
efficient in generating revenue using its assets compared to Acrux limited.
Analysis of profitability position:
Profitability position of companies is evaluated by analyzing the ratios such as gross
margin, net profit margin and return on assets. Gross profit margin is the measure of
profitability that depicts the proportion of gross sales made in relation to sales made. It is
favorable on part of organization to have higher gross profit margin. Looking at the figures of
Adalta limited, it can be seen that value of gross profit margin is computed at -89.30 in year
2016 as against -82.89% in year 2016. The negative figure is indicative of the fact that
revenue generated is significantly lower than cost of sales by Adalta in both the years. There
has been considerable increase in total cost of sales along with increase in revenue for both
the years. However, the rate of increase in revenue is higher than increase in cost of sales
resulting in reduction of gross loss generated in year 2017 as against 2016. When looking at
gross margin figures for Arcux limited, it can be seen that the gross profit generated remained
constant at `100% for both the years and there are no cost incurred in making sales (Swift and
Piff 2016). However, the total amount of revenue generated has reduced from $ 2855700 in

BUSINESS FINANCE
year 2016 to $ 23934000 in year 2017. The negative value is indicative of the fact that the
costs of sales are not at all managed by company.
When computing net profit margin that is attributable to Adalta limited stood at -
155.71% in year 2016 compared to -143.95% in year 2017. There has been fall in net loss
generated due to increase in revenue derived from operations of company as against the net
loss generated. Looking at the net profit figures for Acrux limited, there is significant fall in
value from 45.46% in year 2016 to -1.02% in year 2017 respectively. This negative value is
attributable to net loss that is generated in year 2017 of amount $ -243000 as against amount
of $ 12981000 in year 2016. This negative value is reflective of the fact that company not at
all efficient in converting sales into actual profit and controlling cost. In this regard, the
position of Acrux limited is better as compared to Adalta limited. Acrux limited is more
efficient in converting sales into actual profit and controlling costs.
Return on assets measures the efficiency of management in using the assets for
generating profit. Higher ratio is preferable as it depicts that resources are utilized properly
for generating income and the business is more profitable if higher values are earned by
company on its assets. Return on assets of Adalta limited stood at -84.09% in year 2016 as
against -35.01% in year 2017. It is indicated by the figures that the amount of total assets for
generating income has increased. For Acrux limited, return on asset ratio has reduced from
24.32% in year 2016 compared to -0.51% in year 2017. This is due to fall in total amount of
assets along with net loss generated in year 2017.
Business is more profitable if there is value of return generated by assets. An
increasing trend of profitability ratio that company’s profitability in increasing. However, it is
suggested from the figures computed that the performance of company is not aligned with the
capital that is invested in the business in the form of assets. Now, comparing the profitability

BUSINESS FINANCE
position of both the companies, it can be seen that Acrux limited is more efficient in
generating profits by utilizing their assets.
Analysis of market value:
Market value of companies is evaluated by analyzing the ratios such as price to
earnings and dividend yield rate. Such ratios are used for evaluating the current share price of
companies help in Australian stock exchange. This particular tool is used by company in
determining whether the share price of company are under priced or overpriced (Amir et al.
2015).
Price to earnings ratio is used by investors for evaluating the earnings potential of
company and whether the shares are under priced and overpriced. This ratio decides how
many earnings are willing to be paid by investors for the shares and helps in establishing
direct relationship between earnings and market price of company. For Adalta limited, price
to earnings ratio has increased from -0.83 in year 2016 to -8.89 in year 2017. It can be
inferred from figure that there is considerable improvement in value of price earnings ratio
and this increase in value depicts that investors are willing to pay more for shares of company
and a positive future performance is indicated by higher values. This improvement in price to
earnings ratio is because of value of earning per share that improved from -0.3259 in year
2016 to -0.0315 in year 2017. Moreover, the market value of share has increased in recent
year. For Acrux limited, the value of price earnings ratio has deteriorated from 9.23 in year
2016 to -15 in year 2017. This fall in value is because of fall in earning per share of company
from 0.078 in year 2016 to -0.015 in year 2017. It is inferred from figure that investors does
not expect the performance of company to improve in future as the current performance is
poor as indicated by the value of earning ratio.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Dividend yield ratio is the proportion of market share that the company is willing to
make payment to its shareholders by way of dividends (Caselli and Gatti 2017). This
particular ratio is considered important to investors who have the intention of purchasing
shares for earning dividend income. Now, the value of dividend yield rate for Adalta limited
stood at 0% for both the years. The value of ratio is zero because no dividend is paid to the
shareholder of company for two consecutive years. Stockholders of company have not
received dividend and this is indicative of the fact that not a single percentage of market price
of share is distributed by company by way of dividend.
Looking at the figures of Acrux limited, it can be seen that dividend yield rate stood at
8.33% in year 2016 as against 0% in year 2017. This drastic fall in value from 8.33% to 0% is
because of the fact that company has not paid any amount of dividend to its shareholder in
year 2017. Moreover, there was fall in market value per share from 0.72 in year 2016 to
0.225 in year 2017. Such a significant fall in value of dividend yield of Acrux l,imited is
because of fall in value of dividend down to zero that has the ultimate impact on the market
value of stock. Declining value of dividend yield is not always regarded as unfavorable
situation because higher dividend value might reduce the future amount of dividend that
would have impact on the market value of stock negatively.
Recommendation:
From the above analysis, it can be inferred that Adalta limited is more efficient in
meeting its short term obligations using current assets such as cash and cash equivalent and
inventories compared to Acvrux limited. For the long term solvfecny position, it is
recommended to Acrux limited that they should reduce the total; amount of liabilities in light
of declining total assets. The efficiency of Adalta limited should be increased so that enough
returns are generated using the assets of organization. Furthermore, it is required by Adalta

BUSINESS FINANCE
limited to lower the cost of sales by way of sourcing the raw materials at lower cost from
suppliers.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Conclusion:
It can be inferred from analysis of all the ratios above that the overall performance of
Acrux limited and Adalta limited in terms of solvency and efficiency position. However,
from investment viewpoint by investors, making investment in both the organization does not
seem attractive in the current year because no amount of dividend is being paid on shares. On
other hand, the market value of shares of Adalta limited is more compared to Acrux limited at
value of 0.28 as against 0.025. Therefore, it would be better for investor to make investment
in shares of Adalta limited in current scenario.

BUSINESS FINANCE
References list:
Amir, E., Kama, I. and Levi, S., 2015. Conditional persistence of earnings components and
accounting anomalies. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42(7-8), pp.801-825.
Anderson, S.J., Chandy, R. and Zia, B., 2018. Pathways to Profits: The Impact of Marketing
vs. Finance Skills on Business Performance. Management Science.
Baños-Caballero, S., García-Teruel, P.J. and Martínez-Solano, P., 2014. Working capital
management, corporate performance, and financial constraints. Journal of Business
Research, 67(3), pp.332-338.
Brooks, R., 2015. Financial management: core concepts. Pearson.
Buckland, R. and Davis, E.W. eds., 2016. Finance for growing enterprises. Routledge.
Burns, P., 2016. Entrepreneurship and small business. Palgrave Macmillan Limited.
Carbó‐Valverde, S., Rodríguez‐Fernández, F. and Udell, G.F., 2016. Trade credit, the
financial crisis, and SME access to finance. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 48(1),
pp.113-143.
Caselli, S. and Gatti, S. eds., 2017. Structured Finance: Techniques, Products and Market.
Springer.
Cole, R. and Sokolyk, T., 2016. Who needs credit and who gets credit? Evidence from the
surveys of small business finances. Journal of Financial Stability, 24, pp.40-60.
Colombo, M.G., Cumming, D., Mohammadi, A., Rossi-Lamastra, C. and Wadhwa, A., 2016.
Open business models and venture capital finance. Industrial and Corporate Change, 25(2),
pp.353-370.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Drucker, P.F., 2017. The Theory of the Business (Harvard Business Review Classics).
Harvard Business Press.
Fraser, S., Bhaumik, S.K. and Wright, M., 2015. What do we know about entrepreneurial
finance and its relationship with growth?. International Small Business Journal, 33(1), pp.70-
88.
García-Meca, E., López-Iturriaga, F. and Tejerina-Gaite, F., 2017. Institutional investors on
boards: Does their behavior influence corporate finance?. Journal of Business Ethics, 146(2),
pp.365-382.
Gitman, L.J., Juchau, R. and Flanagan, J., 2015. Principles of managerial finance. Pearson
Higher Education AU.
Jordà, Ò., Schularick, M. and Taylor, A.M., 2016. The great mortgaging: housing finance,
crises and business cycles. Economic Policy, 31(85), pp.107-152.
Kovács, S.Z. and Gál, Z., 2017. The role of business and finance services in Central and
Eastern Europe. In The Routledge Handbook to Regional Development in Central and
Eastern Europe (pp. 63-81). Routledge.
Lee, N., Sameen, H. and Cowling, M., 2015. Access to finance for innovative SMEs since the
financial crisis. Research policy, 44(2), pp.370-380.
Longin, F. ed., 2016. Extreme events in finance: A handbook of extreme value theory and its
applications. John Wiley & Sons.
McLean, R.D. and Zhao, M., 2014. The business cycle, investor sentiment, and costly
external finance. The Journal of Finance, 69(3), pp.1377-1409.
Mian, A.R. and Sufi, A., 2018. Finance and business cycles: the credit-driven household
demand channel (No. w24322). National Bureau of Economic Research.

BUSINESS FINANCE
Moffett, M.H., Stonehill, A.I. and Eiteman, D.K., 2014. Fundamentals of multinational
finance. Prentice Hall.
Owen, R., Botelho, T. and Anwar, O., 2016. Exploring the success and barriers to SME
access to finance and its potential role in achieving growth.
Perotti, P. and Wagenhofer, A., 2014. Earnings quality measures and excess returns. Journal
of business finance & accounting, 41(5-6), pp.545-571.
Storey, D.J., 2016. Understanding the small business sector. Routledge.
Su, W.H. and Wells, P., 2015. The association of identifiable intangible assets acquired and
recognised in business acquisitions with postacquisition firm performance. Accounting &
Finance, 55(4), pp.1171-1199.
Swift, L. and Piff, S., 2014. Quantitative methods: for business, management and finance.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Titman, S., Keown, A.J. and Martin, J.D., 2017. Financial management: Principles and
applications. Pearson.
Werner, F.M. and Stoner, J.A., 2015. Transforming finance and business education: Part of
the problem. Journal of Management for Global Sustainability, 3(1), pp.25-52.
Young, K. and Pagliari, S., 2017. Capital united? Business unity in regulatory politics and the
special place of finance. Regulation & Governance, 11(1), pp.3-23.
Zopounidis, C., Galariotis, E., Doumpos, M., Sarri, S. and AndriosopouloS, K., 2015.
Multiple criteria decision aiding for finance: An updated bibliographic survey. European
Journal of Operational Research, 247(2), pp.339-348.

BUSINESS FINANCE