Managerial Finance Report: Analysis of JD and SD Financial Performance

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of managerial finance, focusing on the financial performance of JD Sports Fashion PLC and Sports Direct International PLC. The report begins with an introduction to managerial finance and its application in decision-making, particularly in the context of share purchases. The core of the report is Portfolio 1, which includes a detailed analysis of ten key financial ratios for both companies over the years 2015 and 2016. These ratios include current ratio, quick ratio, gross profit margin, operating profit margin, net profit margin, gearing ratio, earnings per share, return on capital employed, average inventories turnover, and dividend payout ratio. The analysis compares the performance of the two companies, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses based on these ratios. Portfolio 2 then discusses the limitations of investment appraisal techniques in long-term decision-making. The report concludes with recommendations for improving financial performance, such as inventory turnover optimization and budgetary control. Formulas, calculations, and interpretations are provided to support the analysis, making it a valuable resource for understanding financial performance and investment potential. The report is concluded with references and an appendix with the calculations.

MANAGERIAL FINANCE

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
PORTFOLIO 1.................................................................................................................................3
b) Analysis of the performance and economic financial position of the two companies for
2015 and 2016.............................................................................................................................4
c) Recommendations to improve financial performance ...........................................................9
d) Limitations of financial ratios and interpretation.................................................................10
PORTFOLIO 2...............................................................................................................................11
b) Limitations of using investment appraisal techniques for long time decision making.........15
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................17
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................18
Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………21

INTRODUCTION
Managerial finance is an approach of analysing economic position of any company on
which appropriate decisions are made regarding further implementations. However, variety of
ideas are generated for increasing monetary position and managing fund efficiently. Present
report is based on understanding decision making tools for Madhouse Retail Ltd interested in
purchasing shares of one of two entities as Sport Direct international plc and JD sports Fashion
plc. In this regard, financial position of the two companies is to be discussed in terms of ratio
analysis for decision making regarding buying shares. In addition to this, investment appraisal
techniques and appropriate selection of the project for manufacturing company is to be identified
in this assignment. However, appropriate decision in relation to economic position of entity and
its growth is to be understood in this report.
PORTFOLIO 1
a) 10 financial ratios results of JD and SD for 2015 and 2016
RATIOS
JD
2015 2016 2015 2016
CURRENT RATIOS
1.22 1.47 2.30 2.43
QUICK RATIOS
0.54 0.78 0.94 1.13
GROSS PROFIT MARGIN
48.58% 48.54% 43.81% 44.23%
OPERATING PROFIT MARGIN
6.09% 7.32% 10.44% 7.68%
NET PROFIT MARGIN
3.55% 5.52% 8.52% 9.61%
GEARING RATIOS
12.66% 9.55% 16.50% 23.88%
EARNINGS PER SHARE

27.06pence 50.16penc
e
40.6pence 46.8pence
RETURN ON CAPITAL
EMPLOYED 26.10% 30.10% 21.25% 12.27%
AVERAGE INVENTORIES
TURNOVER PERIOD 105 days 93 days 119 days 158 days
DIVIDENT PAYOUT RATIO
25.17% 14.15% 0 0
See formulas and calculations in Appendix.
b) Analysis of the performance and economic financial position of the two companies for 2015
and 2016.
Financial ratios are key components to analyse economic position of any entity. Different ratios
are evaluated to identify business performance of any firms such as; profitability, liquidity,
efficiency, financial gearing, investment and so on (Babalola and Abiola, 2013). However,
variety of ideas generated to create balance and improving business performance in context to
decision making process. Ratio analysis of the companies is evaluated as follows:
 Current ratio:
This ratio is useful to identify liquidity position of the entity which is evaluated as division of
current assets to current liabilities (Sohn and Kim, 2013). As an ideal current ratio of any entity
is considered as 1 which demonstrates its effectiveness.
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 1.22 2.30
2016 1.47 2.43

Illustration 1: Current ratio
Interpretation: It can be observed that both companies increased the current ratio. In the
accounting year 2016, cash and its equivalents of JD sports increased from 121 to 216 GBP
million. Along with this, level of inventories also inclined from 225 to 238 GBP million
respectively. Further, other current assets also inclined from 16 to 26 GBP million which in turn
resulted are higher current ratio in 2016 over 2015. On the other side, balance sheet of Sports
Direct presents that total current assets are significantly inclined from 878 to 1311 GBP million
at the end of 2016, especially trade receivables and cash had major impact in this increase. This
is one of the main reasons due to which liquidity of Sports Direct is good.
Quick ratios:
It is considered as liquidity ratio which demonstrates business performance and inventory
management of the company (Vogel, 2014).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 0.54 0.94
2016 0.78 1.13

Illustration 2: Quick ratio
Interpretation: Analysing quick ratio it can be concluded that JD with weak 0.78 ratio in 2016
indicate poor liquidity position. That would indicate that they will not be able to pay all of their current
debt liabilities using only quick assets. On the other side SD 1.13 ratio in 2016 puts them in a better
position than the competing firm as with this figures it can be stated that after paying off all of their
current liabilities with quick assets they will still have assets left over.
 Gross profit margin:
It is profitability ratio to identify financial position and profit level of the company
(Cheng, Ioannou and Serafeim, 2014).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 48.58% 43.85%
2016 48.54% 44.23%

Illustration 3: Gross profit ratio
Interpretation: It is analysed that JD Sports higher Gross profit margin score shows that they are
controlling their costs of raw materials and direct labour more efficiently than Sports Direct.
Operating profit margin:
Analysing this ratio remains effective to identify profit level of the company through
business operations (Midrigan and Xu, 2014
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 6.09% 10.44%
2016 7.32% 7.68%

Illustration 4: Operating profit ratio
Interpretation: On analysing individual entity's operation margin, it is observed that this profit
level of Sports Direct International plc has decreased in 2016 in comparison to 2015. While, on
the other hand, JD Fashion Plc's operation profit margin has increased which shows good
performance of its entity. Higher operating profit margin is more beneficial than a lower ratio
because this shows that the company is making enough money from its ongoing operations to
pay for its variable costs as well as its fixed costs.
 Net profit margin:
It is a profitability ratio which shows profitability of the entity (Battiston and et.al. 2016).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 3.55% 8.52%
2016 5.52% 9.61%

Illustration 5: net margin ratio
Interpretation: As comparing net profit margin of both selected companies, it is recognised that
this performance of Sports Direct International Plc is higher than of JD Ltd. It is because of
differences in expenses incurred on additional overhead during business operations. On behalf
of analysing net profit margin of the companies, performance of JD Ltd in better than the other
one.
 Gearing ratio:
It is considered as a fundamental ratio which expresses company's level in respect of long term
debt in comparison to the ratio of equity capital to capital employed (Bartram, Brown and
Waller, 2016).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 12.66% 16.50%
2016 9.55% 23.88%

Illustration 6: Gearing ratio
Interpretation: Gearing ratios purpose is to analyse the financing structure of a business. It is
considered that company which gearing ratio is lower than of other selected one should be
chosen for the business' effectiveness. It is because of this ratio is to demonstrate owner's equity
to fund borrowed by the company. However, the entity whose gearing ratio is higher more
suspect able in position. As it can be seen that Sports Direct gearing ratios increased significantly
high.
 Earnings per share:
This ratio is evaluated for the purpose of continuing or discontinuing business operations,
extraordinary goods and net income of the company (Segal, Shaliastovich and Yaron, 2015).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 21.06 p 40.6 p
2016 50.16 p 46.8 p

Illustration 7: Earning per share
Interpretation: Earning per share of JD Ltd is greater than of Sports Direct International Plc.
Likewise, it is considered that the company which has higher EPS should be selected for
purchasing shares and working on its improvement. It simply means that JD is more profitable
and there for more attractive for shareholders investments.
Return on capital employed:
It refers as profitability ratio of any company demonstrate return on capital employed over its
business operations (Pasquariello, 2014). Including this, analysing this ratio remains effective for
decision making regarding business operations for its long time operations.
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 26.10% 21.25%
2016 30.10% 12.27%

Illustration 8: return on capital
Interpretation: It is evaluated that return on capital employed of JD Fashion Ltd is greater than
of Sports Direct Ltd. It is because of balanced cash flow on business operations of the entity.
 Average inventories turnover period:
This ratio is analysed to identify company's performance in terms of selling inventories which
impacts on its sales revenue (Murphy, 2016). Including this, it is also calculated using cost of
goods sold considers as total cost of inventory.
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 105 days 119 days
2016 93 days 158 days

Illustration 9
Interpretation: Looking at average inventories turnover period it is visible that both companies
ratio is poor however Sport Direct it is in a worse position with the quiet a big increase of 39
days from 2015 to 2016. An increasing average inventory period indicates that it is taking longer
to sell the goods and in result of that the cash is frozen.
 Dividend payout ratio:
This ratio is effective to analyse the company's growth which remains appropriate for its future
growth. (Adrian, Etula and Muir, 2014).
Year
JD Sports
Fashion PLC
Sports Direct
International PLC
2015 25.17% 0
2016 14.15% 0

Illustration 10: dividend payout ratio
Interpretation: As comparing dividend payout ratio of the selected companies it can be seen that
SD made no dividend in 2015 or 2016 and as there is no guarantee the next year it will be fair
safe to say that for investing purposes JD would be a safer option. This also illustrate that the
portion of profits JD decides to keep to fund operations and the portion of profits that is given to
its shareholders was 14.15% in 2016.
Investment potential
Referring the outcome of ratio analysis of JD and Sports Direct, it can be presented that both
companies are competitive and look quite attractive in different areas. Further, it can be depicted
that liquidity position of both the companies are good. Although within those two Sport Direct
net profit margin is comparatively higher than JD it is to be considered that part of the net profit
will be used to serve the extra loan that have been taken in 2016 to service the long term depths.
Along with this, ROCE presents that JD has optimum use of shareholders equity rather than
Sport Direct. Furthermore analysis of dividend payout ratio illustrate that Sports Direct made no
dividend in the last two years and there is no guarantee they should return next year. Hence, as

per overall evaluation, it can be depicted that financial performance of JD is better over the rival
firm Sports Direct. There for it is recommended to invest in JD Sports.
c) Recommendations to improve financial performance
It is recommended for both companies to look into and improve on average inventories turnover
period. Reducing the amount of time goods stay in inventory will help to turn the inventory into
cash faster.
It is recommended to JD to exert control on indirect expenses which in turn helps in attaining
high margin. Thus, for this purpose, business unit needs to employ the technique of budgetary
control. On the basis of such tool, by making continuous evaluation of actual expenses in against
to the standards JD can find out deviations and would become able to take action for
improvement.
Along with this, to control or reduce the level of direct and operating expenses Sports Direct
should undertake the same technique for the maximization of profitability aspect. Considering
the outcome of ratio analysis, it is suggested to both JD and Sports Direct to build optimal capital
structure by issuing 2 equities in against to 1 debt. This in turn helps both the firms in reducing
fixed obligation in terms of interest payment and helps in ensuring balance in the financial
structure. In addition to this, Sports Direct needs to lay emphasis on developing competent
strategic policy framework for generating higher returns through using money invested by
shareholders. Further, for maintaining liquidity in line with the ideal ratio such as 2:1, JD needs
to make focus on maintaining more current assets such as cash etc. Hence, by implementing
above mentioned recommendations it will be effective to enhance its business and financial
performance. Including this, its productivity and profitability will be increased at maximum level
impacts further operations more efficiently.
d) Limitations of financial ratios and interpretation
On critical evaluation over financial ratios, some drawbacks are obtained which affect business
and its economic position negatively (Midrigan and Xu, 2014). As limitations occurred in ratio
analysis are as follows:
 Wrongful information regarding financial data which is collected for the ratio analysis.
 Ratio analysis is predictions on business performance which may wrong and adverse in
terms of its future operations.

 It is difficult to make decisions in respect of further operations due to changes in market
prices and environmental factors (Battiston and et.al. 2016).
 It remains difficult to calculate variety of ratios and working on managing entire business
operations.
 Error in calculation of ratio analysis as taking wrong data for determining entity's
performance affect its business operations adversely.
Therefore, it is needed to consider all these during calculating ratio analysis by which
appropriate decisions can make to improve its financial position. Including this, it will be
appropriate for entity's growth in respect of productivity, marketability and competitiveness
efficiently (Cheng, Ioannou and Serafeim, 2014). Hence, ratio analysis can be done effectively
also remains good for increasing company's development at higher level.
From assessment, it has been identified along with the advantages; there are several limitations
which in turn closely influences the significance of ratio analysis. The main limitations of ratio
analysis imply that it is not suitable in relation to making comparison of the financial
performance of two companies. Moreover, different companies undertake varied accounting
policies and process for the preparation of financial statements. Thus, sometimes it may possible
that such technique does not present appropriate financial position and performance of JD in
against to Sports Direct. Along with this, economic trend and conditions vary from one year to
another. In this regard, it is not possible to evaluate growth of the firm over the years considering
the tool of ratio analysis. Further, ratio analysis or evaluation is highly based on historical
information, whereas management is concerned about future. Thus, all the above depicted
limitations affect the importance of ratio analysis as a decision making tool.
PORTFOLIO 2
a) Appraisal techniques formulas, calculations and answers for two machines
NPV METHOD:
PROFIT + DEPRECIATION = CASH FLOW

MACHINE 1 DEPRECIATION = = 25000 p.a
YEARS NET
PROFIT
DEPRECIATION CASH FLOW DISCOUN
T RATE
PRESEN
T
VALUE
-170,000 1 -170,000
2017 65,000 25,000 90,000 0.833 74,970
2018 65,000 25,000 90,000 0.694 62,460
2019 65,000 25,000 90,000 0.579 52,110
2020 55,000 25,000 80,000 0.482 38,560
2021 55,000 25,000 80,000 0.402 32,160
2022 45,000 25,000 70,000+20,000
=90,000
0.335 30,150
NPV=
120,410

MACHINE 2 DEPRACIATION = = 28,333 p.a
YEARS NET
PROFIT
DEPRECIATION CASH
FLOW
DISCOUNT
RATE
PRESENT
VALUE
-170,000 1 -170,000
2017 25,000 28,333 53,333 0.833 44,426
2018 35,000 28,333 63,333 0.694 43,953
2019 45,000 28,333 73,333 0.579 42,460
2020 75,000 28,333 103,333 0.482 49,807
2021 85,000 28,333 113,333 0.402 45,600
2022 65,000 28,333 93,333 0.335 31,267
NPV=
87,472
After calculating using NPV technique it can be seen that both machines show positive NPV
however between the two machine 1 value is great (120,410) which is comparatively higher to
machine 2 (87,472) so investing in machine 1 will give more return and will increase the value of
the shareholders.
ARR METHOD:
ARR = X 100
AVERAGE PROFIT =

AVERAGE INVESTMENT =
MACHINE 1
= 58,333
= 95,000
X100 = 61.40%
ARR = 61.40%
MACHINE 2
= 55,000
= 85,000
X100 = 64.71%
ARR = 64.71%
According to ARR technique of calculating it is visible that machine 2 with figures 64.71% in
return is economically better to invest in rather than machine 1 which has 61.40%.
PAYBACK METHOD:
MACHINE 1
YEARS CASH FLOW CUMULATIVE
-170,000 -170,000
2017 90,000 -80,000
2018 90,000 10,000
2019 90,000 -
2020 80,000 -

2021 80,000 -
2022 90,000 -
X 12 = 10.66 months
To pay back it took 1 year 11 months
MACHINE 2
YEARS CASH FLOW CUMULATIVE
-170,000 -170,000
2017 53,333 -116,667
2018 63,333 -53,334
2019 73,333 19,999
2020 103,333 -
2021 113,333 -
2022 93,333 -
X 12 = 8.7 months = 9 months
To pay back it took 2 years 9 months

Using payback calculating technique it has been concluded that it takes less to pay back for
machine 1 (1 year and 11 months) than machine 2 (2 years and 9 months). There for it will be
advised to invest in project 1.
b) Limitations of using investment appraisal techniques for long time decision making
Payback period method:
 This method is not useful for long financing, also ignores the benefits that appear after
the payback period and because of that it cannot measure profitability (Pasquariello,
2014).
 It does not consider time value of concept which has high level of importance in the
present times (Atrill and McLaney, 2011).
 The payback period method other disadvantage is that Inflation is not taken into
consideration. And as the rise of inflation can cause severe damage to organization’s
finance, the impacts due to inflation should never be forgotten by a company (Atrill and
McLaney, 2011).
Accounting rate of return (ARR):
 Although it is considered as the most simple method to understand and calculate return
on investment but it focuses on its return but on consideration over time (Adrian, Etula
and Muir, 2014). Therefore, project plan and its return may fail in terms of achieving
manufacturing company's growth. Including this, return on each year remains just
forecasting also timing for achieving the outcome neglected. Thus, project plan and rate
of return can be inappropriate for the company.
 Similarly, this investment appraisal is not suitable for both private and public sector
entities. It is because of conclusion for public sector entity to consider certain regulatory
requirements of corporate governance and working on them (Murphy, 2016). Therefore,

applying ARR as investment appraisal technique can be failure in terms of achieving the
target.
 Additionally, ARR method is based on the accounting income data rather than the cash
flow information which are rather important while measuring achievement over the
whole life of a project (Atrill and McLaney, 2011).
Net Present Value (NPV):
 NPV technique is unable to get accurate results because in this method individual has to
guess about cost of capital. This assumption of cost of capital is low then result in making
suboptimal investments, whereas if it is high then it gives good results regarding
investments (Advantages And Disadvantages Of Net Present Value (NPV), 2017).
 NPV is limited to make comparison between two projects.
 It is difficult to understand. It is very difficult to calculate appropriate discount rates as
well (Advantages And Disadvantages Of Net Present Value (NPV), 2017).
CONCLUSION
It is concluded that analysing economic position of any entity is crucial on which appropriate
decisions are made regarding its further operations. In this regard, appropriate solution is
recognised for selecting the best alternative out of Sports Direct International plc and JD Fashion
plc for buying shares to improve business performance of Madhouse Ltd. Including this, critical
evaluation on ratio analysis and different investment appraisal techniques have been identified.
However, significance of analysing decision making tools has been recognised to improve
monetary performance of the entity.

REFERENCES
Books and Journal
Adrian, T., Etula, E. and Muir, T., 2014. Financial Intermediaries and the Cross‐Section of Asset
Returns. The Journal of Finance. 69(6). pp. 2557-2596.
Atrill, P. and McLaney, E., 2011. Accounting and Finance for Non-Specialists, 7th edition.
Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Babalola, Y.A. and Abiola, F.R., 2013. Financial Ratio Analysis of Firms: A Tool for Decision
Making. International journal of management sciences. 1(4). pp. 132-137.
Bartram, S.M., Brown, G.W. and Waller, W., 2016. How Important Is Financial Risk? (Digest
Summary). CFA Digest. 46(10). pp. 69-138.
Battiston, S. and et.al. 2016. Complexity theory and financial regulation. Science. 35(6). pp. 818-
819.
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G., 2014. Corporate social responsibility and access to
finance. Strategic Management Journal. 35(1). pp. 1-23.
Delis, M.D., Hasan, I. and Tsionas, E.G., 2014. The risk of financial intermediaries. Journal of
Banking & Finance. 44(3). pp. 1-12.
Midrigan, V. and Xu, D.Y., 2014. Finance and misallocation: Evidence from plant-level data.
The American Economic Review. 104(2). pp. 422-458.
Murphy, A.L., 2016. The Bank of England and the genesis of modern management. Eabh Papers.
3(2). pp. 127-156.
Pasquariello, P., 2014. Financial market dislocations. Review of Financial Studies. 27(6). pp.
1868-1914.
Segal, G., Shaliastovich, I. and Yaron, A., 2015. Good and bad uncertainty: Macroeconomic and
financial market implications. Journal of Financial Economics. 117(2). pp. 369-397.
Sohn, S.Y. and Kim, Y.S., 2013. Behavioral credit scoring model for technology-based firms that
considers uncertain financial ratios obtained from relationship banking. Small Business
Economics. 41(4). pp. 931-943.

Subrahmanyam, A. and Titman, S., 2013. Financial market shocks and the macroeconomy.
Review of Financial Studies. 26(11). pp. 2687-2717.
Vogel, H.L., 2014. Entertainment industry economics: A guide for financial analysis. Cambridge
University Press.
Online
Limitations of Investment appraisal techniques. 2016. [Online]. Available through:
<http://knowledgegrab.com/learners-zone/study-support/decision-making-financial-
management/investment-decision/appraisals-16/>.
Advantages And Disadvantages Of Net Present Value (NPV), 2017. [Online]. Available through
<https://accountlearning.blogspot.in/2011/07/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-net.html>
APPENDIX
PORTFOLIO 1 a)
RATIOS FORMULAS
CURRENT RATIOS
QUICK RATIOS

GROSS PROFIT MARGIN
OPERATING PROFIT
MARGIN
NET PROFIT MARGIN
GEARING RATIO
EARNINGS PER SHARE
RETURN ON CAPITAL
EMPLOYED
AVERAGE INVENTORIES
TURNOVER PERIOD
DIVIDEND PAYOUT RATIO
CALCULATIONS FOR JD SPORTS
CURRENT RATIO
2016 - = 1.47
2015 - = 1.22
QUICK RATIO

2016 - = 0.78
2015 - = 0.54
GROSS PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 48.54%
2015 - X 100 = 48.58%
OPERATING PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 7.32%
2015 - X 100 = 6.09%
NET PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 5.52%
2015 - X 100 = 3.55%
GEARING RATIO
2016 - X 100 = 9.55%
2015 - X 100 = 12.66%
EARNINGS PER SHARE

2016 - = 0.50 X 100 = 50.16 pence
2015 - = 0.27 X 100 = 27.06 pence
RETURN ON CAPITAL EMPLOYED
2016 - X 100 = 30.10%
2015 - X 100 = 26.10%
AVERAGE INVENTORIES TURNOVER PERIOD
2016 - X 365 = 93 days
2015 - X 365 = 105 days
DIVIDENT PAYOUT RATIO
2016 - X 100 = 14.15%
2015 - X 100 = 25.17%
CALCULATIONS FOR SPORTS DIRECT
CURRENT RATIO
2016 - = 2.43
2015 - = 2.30
QUICK RATIO
2016 - = 1.13

2015 - = 0.94
GROSS PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 44.23%
2015 - X 100 = 43.81%
OPERATING PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 7.68%
2015 - X 100 = 10.44%
NET PROFIT MARGIN
2016 - X 100 = 9.61%
2015 - X 100 = 8.52%
GEARING RATIO
2016 - X 100 = 23.88%
2015 - X 100 = 16.50%
EARNINGS PER SHARE
2016 - = 0.468 X 100 = 46.8 pence

2015 - = 0.405 X 100 = 40.6 pence
RETURN ON CAPITAL EMPLOYED
2016 - X 100 = 12.27%
2015 - X 100 = 21.25%
AVERAGE INVENTORIES TURNOVER PERIOD
2016 - X 365 = 158 days
2015 - X 365 = 119 days
DIVIDENT PAYOUT RATIO
2016 - 0
2015 - 0
RATIOS
JD
2015 2016 2015 2016
CURRENT RATIOS
1.22 1.47 2.30 2.43
QUICK RATIOS
0.54 0.78 0.94 1.13
GROSS PROFIT MARGIN
48.58% 48.54% 43.81% 44.23%
OPERATING PROFIT MARGIN
6.09% 7.32% 10.44% 7.68%
NET PROFIT MARGIN
3.55% 5.52% 8.52% 9.61%

GEARING RATIOS
12.66% 9.55% 16.50% 23.88%
EARNINGS PER SHARE
27.06pence 50.16pence 40.6pence 46.8pence
RETURN ON CAPITAL EMPLOYED
26.10% 30.10% 21.25% 12.27%
AVERAGE INVENTORIES TURNOVER
PERIOD 105 days 93 days 119 days 158 days
DIVIDENT PAYOUT RATIO
25.17% 14.15% 0 0