Table of Contents
Part A: Ratio analysis. 2
Evaluation of the ability to pay current liabilities: 2
Evaluation the ability to sell inventory and collect receivables: 3
Evaluation of the ability to pay long term debt: 4
Evaluation of the long term profitability: 5
Evaluation of the shares as an investment: 6
Part B: Vertical analysis of the financial statements of both the organization over the mentioned period 7
Vertical analysis of the income statement: 7
Vertical analysis of balance sheet: 10
Part C: Cash flow statement analysis. 15
1. Cash flows from operating activities. 16
2. Cash flows from investing activities. 16
3. Cash flows from financing activities. 16
References: 18
Appendix: 19
Part A: Ratio analysis
This particular section of the study has been undertaken to assess the financial performance of the Nufarm limited and Incitec Pivot limited for the two years period (2012 and 2013) in terms of assessing the ability to pay their current liabilities, the ability to sell inventory and collect receivables, the ability to pay long term debt, the long term profitability and shares as an investment (Alexander and Sinnett, 2005).
Evaluation of the ability to pay current liabilities:
Evaluation of the ability to pay current liabilities mainly revolves around the assessment of the liquidity position of both the organization over the mentioned period. There exist two commonly used ratios that explore the ability to obligate its current liabilities are current ratio and quick ratio. Level of current ratio and quick ratio for both the organization during the period 2012 and 2013 are as follows:
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Current ratio | 1.83 | 2.05 | 0.93 | 1.01 |
| Quick ratio | 1.19 | 1.17 | 0.56 | 0.64 |
From the above figure it can be said that for both the organization the incremental rate of current assets as well as quick assets over the mentioned period is more than incremental rate of current liabilities, which is the reason both the ratios increases over the time. Since standard current ratio is 2:1 and standard quick ratio is 1:1, Nufarm evidenced better result than Incitec Pivot limited.
To enhance the liquidity position of the organization, Incitec Pivot should have to reduce the level of current liabilities which mainly revolves around the reduction of trade and other payables (Certo and Lester et al., 2006, pp. 813–839).
Evaluation the ability to sell inventory and collect receivables:
Here the inventory turnover ratio and accounts receivable period in terms of days for both organizations over the mentioned period is shown below:
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Inventory turnover ratio | 67.93 | 69.81 | 198.07 | 221.99 |
| Accounts receivable period | 122.22 | 121.58 | 38.88 | 39.11 |
Since the level of inventory turnover increases over the mentioned period; both the organization has certain association of risk regarding holding obsolete inventory which is very tough to sell. It also reduced the level of operating profit of the organization.
Again since accounts receivable period represents the organization’s credit policy, an increment in the days of account receivable indicates that both the organization faced difficulties in colleting its credit amount from the customer (Cokins, 2009).
However in both cases Incitec Pivot ltd evidenced worst result than Nufarm ltd. Therefore, the organization needs to revise both the inventory as well as credit policy.
Evaluation of the ability to pay long term debt:
In order to evaluate the ability to pay the long term debt for both the organization over the mentioned period, capitalization ratio and the debt equity ratio are assessed. The results are shown in the below mentioned table.
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Capitalization ratio | 0.20 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.28 |
| Debt equity ratio | 0.45 | 0.54 | 0.36 | 0.39 |
The capitalization ratio explores the markup of both the organization’s permanent or long term capital. On the other hand, the levels of debt to equity ratios are depicting the capital structure of both the organization over the mentioned period. Now the above graphical figure shows that over the mentioned period both the organizations long term debt amount increases significantly, which leads to such increment in the level of capitalization as well as debt to equity ratio (Elliott and Elliott, 2008).
However, in both cases it is noticeable that Nufarm evidenced better result than the Incitec pivot Ltd. Therefore, to enhance the performance of the organization in terms of capitalization ratio and debt to equity ratio, the organization needs to review its capital structure and have to change accordingly.
Evaluation of the long term profitability:
In order to evaluate the long term profitability, return on shareholders’ equity and the return on capital employed are measured. The results are shown in the below mentioned table.
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Return on shareholder’s equity | 4.9% | 4.9% | 12.6% | 8.8% |
| Return on capital employed (ROCE) | 7.07% | 6.39% | 13.66% | 7.35% |
The return on shareholder’s equity (ROE) explores the effectiveness which the organization is able to maintain its speculation of assets and utilizing them to produce revenues. On the other hand the return on capital employed (ROCE) indicates how well an organization used its capital in order to generate revenue. However, the level of return on capital employed ratio depicted the competency and the productivity level of the organization’s capital investments (Hendricks and Singhal, 2001, pp. 269–285).
From the above result it can be said that since the Incitec Pivot ltd unable to deploy its assets it evidenced worst result than Nufarm.
Therefore, the organization needs to review its assets utilization policy.
Evaluation of the shares as an investment:
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Earnings per share | 22.3 | 25.5 | 31.4 | 22.8 |
| price earnings ratio | 19.05829596 | 16.78431373 | 8.789808917 | 12.28070175 |
The earnings per share (EPS) indicate how much the organization pays to its ordinary shareholders for each unit of stock. In case of Nufarm, the present level of EPS still remains above the base year. So the firm enhanced its performances over the mentioned period. But the Incitec Pivot ltd fails to do so.
On the other hand, the price earnings ratio of the Incitec Pivot ltd also reduced which indicates that the relative value of the stock in the market place reduced from its base position.
Therefore, Incitec Pivot ltd have to review its operation to address this particular issue.
Part B: Vertical analysis of the financial statements of both the organization over the mentioned period
The vertical analyses of the financial statements of both the organization over the mentioned period are executed through using the below mentioned formula:
Percentage of particular item = (amount of individual item / amount of base) * 100
(Nissim and Penman, 2001, pp. 109–154)
Vertical analysis of the income statement:
During the vertical analysis of the income statement, revenue is considered as the base amount.
The below mentioned table shows that during 2012, the percentage of costs of sales of Nufarm was 72 % which is increased to 73.63 % in 2013. This directly affects the level of gross profit. For that reason gross profit reduced to 27.37 % from 28.00 %. Again the analysis is also shows that level of other income is increased almost double in 2013 in against 2012. The table is also evidenced that while operating profit was 6.65 % in 2012, it increased to 8.06 % in 2013. This indicates that the operating expenses of the organization reduced over the time.
The results also shows that although the gross profit percentage and operating profit percentage enhance significantly, the level of net profit increased to 3.59 % in 2013 from 3.34 % in 2012. This indicates that the level of financing cost increases significantly (Penman and Penman, 2007).
| Nufarm Limited | ||||
| 2013 | 2012 | |||
| Amount (‘000) | Percent | Amount (‘000) | Percent | |
| Revenue | $ 2,277,292 | 100% | $ 2,181,551 | 100% |
| Cost of sales | $ (1,653,991) | 72.63% | $ (1,570,657) | 72.00% |
| Gross profit | $ 623,301 | 27.37% | $ 610,894 | 28.00% |
| Other income | $ 20,677 | 0.91% | $ 10,124 | 0.46% |
| Sales, marketing and distribution expenses | $ (269,582) | 11.84% | $ (240,543) | 11.03% |
| General and administrative expenses | $ (148,012) | 6.50% | $ (198,007) | 9.08% |
| Research and development expenses | $ (42,698) | 1.87% | $ (37,874) | 1.74% |
| Share of net profit / (losses) of equity accounted investees | $ (60) | 0.003% | $ 378 | 0.017% |
| Operating profit | $ 183,626 | 8.06% | $ 144,972 | 6.65% |
| Financial income excluding foreign exchanges gains / (losses) | $ 5,491 | 0.24% | $ 7,910 | 0.36% |
| Net foreign exchange gains / (losses) | $ (10,734) | 0.47% | $ 19,237 | 0.88% |
| Net financial income | $ (5,243) | 0.23% | $ 27,147 | 1.24% |
| Financial expenses | $ (65,460) | 2.87% | $ (61,796) | 2.83% |
| Net financing costs | $ (70,703) | 3.10% | $ (34,649) | 1.59% |
| Profit / (loss) before income tax | $ 112,923 | 4.96% | $ 110,323 | 5.06% |
| Income tax befit / (expense) | $ (31,173) | 1.37% | $ (37,501) | 1.72% |
| Profit or loss for the period | $ 81,750 | 3.59% | $ 72,822 | 3.34% |
Again, the below mentioned table shows that during 2012, the percentage of costs of sales of Incitec Pivot ltd was 43.03 % which is increased to 47.31 % in 2013. This directly affects the level of gross profit. Again the analysis is also shows that level of other income is increased almost double in 2013 in against 2012. This indicates that the operating expenses of the organization reduced over the time (Steffan, 2008).
The results also show that there exists a significant reduction in the level of net profit from 2012 to 2013.
It is noticeable that the vertical analysis of the income statement of both organizations depicts that Nufarm evidenced better result than Incitec Pivot ltd.
| Incitec Pivot ltd | ||||
| 2013 | 2012 | |||
| Amount (in millions) | Percent | Amount (in millions) | Percent | |
| Revenue | $ 3,403.70 | 100.00% | $ 3,500.90 | 100.00% |
| Financial and other income | $ 59.50 | 1.75% | $ 40.40 | 1.15% |
| Operating expenses | ||||
| Changes in inventories of finished goods and work in progress | $ 19.50 | 0.57% | $ (97.10) | 2.77% |
| Raw materials and consumables used and finished goods purchased for resale | $ (1,610.20) | 47.31% | $ (1,506.50) | 43.03% |
| Employee expenses | $ (584.20) | 17.16% | $ (543.30) | 15.52% |
| Depreciation and amortization expense | $ (183.70) | 5.40% | $ (155.80) | 4.45% |
| Financial expenses | $ (89.30) | 2.62% | $ (66.60) | 1.90% |
| Purchased services | $ (161.20) | 4.74% | $ (167.40) | 4.78% |
| Repairs and maintenance | $ (132.90) | 3.90% | $ (109.40) | 3.12% |
| Outgoing freight | $ (224.20) | 6.59% | $ (237.80) | 6.79% |
| Lease payments – operating leases | $ (62.10) | 1.82% | $ (65.30) | 1.87% |
| Share of profit on equity accounted investments | $ 33.50 | 0.98% | $ 27.40 | 0.78% |
| Asset write-downs, clean-up and environmental provisions | $ (50.90) | 1.50% | $ (104.20) | 2.98% |
| Reversal of Moranbah unfavorable contract liability | – | 0.00% | $ 261.60 | 7.47% |
| Other expenses | $ (61.00) | 1.79% | $ (65.20) | 1.86% |
| Profit before income tax | $ 356.50 | 10.47% | $ 711.70 | 20.33% |
| Income tax benefit/(expense) | $ 16.10 | 0.47% | $ (203.70) | 5.82% |
| Profit for the financial year | $ 372.60 | 10.95% | $ 508.00 | 14.51% |
Vertical analysis of balance sheet:
During the vertical analysis of balance sheet total assets amount and total liabilities and equity amount are considered as base amount.
Here, in case of Nufarm, the level of current assets increased by nearly 3 % from 2012 to 2013. Whereas in case of Incitec Pivot ltd it increased by nearly 1 %. Therefore in terms of current assets, Nufarm evidenced better result.
Again in the context of fixed assets the level of fixed assets reduced by nearly 3 % from 2012 to 2013. Whereas in case of Incitec Pivot ltd it reduced by nearly 1 %. Therefore in terms of fixed assets, Incitec Pivot ltd evidenced better result.
Similarly the levels of total liabilities for both the organization are increased by nearly 3 %. This indicates that in terms of level of total liabilities both the organizations are in same position. Finally, the analysis also shows that the levels of equity for both the organizations are also reduced by 3 %. This indicates that in terms of level of total shareholder’s equity both the organizations are in same position (Werner and Br, 2001, pp. 501–519).
| Nufarm | ||||
| 2013 | 2012 | |||
| Current assets | Amount (‘000) | Percent | Amount (‘000) | Percent |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ 264,972.00 | 7.86% | $ 191,317.00 | 6.83% |
| Trade and other receivables | $ 758,534.00 | 22.50% | $ 730,496.00 | 26.08% |
| Inventories | $ 802,789.00 | 23.81% | $ 515,254.00 | 18.39% |
| Current tax assets | $ 33,866.00 | 1.00% | $ 37,664.00 | 1.34% |
| Assets held for sale | $ – | 0.00% | $ – | 0.00% |
| Total current assets | $ 1,860,161.00 | 55.17% | $ 1,474,731.00 | 52.64% |
| Noncurrent assets | ||||
| Trade and other receivables | $ 36,191.00 | 1.07% | $ 41,095.00 | 1.47% |
| Investments in equity accounted investees | $ 6,197.00 | 0.18% | $ 4,216.00 | 0.15% |
| Other investments | $ 448.00 | 0.01% | $ 6,213.00 | 0.22% |
| Deferred tax assets | $ 200,219.00 | 5.94% | $ 181,633.00 | 6.48% |
| Property, plant and equipment | $ 402,698.00 | 11.94% | $ 370,780.00 | 13.24% |
| Intangible assets | $ 865,755.00 | 25.68% | $ 722,690.00 | 25.80% |
| Other financial assets | $ – | 0.00% | $ – | 0.00% |
| Total noncurrent assets | $ 1,511,508.00 | 44.83% | $ 1,326,627.00 | 47.36% |
| Total assets | $ 3,371,669.00 | 100.00% | $ 2,801,358.00 | 100.00% |
| Current liabilities | ||||
| Bank overdraft | $ – | 0.00% | $ – | 0.00% |
| Trade and other payables | $ 550,319.00 | 16.32% | $ 474,991.00 | 16.96% |
| Loans and borrowings | $ 316,365.00 | 9.38% | $ 292,323.00 | 10.44% |
| Employee benefits | $ 19,783.00 | 0.59% | $ 18,167.00 | 0.65% |
| Current tax payable | $ 16,677.00 | 0.49% | $ 14,834.00 | 0.53% |
| Provisions | $ 3,279.00 | 0.10% | $ 6,742.00 | 0.24% |
| Total current liabilities | $ 906,423.00 | 26.88% | $ 807,057.00 | 28.81% |
| Noncurrent liabilities | ||||
| Payable | $ 48,871.00 | 1.45% | $ 10,246.00 | 0.37% |
| Loans and borrowings | $ 581,720.00 | 17.25% | $ 366,798.00 | 13.09% |
| Deferred tax liabilities | $ 119,691.00 | 3.55% | $ 95,823.00 | 3.42% |
| Employee benefits | $ 50,219.00 | 1.49% | $ 44,542.00 | 1.59% |
| Total noncurrent liabilities | $ 800,501.00 | 23.74% | $ 517,409.00 | 18.47% |
| Total liabilities | $ 1,706,924.00 | 50.63% | $ 1,324,466.00 | 47.28% |
| Equity | ||||
| Share capital | $ 1,063,992.00 | 31.56% | $ 1,059,522.00 | 37.82% |
| Reserves | $ (198,670.00) | -5.89% | $ (326,915.00) | -11.67% |
| Retain earnings | $ 547,302.00 | 16.23% | $ 496,663.00 | 17.73% |
| Equity attributable to equity holders of the company | $ 1,412,624.00 | 41.90% | $ 1,229,270.00 | 43.88% |
| Nufarm step up securities | $ 246,932.00 | 7.32% | $ 246,932.00 | 8.82% |
| Non controlling assets | $ 5,189.00 | 0.15% | $ 600.00 | 0.02% |
| Total equity | $ 1,664,745.00 | 49.37% | $ 1,476,802.00 | 52.72% |
| Total equities and liabilities | $ 3,371,669.00 | 100.00% | $ 2,801,268.00 | 100.00% |
| Incitec Pivot ltd | ||||
| 2013 | 2012 | |||
| Amount (in millions) | Percentage | Amount (in millions) | Percentage | |
| Current assets | ||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ 270.60 | 3.52% | $ 154.10 | 2.20% |
| Trade and other receivables | $ 364.70 | 4.75% | $ 372.90 | 5.32% |
| Inventories | $ 435.60 | 5.67% | $ 403.70 | 5.76% |
| Other assets | $ 61.90 | 0.81% | $ 57.40 | 0.82% |
| Other financial assets | $ 5.60 | 0.07% | $ 32.20 | 0.46% |
| Assets held for sale | $ 0.60 | 0.01% | $ 0.20 | 0.00% |
| Current tax assets | $ 36.20 | 0.47% | $ – | 0.00% |
| Total current assets | $ 1,175.20 | 15.29% | $ 1,020.50 | 14.55% |
| Noncurrent assets | ||||
| Trade and other receivables | $ 8.20 | 0.11% | $ 24.20 | 0.35% |
| Other assets | $ 4.40 | 0.06% | $ 17.70 | 0.25% |
| Other financial assets | $ 117.10 | 1.52% | $ 49.50 | 0.71% |
| Investments in equity accounted investees | $ 299.10 | 3.89% | $ 292.80 | 4.17% |
| Property, plant and equipment | $ 3,033.50 | 39.48% | $ 2,738.50 | 39.05% |
| Intangible assets | $ 2,961.00 | 38.54% | $ 2,845.20 | 40.57% |
| Deferred tax assets | $ 85.30 | 1.11% | $ 25.00 | 0.36% |
| Total noncurrent assets | $ 6,508.60 | 84.71% | $ 5,992.90 | 85.45% |
| Total assets | $ 7,683.80 | 100.00% | $ 7,013.40 | 100.00% |
| Current liabilities | ||||
| Trade and other payables | $ 979.30 | 12.74% | $ 817.50 | 11.66% |
| Interest bearing liabilities | $ 33.50 | 0.44% | $ 125.70 | 1.79% |
| Other financial liabilities | $ 39.60 | 0.52% | $ 14.80 | 0.21% |
| Provisions | $ 108.40 | 1.41% | $ 122.80 | 1.75% |
| Current tax payable | $ – | 0.00% | $ 11.40 | 0.16% |
| Total current liabilities | $ 1,160.80 | 15.11% | $ 1,092.20 | 15.57% |
| Noncurrent liabilities | ||||
| Trade and other payables | $ 7.00 | 0.09% | $ 17.10 | 0.24% |
| Interest bearing liabilities | $ 1,620.60 | 21.09% | $ 1,315.30 | 18.75% |
| Other financial liabilities | $ 114.30 | 1.49% | $ – | 0.00% |
| Provisions | $ 77.50 | 1.01% | $ 74.50 | 1.06% |
| Deferred tax liabilities | $ 413.40 | 5.38% | $ 371.30 | 5.29% |
| Retirement benefit obligation | $ 70.40 | 0.92% | $ 111.60 | 1.59% |
| Total noncurrent liabilities | $ 2,303.20 | 29.97% | $ 1,889.80 | 26.95% |
| Total liabilities | $ 3,464.00 | 45.08% | $ 2,982.00 | 42.52% |
| Equity | ||||
| Issued capital | $ 3,265.90 | 42.50% | $ 3,265.90 | 46.57% |
| Reserves | $ (178.60) | -2.32% | $ (178.40) | -2.54% |
| Retain earnings | $ 1,129.60 | 14.70% | $ 941.60 | 13.43% |
| Minority interest | $ 2.90 | 0.04% | $ 2.30 | 0.03% |
| Total equity | $ 4,219.80 | 54.92% | $ 4,031.40 | 57.48% |
| Total equities and liabilities | $ 7,683.80 | 100.00% | $ 7,013.40 | 100.00% |
Part C: Cash flow statement analysis
A rapid examination of the cash-flow statement makes available a description of how efficiently both the organization is controlling its short-term financial state of affairs. At the same time it can furthermore propose imperative signal to tribulations that may be mounting.
The statement is separated into three sub sections:
1. Cash flows from operating activities
This replicates cash coming into as well as leaving the company connected with the normal corporation actions. It incorporates factors such as receipts from customers, dividends received, payments to suppliers and employees, and tax and interest payments (Weygandt and Kieso et al., 2003).
For the reason that it replicates the fundamental health of the business, in case of Nufarm it is a great concern as the level of cash flows from operating activities reduced from $ 166,505,000 to $ 62,787,000.
On the other hand in case of Incitec Pivot ltd, the level of cash flows from operating activities reduced with smaller rate as it became $ 614.5 million in 2013 from $ 620.8 million.
Therefore it can be said that in term of cash flows from operating activities Incitec Pivot ltd evidenced better result.
2. Cash flows from investing activities
This replicates money coming into and leaving the business associated with investment activities. It incorporates factors such as buying and selling property, plant and equipment, shares, businesses and brand names, and loan repayments (Weygandt and Kieso et al., 2003).
Here, the result shows that Nufarm evidenced reduction of investing activities as the level of cash flow from investing activities became $ (113,143,000) in 2013 from $ (130,297,000) in 2012.
On the other hand in case of Incitec Pivot Ltd, this became $ (389.4) million in 2013 from $ (601.3) million in 2012. Therefore in terms of cash flow from investing activities Nufarm evidenced better result.
3. Cash flows from financing activities
This replicates money coming into and leaving the business associated with factors such as borrowing and lending money, new share issues, and so on (Weygandt and Kieso et al., 2003). Since it replicates how the organizations are financing its operations, whether through debt or through equity, the result shows that Nufarm involves large volume of financing activities as the level of cash flow from financing activities became $ 99,252,000 in 2013 from $ (84,596,000) in 2012.
On the other hand in case of Incitec Pivot Ltd, this became $ (119.4) million in 2013 from $ (245.6) million in 2012. Therefore in terms of cash flow from financing activities also Nufarm evidenced better result.
References:
Alexander, G. and Sinnett, W. M. 2005. Business performance management. [Florham Park, N.J.]: Financial Executives Research Foundation.
Certo, S. T., Lester, R. H., Dalton, C. M. and Dalton, D. R. 2006. Top management teams, strategy and financial performance: A Meta-Analytic examination. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (4), pp. 813–839.
Cokins, G. 2009. Performance management. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Elliott, B. and Elliott, J. 2008. Financial accounting and reporting. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Hendricks, K. B. and Singhal, V. R. 2001. Firm characteristics, total quality management, and financial performance. Journal of Operations Management, 19 (3), pp. 269–285.
Libby, R., Libby, P. A. and Short, D. G. 2004. Financial accounting. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Nissim, D. and Penman, S. H. 2001. Ratio analysis and equity valuation: From research to practice. Review of accounting studies, 6 (1), pp. 109–154.
Penman, S. H. and Penman, S. H. 2007. Financial statement analysis and security valuation. McGraw-Hill New York.
Steffan, B. 2008. Essential management accounting. London: Kogan Page.
Werner, R. and Br. 2001. Referencing strategies and techniques in stable isotope ratio analysis. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry, 15 (7), pp. 501–519.
Weygandt, J. J., Kieso, D. E. and Kimmel, P. D. 2003. Financial accounting. New York, NY: Wiley.
Appendix:
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Current assets | $ 1,474,731.00 | $ 1,860,161.00 | $ 1,020.50 | $ 1,175.20 |
| Current liability | $ 807,057.00 | $ 906,423.00 | $ 1,092.20 | $ 1,160.80 |
| Current ratio | 1.83 | 2.05 | 0.93 | 1.01 |
| Current assets | $ 1,474,731.00 | $ 1,860,161.00 | $ 1,020.50 | $ 1,175.20 |
| Inventory | $ 515,254.00 | $ 802,789.00 | $ 403.70 | $ 435.60 |
| Current liabilities | $ 807,057.00 | $ 906,423.00 | $ 1,092.20 | $ 1,160.80 |
| Quick ratio | 1.19 | 1.17 | 0.56 | 0.64 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Current ratio | 1.83 | 2.05 | 0.93 | 1.01 |
| Quick ratio | 1.19 | 1.17 | 0.56 | 0.64 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| inventory | $ 292,323.00 | $ 316,365.00 | $ 817.50 | $ 979.30 |
| cost of goods sold | 1570657.00 | 1653991.00 | $ 1,506.50 | $ 1,610.20 |
| Inventory turnover ratio | 67.93 | 69.81 | 198.07 | 221.99 |
| Accounts receivable | $ 730,496.00 | $ 758,534.00 | $ 372.90 | $ 364.70 |
| total sales | $ 2,181,551 | $ 2,277,292 | $ 3,500.90 | $ 3,403.70 |
| Accounts receivable period | 122.22 | 121.58 | 38.88 | 39.11 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Inventory turnover ratio | 67.93 | 69.81 | 198.07 | 221.99 |
| Accounts receivable period | 122.22 | 121.58 | 38.88 | 39.11 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Long term debt | $ 366,798.00 | $ 581,720.00 | $ 1,315.30 | $ 1,620.60 |
| Shareholders’ equity | $ 1,476,802.00 | $ 1,664,745.00 | $ 4,031.40 | $ 4,219.80 |
| Capitalization ratio | 0.20 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.28 |
| Total debt | $ 659,121.00 | $ 898,085.00 | $ 1,441.00 | $ 1,654.10 |
| Shareholders’ equity | $ 1,476,802.00 | $ 1,664,745.00 | $ 4,031.40 | $ 4,219.80 |
| Debt equity ratio | 0.446316432 | 0.539473012 | 0.357444064 | 0.391985402 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Capitalization ratio | 0.20 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.28 |
| Debt equity ratio | 0.45 | 0.54 | 0.36 | 0.39 |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Net income | $ 72,822 | $ 81,750 | $ 508.00 | $ 372.60 |
| Shareholders’ equity | $ 1,476,802.00 | $ 1,664,745.00 | $ 4,031.40 | $ 4,219.80 |
| Return on shareholder’s equity | 4.9% | 4.9% | 12.6% | 8.8% |
| EBIT | $ 172,119 | $ 178,383 | 778.30 | 445.80 |
| capital employed | $ 2,434,560.00 | $ 2,789,949.00 | $ 5,698.10 | $ 6,063.20 |
| Return on capital employed (ROCE) | 7.07% | 6.39% | 13.66% | 7.35% |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Return on shareholder’s equity | 4.9% | 4.9% | 12.6% | 8.8% |
| Return on capital employed (ROCE) | 7.07% | 6.39% | 13.66% | 7.35% |
| Nufarm | Incitec Pivot Ltd | |||
| 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2013 | |
| Net income | $ 72,822,000 | $ 81,750,000 | $ 508,000,000 | $ 372,600,000 |
| Number of share outstanding | 3265561 | 3205882 | 16178344 | 16342105 |
| Earnings per share | 22.3 | 25.5 | 31.4 | 22.8 |
| market price per share | 4.25 | 4.28 | 2.76 | 2.8 |
| earnings per share | 22.3 | 25.5 | 31.4 | 22.8 |
| price earnings ratio | 19.05829596 | 16.78431373 | 8.789808917 | 12.28070175 |
