Current Ratio Return On Assets Gross Margin Debit To Equity

Sheet1current Ratioreturn On Assetsgross Margindebit To Equityoperatin

The provided data appears to include financial ratios and metrics for companies such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HP) and IBM. These metrics include current ratio, return on assets (ROA), gross margin, debt to equity ratio, and operating cash flow. Additionally, some references and sources are mentioned, notably MSN for IBM and HP. The information seems somewhat disorganized but indicates an analysis of financial health and performance of these companies.

For a comprehensive analysis, understanding these ratios is essential. The current ratio assesses a company's short-term liquidity, calculated by dividing current assets by current liabilities. Return on assets (ROA) measures how efficiently a company utilizes its assets to generate profit. Gross margin indicates the percentage of revenue remaining after deducting cost of goods sold, reflecting profitability at the gross level. The debt to equity ratio shows the company's leverage, and operating cash flow reveals the cash generated from core business operations.

Comparing Hewlett Packard Enterprise and IBM across these financial indicators provides insights into their respective operational efficiencies, profitability, leverage, and liquidity. For instance, HP’s current ratio of 1.51 suggests decent short-term liquidity, while IBM’s ratio of 1.37 indicates a slightly lower liquidity position. The return on assets for HP is 3.86, whereas IBM's is 11.15, emphasizing IBM’s higher efficiency in using its assets to generate profit.

Paper For Above instruction

Holistic financial analysis of major corporations like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HP) and International Business Machines (IBM) requires a detailed understanding of key financial ratios and what they reveal about company performance. In this paper, the focus is on analyzing the provided ratios, understanding their implications, and comparing the financial health and operational efficiency of these two technology giants.

Starting with liquidity ratios, the current ratio provides insight into the company's ability to meet short-term obligations. HP's current ratio of 1.51 suggests that it holds $1.51 in current assets for every dollar of current liabilities, indicating a comfortable liquidity position. IBM's current ratio of 1.37, while slightly lower, also signifies adequate liquidity but hints at a potentially tighter short-term financial position. Maintaining a current ratio around 1.5 is generally considered healthy, but significant deviations from this benchmark need further analysis regarding the company's liquidity management strategies.

Return on assets (ROA) measures how efficiently a company leverages its assets to generate net income, and HP's ROA of 3.86 indicates moderate efficiency. In contrast, IBM's ROA of 11.15 demonstrates a substantially higher utilization of its assets to produce earnings, which can be attributed to differences in business models, asset management, and operational efficiency. High ROA ratios reflect effective asset utilization, which is crucial for investors assessing profitability and management effectiveness.

Gross margin percentages reveal the company's core profitability from sales after subtracting the cost of goods sold. Although the provided data for gross margins are somewhat inconsistent, with HP showing a gross margin of 28.86% and IBM at 49.38%, the higher gross margin of IBM suggests it retains more revenue after covering direct costs, thus positioning the company for greater profitability at the gross level.

The debt to equity ratio is another vital indicator, illustrating the degree of leverage a company employs. While specific values are not explicitly provided in the data, these ratios generally help assess financial risk and stability. High debt levels relative to equity can amplify returns but also increase financial vulnerability.

Operating cash flow reflects the cash generated from core operations, which is vital for sustaining business activities and funding growth initiatives. HP’s operating cash flow appears to be 0.38 (possibly in billions or millions), while IBM’s is 2.7, indicating that IBM generates significantly more cash from its operating activities, enhancing its ability to invest and reduce financial risk.

In light of this data, it’s evident that IBM surpasses HP in several key areas such as ROA and operating cash flow, indicating higher efficiency and operational strength. However, each company's financial ratios must be contextualized within their respective industry standards and strategic goals.

Moreover, the sources cited—MSN for IBM and HP—highlight the importance of reliable, real-time financial data in conducting such analyses. Investors and analysts must consider multiple ratios collectively to form a comprehensive picture beyond isolated metrics. Ratios like current ratio, ROA, gross margin, and cash flow should be evaluated in conjunction to assess overall corporate health, risk, and profitability potential.

In conclusion, benchmarking financial ratios across companies offers valuable insights into comparative operational effectiveness and financial stability. IBM’s higher ROA and cash flow position suggest superior asset management and profitability, whereas HP’s liquidity measures are solid but not exceptional. Ongoing financial analysis, industry context, and strategic review are critical for making well-informed investment decisions and understanding the evolving corporate landscape in the tech sector.

References

  • MSN. (2016). IBM Corporation Financials. Retrieved from https://www.msn.com
  • MSN. (2016). Hewlett Packard Enterprise Financials. Retrieved from https://www.msn.com
  • Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining the Value of Any Asset. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Fridson, M. S., & Alvarez, F. (2011). Financial Statement Analysis: A Practitioner's Guide. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Penman, S. H. (2012). Financial Statement Analysis and Security Valuation. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Graham, B., & Dodd, D. (2008). Security Analysis: Sixth Edition, Foreword by Warren Buffett. McGraw-Hill.
  • Higgins, R. C. (2012). Analysis for Financial Management. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jaffe, J. (2013). Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2013). Financial Management: Theory & Practice. Cengage Learning.
  • White, G. I., Sondhi, A. C., & Fried, D. (2003). The Analysis and Use of Financial Statements. Wiley.

Related Assignments