Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Years
Current assets
Current liabilities
Ratio
2003
288,997,580
189,006,552
1.53
2004
177,122,556
142,210,762
1.25
2005
206,490,630
148,633,390
1.39
2006
398,960,970
190,005,314
2.10
2007
391,339,953
276,101,207
1.42
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that current ratio was decreased
from 1.53 to 1.25, increased to 1.39 and increased to 2.10 and again decreased to
1.42 .The current ratio is less than the rule of thumb 2:1 except the year 2006.
Table2: Quick ratio
Years
Quick assets
Current liabilities
Ratio
2003
69,334,778
189,006,552
0.37
2004
80,262,817
142,210,762
0.56
2005
99,258,431
148,633,390
0.67
2006
94,319,524
190,005,313
0.50
2007
109,757,257
276,101,206
0.40
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that quick ratio was increased
from 0.37 to 0.67 and decreased to 0.40 it was due to improper maintenance of
quick assets. The quick ratio was below the rule thumb of 1:1 i.e. quick assets were
less than current liabilities.
Net assets
Ratio
2003
99,991,031
325,654,257
0.31
2004
34,911,795
260,575,021
0.13
2005
60,668,199
287,272,474
0.21
2006
208,955,659
435,610,011
0.48
2007
115,238,248
352,622,327
0.33
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that net working capital ratio
had decreased from 0.31 to 0.13 in 2004, increased to 0.21 in 2005, increased to
0.48 and again decreased to 0.33. it was due to the changes in working capital
requirements.
LEVERAGE RATIOS
Table1: Debt ratio
Years
Total debt
Capital employed
Ratio
2003
264452746
325654257
0.81
2004
452550346
260575021
1.74
2005
514161592
287272474
1.79
2006
668649834
435610011
1.53
2007
673709257
352622327
1.91
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that the debt ratio mostly
increased. It is due to increase in additional funds required year by year.
Table2: Debt equity ratio
Years
Total debt
Net Worth
Ratio
2003
264452746
61201511
4.32
2004
452550346
7940102
57.00
2005
514161592
-7955293
-64.63
2006
668649834
245159
2727.41
2007
673709257
-88281982
-7.63
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that the lenders contribution is more than the
owners contribution, in the years 2005 and 2006 there is no owners contribution.
So, the debt equity ratio became negative.
Table3: Capital employed to net worth
Years
2003
Capital employed
325654257
Net Worth
61201511
Ratio
5.32
2004
260575021
7940102
32.82
2005
287272474
-7955293
-36.11
2006
435610011
245159
1776.85
2007
352622327
-88281982
-3.99
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that capital employed to net
worth was 5.32%, increased to 32.83% in 2004, became negative in 2005,2007 and
in the year 2006 increased to 1776.85% due to changes in the value of net worth of
the firm.
ACTIVITY RATIOS
Table1: Inventory turnover
Years
Average inventory
Ratio
2003
239132131
234147889
1.02
2004
155574480
137597980
1.13
2005
102243876
83065442
1.23
2006
72877770
182464926
0.40
2007
406536335
264313376
1.54
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that the inventory turnover ratio
was very low in all the years, due to excess inventory levels in all the years.
Table2: Debtors turnover
Years
Sales
Debtors
Ratio
2003
201486573
51412361
3.92
2004
130517437
54894708
2.38
2005
96920394
67056512
1.45
2006
124629659
73209660
1.70
2007
368853567
75541003
4.88
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that in 2005 and 2006 debtors
turnover ratio is very low due to most of the goods were sold on credit.
Table3: Collection period
Years
Debtors
Sales
Ratio
2003
51412361
201486573
91.86
2004
54894708
130517437
151.41
2005
67056512
96920394
249.07
2006
73209660
124629659
211.47
2007
75541003
368853567
73.73
Source: Annual Reports of CCSL
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that collection
period increased up to 2005 and then decreased, due to most of
the goods were sold on credit debts are outstanding.
PROFITABILITY RATIOS
Table1: Gross profit ratio
Years
Gross profit/loss
Sales
Ratio
2003
-37645558
201486573
-18.68%
2004
-25057043
130517437
-19.20%
2005
-5323482
96920394
-5.49%
2006
51751887
124629659
41.52%
2007
-37682768
368853567
-10.22%
Source: Annual Reports of CCSL
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that gross profit ratio was
negative for most of the years except the year 2006 it is due to inefficiency in
producing goods.
Net profit/loss
Sales
Ratio
2003
-67413729
201486573
-33.46%
2004
-62633704
130517437
-47.99%
2005
-35256615
96920394
-36.38%
2006
-8199872
124629659
-6.58%
2007
-93637848
368853567
-25.39%
Source: Annual Reports of CCSL
Interpretation:
From the above graph it was analyzed that in all the
years the net profit ratio is negative due to over all inefficiency in
the firm.