1

Comparative Financial Performance Analysis of Apple and Samsung: A

Ratio-Based Evaluation
 2

Contents
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................3
Financial performance...........................................................................................................................3
Liquidity Ratio....................................................................................................................................4
Efficiency...........................................................................................................................................5
Solvency Ratios..................................................................................................................................5
Profitability ratios..............................................................................................................................6
The Balanced Scorecard........................................................................................................................7
Apple Inc.'s proposed balanced scorecard............................................................................................8
Integrated Reporting (IR).....................................................................................................................11
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................15
References...........................................................................................................................................16
APPENDIX............................................................................................................................................20
 3

Introduction
Ratio analysis is an important instrument for evaluating a company's financial health and

performance (Mavlutova et al., 2021). According to Mavlutova et al. (2021), this analysis

involves assessing various ratios derived from a company's financial statements to gain

insights into its liquidity, solvency, efficiency and profitability. Two of the top technology

businesses in the world are Apple Inc., with its headquarters in Cupertino, California, and

Samsung Electronics, with its headquarters in Suwon, South Korea (Joshua, 2021). They

work in the very competitive consumer electronics sector and are renowned for their cutting-

edge goods and solutions. These organizations' financial statistics can be analysed to get a

comparative picture of their financial performance and reveal both their strengths and faults.

As of 2022, Apple's net value was $2.650 trillion ($2650 billion). In June 2021, Apple

became the first company to reach the $3 trillion milestone. The company has firmly

maintained its position by overtaking Exxon Mobil Corporation as the largest corporation in

the world. There is a huge gap of approximately $500 billion between Apple and the second

largest company in the world Microsoft, which is larger than most of well-known global

companies. On the other hand, Samsung has a market value of $262.80 billion as of October

2022.

In his evaluation, we will delve into the financial ratio analysis of this two tech giants, Apple

and its main competitor Samsung, focusing on the years 2022 and 2021, going forward we

will critically analyse Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Scorecard where a proposed Balanced

Scorecard for Apple will be developed. Finally, the report will critically evaluate the analysis

of Integrated reporting (IR) for Apple Inc. company.

 4

Financial performance

To assess and differentiate Apple and Samsung's financial performance over the previous two

years, this paper will do a financial ratio analysis of both companies. The data used for this

analysis will be sourced from annual financial statements and available links Apple and

Samsung will be attached to Appendix.

Liquidity Ratio

According to Saleem and Rehman (2011), liquidity ratio gauges a firm’s capacity to

recompense interim debts. By concentrating on a company's most liquid assets, the liquid

ratio sheds light on its current liquidity condition. Current, quick and cash ratios will be

discussed in this analysis and presented at the Appendix.

Current Ratio

The current ratio, according to Bordeianu and Radu (2020), is a financial indicator that

assesses a firm’s ability to use short-term assets to cover short-term liabilities. Apple's

present ratio in 2021 was more than 1, showing that the business had enough short-term

assets to meet its short-term liabilities. This was a blatant sign of a strong 2021 liquidity

position. The current ratio's value dropped dramatically to 0.88 in 2022, but it was still

positive, suggesting a little decline in the company's ability to pay short-term debts with

current assets. Samsung, a rival of its, had a current ratio that was higher than 1 in each of the

two years, indicating favourable financial conditions for the business.

Quick Ratio:

The fast ratio focuses on a company's assets that are most readily available for use in paying

off short-term debts, providing a quicker evaluation of its liquidity situation (Tumanggor,

2020). In comparison to 2022, when it slightly decreased, Apple's fast ratio was also over 1,
 5

showing a high ability to pay short-term obligations without largely relying on inventory.

This indicates that the liquidity situation is favourable. However, Samsung's quick ratio was

also over 1, indicating the company has a favourable liquidity situation.

Cash ratio

This ratio simply takes a company's cash resources into account and, provides information on

how liquid it is at the moment. It demonstrates how much of a company's immediate

commitments may be paid for without the assistance of other assets or external financing.

Samsung has had greater reading of cash ratio compared to Apple throughout the past two

years. It can be concluded from the analyse that both companies had strong positive cash

positions and were unlikely to encounter any financial issues. The cheap cost of sales was

advantageous to the business. Apple, however, recorded a modest reduction in working cash

flow.

Efficiency

According to Herison et al. (2022), efficiency ratios evaluate how best an organisation

utilizes its assets to produce sales and manage its resources.

Inventory turnover

This is a company’s efficiency that quantifies how fast stock is sold and replaced by a fresh

stock (Rajagukguk and Siagian, 2021). It is stated that Apple was extremely effective at

managing its inventory over the past two years since it was able to quickly turn its stock into

sales. As a result of the cheap cost of sales and rapid inventory movement during that time, it

is observed that its inventory turnover grew significantly (Al Mheiri, 2021). However, in the

past two years it can be noted that the turnover inventory for Samsung has been low which

maybe a result of failure to close sales quickly.

 6

Receivable Turnover

This tool measures the efficiency in which an organisation collects its accounts receivable

from clients (Purwanti, 2019). When comparing the two businesses, it is possible to see that

Apple had a larger accounts receivable turnover than Samsung, which signals a quick

conversion of sales into cash on hand. However, it should be noted that during the past two

years, Samsung's figures for these ratios have increased.

Total Assets Turnover

Total assets turnover is a financial metric that measures how well a company uses its total

assets to produce sales. The asset turnover ratio is derived by dividing a company's net sales

by its average total assets. This ratio can be used to assess if a company is making enough

money to maintain a significant amount of assets on its balance sheet. Apple generated more

revenue from its assets than Samsung, as evidenced by the fact that its total assets turnover

was larger.

Solvency Ratios

A company's long-term financial health and ability to pay off long-term debt are evaluated

using solvency ratios. The debt-to-equity ratio compares a company's total debt to its

shareholders' equity to determine the proportion of debt financing to equity financing.

Debt ratio

According to Restiant and Agustina (2018), this ratio is responsible for the proportion of

firm’s assets that are sponsored by liabilities. In the previous two years, Apple's debt to

equity ratio levels stayed high. It suggested that management had taken advantage of the

substantial debt to gain tax-wise from the interest payment deduction. Because the company's
 7

external debt carries a larger risk, Apple's large debt ratio dilutes the interest of its

shareholders.

Time interest earner ratio (TIER)

This type of ratio is responsible in the evaluation of company’s capacity to pay interests costs

out of the revenues before interest and taxes (Lan, 2012).

Samsung's interest coverage decreased over the past two years, whereas Apple's increased.

However, despite Apple's lack of issues, its diminishing operating profit raises concerns

among investors regarding the company's strategy and rising product pricing

Profitability ratios

According to Kharatyan et al. (2016), profitability ratios are frequently used to assess a firm’s

capacity for profit-making. The main goal of a company should be to make money that will

be distributed to its shareholders. The following important profitability ratios have been

determined for this report:

Return on equity

This is a financial metric used to evaluate a company's profitability and efficiency in

reinvesting shareholder capital. In the last two years, Apple outperformed Samsung in terms

of return on shareholders' equity, indicating that the company was making more money

relative to the amount spent. It should be noted that Samsung's net profit fell significantly

over the course of the two years, and its total equity fell as a result of the reduction in retained

earnings.

Return on Assets

This financial ratio assesses an organization's ability to generate profits relative to its total

assets. Even though both returns on assets were positive over the course of two years, Apple's
 8

was just lower than Samsung's. The positive number shows unequivocally that during the

course of the two years, both businesses increased their income per unit of assets. Samsung

stated that its value had increased over the previous two years.

Profit Margins

By calculating the proportion of profit derived from a company's sales or revenue, profit

margins are financial statistics that shed light on the profitability of the business. The ability

of a corporation to control costs, pricing, and overall financial performance is strongly

correlated with its profit margins. In comparison to 2021, Samsung's net profit margin shrank

in 2022. However, Apple's ratio value marginally decreased within the same time period.

The Balanced Scorecard

This is a strategic management framework that aims to align an organization's undertakings

with its strategic objectives and monitor performance in multiple dimensions (Kaplan and

Norton, 2001). Since its debut in the early 1990s, the BSC has grown in acceptance among

businesses all around the world. However, its effectiveness as a strategic management system

has been a subject of debate among scholars and practitioners. In this report, we will critically

assess the BSC based on relevant literature.

One of the key strengths of the BSC for the Apple industry is its ability to offer a stable

perspective of organizational performance by integrating both financial and non-financial

measures (Kumari, 2011). The BSC suggests that financial measures alone are insufficient to

capture the complex dynamics of contemporary organizations. The BSC adds other
 9

perspectives, such as those of the customer, internal operations, and learning and growth, to

provide a comprehensive framework for performance measurement and management.

Numerous studies have highlighted the positive impact of adopting the BSC. For example, a

study by Ittner and Larcker (2003) found that firms implementing the BSC experienced

improved financial performance. Other research has shown that the BSC enhances

communication, coordination, and alignment of organizational activities, facilitating the

execution of strategy (Kaplan and Norton, 2001; Quesado et al., 2018). However, there are

also several criticisms and challenges associated with the BSC. One criticism is that the BSC

may oversimplify the complexities of strategy implementation by reducing it to a set of

performance measures (Khomba, 2015). Critics argue that strategy execution is a

multifaceted process that involves a wide range of factors, including organizational culture,

leadership, and contextual influences. The BSC's focus on measurement may overlook these

critical aspects.

Furthermore, the BSC's design and implementation can be resource-intensive and time-

consuming. Developing meaningful metrics and identifying cause-and-effect relationships

across different perspectives can be challenging. Additionally, the BSC requires a significant

commitment from top management to drive its implementation and sustain its use over time.

Without strong leadership support, the BSC may become a mere reporting tool rather than a

strategic management system (Speckbacher et al., 2003).

Another criticism is that the BSC may not adequately address dynamic and uncertain

environments. The BSC's traditional approach assumes a relatively stable strategy and

environment, which may not be suitable for industries characterized by rapid change and

disruption. Scholars argue that organizations operating in turbulent environments may need
 10

more flexible and adaptive management systems to respond effectively to emerging

challenges (Malmi and Brown, 2008).

Moreover, the BSC's cause-and-effect relationships are often based on assumptions and may

not hold in practice. Relationships between viewpoints on finances, customers, internal

operations, and learning and growth can be intricate and context-specific. Research suggests

that the BSC's theoretical foundations need further development to provide a more robust

understanding of the relationships and mechanisms underlying strategic performance

(Amaratunga et al., 2011)

Apple Inc.'s proposed balanced scorecard

Creating a proposed balanced scorecard for Apple Inc. involves considering various

dimensions of the company's performance and aligning them with its strategic goals and

objectives. The following provide a brief outline of a balanced scorecard for Apple,

supported by relevant literature.

Financial Perspective: In this perspective, financial metrics are evaluated to assess Apple's

profitability, efficiency, and shareholder value. Relevant metrics include the development of

shareholder value as well as rising gross profit margin, operating profit margin, and return on

investment. (Kaplan & Norton, 1992; Ittner & Larcker, 2003).

Customer Perspective: Measures of customer happiness, loyalty, and market share are the

primary focus of the consumer perspective. Key indicators may include customer satisfaction

scores, Net Promoter Score (NPS), market share, and customer retention rates (Kaplan &

Norton, 1996)

Internal Processes Perspective: This perspective examines internal processes that drive

customer satisfaction and financial performance. It includes metrics like supply chain
 11

efficiency, time to market for new products, product innovation, and quality control

procedures (Kaplan & Norton, 1996).

Learning and Growth Perspective: This kind of perspective focuses on developing the

capabilities and knowledge necessary for sustained success. Indicators in this perspective

may include employee satisfaction and engagement, investment in employee training and

development, and technological advancement (Kaplan & Norton, 1996; Becker et al., 2001)

Balanced Scorecard for Apple Inc.

Financial Performance

Key performance Objectives Metrics

indicator
1.Track business 1.Increase sales by tapping into 1. Profitability ratios
activities new markets 2. Return on
2. Track sales and 2.Grow Apple revenue by investments
Revenue increasing number of new 3. Financial leverage
3. Tracking products and innovative ideas 4. Liquidity ratio
Financial 3.Adopt new pricing strategy 5. Revenue
performance of aside from current premium 6. Sales
new products pricing
4.Financial viability of Apple Inc.
5.Improve utilization of assets.

Customer Perspective
 12

Key performance Objectives Metrics

indicators
1.Product quality 1. Satisfy customer needs 1.Number of customers
2. Customer and wants 2. Customer rating via Apple Inc.
satisfaction 2. Increase customer main website, surveys, apple Inc.
3. customer retention retention retail stores and Apple Inc. business
4. Brand reliability 3. Increase customers by partners.
reaching out to new 3. Market shares
customers through 4. Returns percentage
advertising
4.Increase market share
5. Improve Apple product
reputation

Internal Perspective
Key performance Objectives Metrics
indicators
1.Process efficiency 1. Increase new products 1. Product manufacture output yield
2. Process quality 2. Increase product 2. Number of defective units
3. Quality of service quality 3. Cost of production
4. Number and 3. Increase customer 4. Number of planned products vs
development time of service and quality number manufactured
new products 4. Reduce delivery time 5. Production cycle time
5. Increase process
efficiency
 13

Learning and growth perspective

Key performance Objectives Metrics
indicators
1.Employee 1.Increase employee 1.Employee surveys
development loyalty and motivation 2. Employee suggestions
2. Technological 2. Enhance employee 3. Employee training
advancement skills 4. Employee productivity
3. Innovation 3. Increase product 5. Availability of product
4. Employee information availability information to customers
remuneration 4. Employee satisfaction
5. Customer service

Integrated Reporting (IR)

According to Singh, Sadiq and Kaur (2019), Integrated Reporting (IR) is a tool that

incorporates the economic, social, governance and ecological information into an integrated

format. In addition, its purpose is to inform the stakeholders about the organization's plans

and dangers, tying together its financial and sustainability performance in a report that is

simple to grasp and offers a full, all-encompassing perspective on organizations for the future

(Singh, Sadiq and Kaur, 2019).

By incorporating both financial-historical information and non-financial and forward-looking

information, IR aims to address the limitations of a traditional set of financial statements.

Firstly, by including non-financial information including environmental, social, and

governance (ESG) factors, IR broadens the range of information supplied to investors. By

including these non-financial metrics, IR enables investors to assess a company's

sustainability practices, its impact on the environment, and its social and ethical performance.

For example, Apple's IR reports highlight its efforts towards reducing carbon emissions,

promoting renewable energy, and improving supply chain labour practices (Apple, 2021).
 14

This information helps investors evaluate Apple's long-term sustainability and potential risks

or opportunities related to ESG factors.

Secondly, IR provides forward-looking information, allowing investors to gain insights into a

company's future prospects and strategic direction. Traditional financial statements primarily

provide historical data, which may not capture a company's future growth potential. In

contrast, IR offers information on a company's strategy, risks, and opportunities, helping

investors make more informed investment decisions. For instance, Apple's IR reports discuss

its focus on innovation, product pipeline, and expansion into emerging markets (Apple,

2021). These insights assist investors in assessing Apple's ability to sustain competitive

advantage and future revenue growth.

Furthermore, IR promotes integrated thinking by emphasizing the interdependencies between

financial and non-financial aspects of a firm’s performance. This approach helps investors

understand how non-financial factors impact financial outcomes and vice versa. For example,

Apple's IR reports highlight the link between customer satisfaction, brand loyalty, and

financial performance (Apple, 2021). By providing this integrated view, IR enables investors

to evaluate the quality and durability of a company's earnings and its ability to generate long-

term value.

However, there are practical challenges that Apple may encounter in adopting IR. Data

availability and quality can be a significant challenge, especially given Apple's complex

global supply chain. Collecting accurate and relevant data on various ESG indicators may

require significant effort and coordination with suppliers and partners. Additionally,

modifications to current reporting systems and processes may be necessary to bring reporting

practices into compliance with the International Integrated Reporting (IR) Framework or
 15

other widely accepted standards. This alignment process could be time-consuming and may

necessitate organizational changes to ensure consistency and comparability in reporting.

Furthermore, fostering a culture of integrated thinking within Apple can be challenging.

Breaking down functional silos, promoting collaboration, and integrating ESG considerations

across the organization requires a cultural shift and strong leadership commitment. Lastly,

seeking external assurance and verification of integrated reports can be complex and costly.

Engaging independent auditors to assess the accuracy and reliability of reported information

adds an additional layer of complexity to the reporting process.

In summary, Integrated Reporting provides investors with a more thorough and forward-

looking perspective of a company's performance and value generation, overcoming the limits

of a standard set of financial statements. IR enables investors to analyse a company's

sustainability policies, comprehend its strategic direction, and analyse the interdependencies

between financial and non-financial aspects by including non-financial information and

promoting integrated thinking. The example of Apple Inc. shows how IR reports may be a

useful resource for learning about a company's ESG policies, prospects, and the connection

between non-financial and financial success.

Integrated Reporting (IR) reports provide valuable information to investors regarding a

company's use of limited resources for long-term sustainable success and its ability to balance

the interests of various stakeholders. By going beyond financial metrics, IR reports offer

insights into the broader aspects of a company's operations and value creation.

IR reports provide information on a company's resource allocation and utilization practices,

helping investors understand how effectively a company manages its limited resources. In the

case of Apple, their IR reports highlight initiatives related to energy efficiency, responsible

sourcing, and waste reduction (Apple, 2021). Such information allows investors to assess
 16

Apple's commitment to sustainable resource management and its potential to mitigate risks

associated with resource scarcity and environmental impact.

Furthermore, IR reports provide insight into how a firm balances the interests of several

stakeholders, such as its employees, clients, suppliers, and communities. These reports

provide insights into a company's corporate governance practices, social impact initiatives,

and relationships with stakeholders. Apple's IR reports, for instance, highlight their focus on

supplier responsibility, employee well-being, and community engagement (Apple, 2021).

This information enables investors to evaluate the company's efforts in managing stakeholder

relationships, which can have significant implications for long-term success and reputation.

Additionally, IR reports provide details on a company's business model, value generating

procedures, and prospects and hazards. This allows investors to understand the factors that

drive a firm’s competitive advantage and its adaptation ability to changing market conditions.

In the case of Apple, their IR reports provide insights into their product innovation,

ecosystem integration, and focus on customer experience (Apple, 2021). Investors can use

this information to evaluate the firm’s strategic positioning and potential for sustainable

growth.

By incorporating both financial and non-financial information, IR reports allow investors to

make more informed decisions aligned with their values and long-term objectives. They

provide a comprehensive view of a company's performance, value creation, and sustainability

practices, going beyond traditional financial statements. In the case of Apple, their IR reports

demonstrate their commitment to transparency, responsible practices, and stakeholder

engagement, which are essential considerations for many investors.

 17

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is clear from the research that Apple performed exceptionally well over the

past two years. This report raised certain issues that need to be addressed because the

company is experiencing a drop in the demand for its pricey items. Although its finances

remain positive and high which a courtesy of the new products in the market. Majority of the

electronics in the market continues to be controlled by Samsung. Over the last year the

profitability of Samsung has increased therefore, the company need to improve its

management and products strategy in order to compete in developed markets with Apple

In addition, the Balanced Scorecard has contributed significantly to the field of strategic

management by providing a comprehensive framework for performance measurement and

management. It has been associated with improved financial performance, enhanced

communication, and better alignment of organizational activities. However, the BSC is not

without its limitations. It may oversimplify strategy implementation, require significant

resources and commitment, struggle to address dynamic environments, and rely on

assumptions regarding cause-and-effect relationships. To maximize its effectiveness,

organizations should carefully consider these factors and adapt the BSC to their specific

context and needs.

Further, Integrated Reporting can offer benefits such as improved stakeholder

communication, enhanced decision-making, increased investor engagement and risk

management for Apple, it is crucial to address the practical challenges associated with data

availability and quality, reporting framework alignment, organizational culture, and external

assurance. Overcoming these challenges requires strong leadership commitment, effective

data management systems, and a cultural shift towards integrated thinking. By addressing

these obstacles, Apple can leverage the advantages of IR to effectively communicate its value
 18

creation story, drive sustainable decision-making, and enhance stakeholder trust and

confidence.

References
Adams, C.A., Potter, B., Singh, P.J. and York, J., 2016. Exploring the implications of

integrated reporting for social investment (disclosures). The British Accounting

Review, 48(3), pp.283-296.

Al Mheiri, Rashed, Nasser Al Hosani, Eissa Saif, and Haitham Nobanee., 2021."Ratio

Analysis of Apple." Available at SSRN 3895231 .

Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D. and Sarshar, M., 2001. Process improvement through

performance measurement: the balanced scorecard methodology. Work study, 50(5), pp.179-

189.

Apple Inc. (2021). Apple Inc. Form 10-K. Retrieved from

https://investor.apple.com/investor-relations/default.aspx

Bordeianu, G.D. and Radu, F., 2020. Basic Types of Financial Ratios Used to

Measure a Company's Performance. Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition, 23(2).

De Villiers, C. and Dimes, R., 2022. Critical analysis of the contribution of Integrated

Reporting (IR) to sustainability. In Handbook of Accounting and Sustainability (pp. 210-223).

Edward Elgar Publishing.

 19

Garanina, T. and Dumay, J., 2017. Forward-looking intellectual capital disclosure in

IPOs: implications for intellectual capital and integrated reporting. Journal of intellectual

Capital.

Herison, R., Sahabuddin, R., Azis, M. and Azis, F., 2022. The Effect of Working

Capital Turnover, Accounts Receivable Turnover and Inventory Turnover on Profitability

Levels on the Indonesia Stock Exchange 2015-2019. Psychology And Education, 59(1),

pp.385-396.

Mavlutova, I., Babenko, V., Dykan, V., Prokopenko, N., Kalinichenko, S. and

Tokmakova, I., 2021. Business restructuring as a method of strengtening company’s financial

position. Journal of Optimization in Industrial Engineering, 14(Special Issue), pp.105-115.

Ittner, C.D. and Larcker, D.F., 2003. Coming up short on nonfinancial performance

measurement. Harvard business review, 81(11), pp.88-95

Joshua, J.Y., 2021. Recent Patents for Leading Computer Architecture

Companies. IEEE Micro, 41(4), pp.74-77.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 2001. Transforming the balanced scorecard from

performance measurement to strategic management: Part II. Accounting horizons, 15(2),

pp.147-160.

Kumari, N., 2011. Balanced scorecard for superior organizational

performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(5), pp.73-86.

Kharatyan, Davit, Alcina Nunes, and José Lopes. "Financial ratios and indicators that

determine return on equity." XVII–Encuentro AECA (2016).

 20

Khomba, J.K., 2015. Conceptualisation of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) model: A

critical review on its validity in Africa. International Journal of Commerce and

Management, 25(4), pp.424-441.

Lan, J., 2012. 16 financial ratios for analysing a company's strengths and

weaknesses. AAII Journal, (September).

Purwanti, T., 2019. An analysis of cash and receivables turnover effect towards

company profitability. International Journal of Seocology, pp.037-044.

Quesado, P.R., Aibar Guzmán, B. and Lima Rodrigues, L., 2018. Advantages and

contributions in the balanced scorecard implementation. Intangible capital, 14(1), pp.186-

201.

Rajagukguk, A. and Siagian, H., 2021. Inventory Turnover and Accounts Receivable

Turnover on Profitability: An Evidence of Chemical Companies Listed In IDX. Jurnal Bisnis

Dan Kajian Strategi Manajemen, 5(2).

Rao, C.M. and Rao, K.P., 2009. Inventory turnover ratio as a supply chain

performance measure. Serbian Journal of Management, 4(1), pp.41-50.

Restianti, T. and Agustina, L., 2018. The effect of financial ratios on financial distress

conditions in sub industrial sector company. Accounting Analysis Journal, 7(1), pp.25-33.

Saleem, Q. and Rehman, R.U., 2011. Impacts of liquidity ratios on

profitability. Interdisciplinary journal of research in business, 1(7), pp.95-98.

Singh, J., Sadiq, M. and Kaur, K., 2019. Integrated reporting: challenges, benefits and

the research agenda. International journal of innovation, creativity and change, 7(8), pp.1-16.
 21

Speckbacher, G., Bischof, J. and Pfeiffer, T., 2003. A descriptive analysis on the

implementation of balanced scorecards in German-speaking countries. Management

accounting research, 14(4), pp.361-388.

Thomas, E., Zeron, A. and O’Rourke, J.S., 2017. Samsung Electronics Company,

Ltd.: Galaxy Note 7 Crisis. In SAGE Business Cases. The Eugene D. Fanning Center for

Business Communication, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame.

Tumanggor, M., 2020. The influence of current ratio, quick ratio and net profit margin

on return on assets at PT. Hero Supermarket Tbk. PINISI Discretion Review, 3(2), pp.137-

146.

Unruh, G., Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Reeves, M., Rubel, H. and Zum Felde, A.M.,

2016. Investing for a sustainable future: Investors care more about sustainability than many

executives believe. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(4).

 22

APPENDIX
i. TABLES

Financial Data for Apple and Samsung for 2021 and 2022

Company APPLE SAMSUNG

Item/ year 2022 2021 2022 2021

Current Assets 135,40 134,836 169,206 168,968

Current Liabilities 153,98 125,481 60,678 68,247

Inventories 4,946 6,580 40,420 32,052

Cash+ equivalents 23,646 34,940 38,478 30,230

Receivables 28,184 26,278 32,429 35,016

Total Assets 352,75 351,002 347,307 330,420

Total Liabilities 302,08 287,912 72,552 94,274

Total Equity 50,672 63,090 274,755 236,146

Net sales 394,32 365,817 147,188 128,886

EBIT 122,24 122, 752 17,472 32,431

 23

Interest 2,865 2,687 716 514

Net income 99,803 94,680 234,079 216,555

Calculated Liquidity ratios for Apple and Samsung in 2022 and 2021

Liquidity ratio Apple Samsung

2022 2021 2022 2021

Current ratio 0.88 1.07 2.8 2.5

Quick ratio 0.85 1.02 2.12 2.01

Cash ratio 0.15 0.28 0.63 0.44

Table 1: Liquidity ratios for both companies

Efficiency ratios

Activity Apple Samsung

2022 2021 2022 2021
Inventory turnover 79.72 55.59 3.64 4.02

Receivable turnover 14.00 13.92 4.54 3.68

Total assets turnover 1.12 1.04 0.42 0.39
Table 2: Efficiency ratios for the two companies
 24

Solvency ratios

Ratio Apple Samsung

2022 2021 2022 2021

Debt Ratio 0.86 0.82 0.22 0.29

T.I.E.R 42.67 45.68 24.40 63.10

Profitability ratios

Profitability ratios Apple Samsung

2022 2021 2022 2021
Return on Equity 1.97 1.50 0.85 0.92
Return on Assets 0.28 0.27 0.67 0.66
Profit Margins 0.25 0.26 1.59 1.68

GRAPHS
25
26
 27

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR APPLE Inc. for 2022 and 2021

Available at: https://investor.apple.com/investor-relations/default.aspx
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/FY22_Q4_Consolidated_Financial_Statement
s.pdf
 28

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited)

(In millions, except number of shares which are reflected in thousands and per share amounts)
septemberseptermber
24 2022 september
25 2021 september
24 2022 25 2021
Products $ 70,958 65,083 316,199 297,392
Services 19,188 18,277 78,129 68,425

Total net
(1) 90,146 83,360 394,328 365,817
sales

Cost of sales:

Products 46,387 42,790 201,471 192,266

Services 5,664 5,396 22,075 20,715

Total cost
52,051 48,186 223,546 212,981
of sales

Gross margin 38,095 35,174 170,782 152,836

 29

Ope rati ng expens es :

Re s ea rch a nd
6,761 5,772 26,251 21,914
de vel opme nt

Sel l i ng, general

6,440 5,616 25,094 21,973
and admi ni s tra ti ve

Tota l
operati ng 13,201 11,388 51,345 43,887
expens es

Ope rati ng i ncome 24,894 23,786 119,437 108,949

Other
-237 -538 -334 258
i ncome/(expens e ), net

Income before
provi s i on for i ncome 24,657 23,248 119,103 109,207
taxes

Provi s i on for i ncome

3,936 2,697 19,300 14,527
taxes

Net i ncome $ 20,721 $ 20,551 $ 99,803 $ 94,680

Re s ea rch a nd
6,761 5,772 26,251 21,914
de vel opme nt
Sel l i ng, general
6,440 5,616 25,094 21,973
and admi ni s tra ti ve
Tota l
operati ng 13,201 11,388 51,345 43,887
expens es
 30

Earnings per s ha re:

Bas i c $ 1.29 $ 1.25 $ 6.15 $ 5.67

Di l uted $ 1.29 $ 1.24 $ 6.11 $ 5.61

Sha res us ed i n
computi ng e arni ngs
per s hare:

Bas i c 16,030,382 16,487,121 16,215,963 16,701,272

Di l uted 16,118,465 16,635,097 16,325,819 16,864,919

(1)
Net sa l es by
reporta bl e s egment:

Ameri cas $ 39,808 $ 36,820 $ 169,658 $ 153,306

Europe 22,795 20,794 95,118 89,307

Grea ter Chi na 15,470 14,563 74,200 68,366

Ja pa n 5,700 5,991 25,977 28,482

Res t of As i a
6,373 5,192 29,375 26,356
Pa ci fi c

Tota l net s al$e s 90,146 $ 83,360 $ 394,328 $ 365,817

(1)
Net sa l es by
cate gory:

i Phone $ 42,626 $ 38,868 $ 205,489 $ 191,973

Ma c 11,508 9,178 40,177 35,190

i Pa d 7,174 8,252 29,292 31,862

Wea rabl es ,
Home and 9,650 8,785 41,241 38,367
Acces s ori es

Servi ces 19,188 18,277 78,129 68,425

Tota l net s al$e s 90,146 $ 83,360 $ 394,328 $ 365,817

 31

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS (Unaudited)
(In mi l l ions , except number of s hares whi ch a re refl ected i n thous ands a nd par va l ue )
Current Assets September 24,2022
September 25, 2021

Cas h a nd ca s h equi va l ents $ 23646 34940

Ma rketa bl e s ecuri ti e s 24,658 27,699

Accounts recei va bl e,
28,184 26,278
ne t

Inventories 4,946 6,580

Vendor non-tra de
32,748 25,228
recei va bl es

Other current a s s ets 21,223 14,111

Total current a s s e ts 135,405 134,836

Non-current as s e ts :

Ma rketa bl e
120,805 127,877
s ecuri ti e s

Prope rty, pl a nt and equi pment,

42,117
net 39,440
Other non-current a s s e ts 54,428 48,849
Total non-current a s s ets 217,350 216,166
Total a s s e ts $ 352,755 $ 351,002
 32

LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY

Current liabilities 2022 2021
Accounts pa ya bl e 64,115 54,763

Non-current l i a bi l i ti e s :

Term debt 98,959 109,106

Other non-curre nt
49,142 53,325
l i abi l i ti es

Total non-
current 148,101 162,431
l i abi l i ti es

Tota l l i a bi l i ti es 302,083 28,912

Sha rehol ders ’ equi ty:

Common s tock a nd a ddi ti ona l

pai d-i n ca pi ta l, !0.00001 pa r
val ue: 50,400,000 shares
64,849 57,365

a uthori zed; 15,943,425 and 16,426,786

s ha res i s s ued and outs tandi ng,
res pecti vel y

Reta i ned ea rni ngs /(Accumula ted

-3,068 5,562
defi ci t)

Accumul ated othe r

-11,109 163
comprehens i ve i ncome/(los s )

Total s ha rehol ders ’ e qui ty 50,672 63,090

Tota l l i a bi l i ti es a nd
$ 352,755 351,002
s ha rehol ders ’ equi ty
 33

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR SUMSUNG COOMPANY FOR 2022 AND 2021

Available at: https://www.samsung.com/global/ir/financial-information/audited-financial-
statements/#expandCont23
https://images.samsung.com/is/content/samsung/assets/global/ir/docs/
2022_con_quarter04_all_1.pdf

Samsung
Electronics Co.,
Ltd. and its
subsidiaries

CONSOLIDAT
ED
STATEMENTS
OF FINANCIAL
POSITION

(In millions Korean won, in thousands US

dollars)

December
December 31, December 31, December 31,
31,
Notes 2022 2021 2022 2021
KRW KRW USD USD

Assets

Current assets
4, 28
Cash and cash
49,680,710 39,031,415 38,477,921 30,229,997
equivalents

Short-term
4, 28 65,102,886 81,708,986 50,422,462 63,283,957
financial instruments

Short-term
414,6
financial assets at 4, 28 3,369,034 321,117 2,609,331
10
amortized cost

Short-term
financial assets at fair 29,08 22,52
4, 6, 28 40,757 31,566
value through profit 0 3
or loss
 34

Trade receivables 4, 5, 7, 28 35,721,563 40,713,415 27,666,503 31,532,713

Non-trade
4, 7, 28 6,149,209 4,497,257 4,762,589 3,483,145
receivables

Prepaid expenses 2,867,823 2,336,252 2,221,141 1,809,437

Inventories 8 52,187,866 41,384,404 40,419,724 32,052,397

Other current
4, 28 6,316,834 5,081,665 4,892,415 3,935,772
assets

218,470,581 218,163,185 169,206,395 168,968,315

Non-current assets

Financial assets
at fair value through
4, 6, 28 11,397,012 13,965,839 8,827,034 10,816,602
other comprehensive
income

Financial assets
at fair value through 4, 6, 28 1,405,468 1,525,344 1,088,541 1,181,385
profit or loss

Investment in
associates and joint 9 10,893,869 8,932,251 8,437,348 6,918,066
ventures

Property, plant and

10 168,045,388 149,928,539 130,151,868 116,120,291
equipment

Intangible assets 11 20,217,754 20,236,244 15,658,737 15,673,057

 35

Net defined benefit

14 5,851,972 2,809,590 4,532,377 2,176,039
assets

Deferred income
25 5,101,318 4,261,214 3,950,992 3,300,328
tax assets

Other non-current
4, 7, 28 7,041,145 6,798,952 5,453,397 5,265,819
assets

229,953,926 208,457,973 178,100,294 161,451,587

Total assets 448,424,507 426,621,158 347,306,689 330,419,902

December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31,

Notes 2022 2021 2022 2021

KRW KRW USD USD
Liabilities and Equity
Current liabilities
Trade payables 4, 28 10,644,686 13,453,351 8,244,355 10,419,678
Short-term borrowings 4, 5, 12, 28 5,147,315 13,687,793 3,986,617 10,601,254
Other payables 4, 28 17,592,366 15,584,866 13,625,362 12,070,545
Advances received 17 1,314,934 1,224,812 1,018,422 948,622
Withholdings 4, 28 1,298,244 1,294,052 1,005,496 1,002,249
Accrued expenses 4, 17, 28 29,211,487 27,928,031 22,624,421 21,630,379
Current income tax
4,250,397 6,749,149 3,291,951 5,227,245
liabilities
Current portion of
4, 12, 13, 28 1,089,162 1,329,968 843,561 1,030,066
long-term liabilities
Provisions 15 5,844,907 5,372,872 4,526,905 4,161,312
Other current liabilities 4, 17, 28 1,951,354 1,492,239 1,511,331 1,155,744
78,344,852 88,117,133 60,678,421 68,247,094

Non-current liabilities
Debentures 4, 13, 28 536,093 508,232 415,206 393,628
Long-term borrowings 4, 12, 28 3,560,672 2,866,156 2,757,756 2,219,850
Long-term other
4, 28 2,753,305 2,991,440 2,132,446 2,316,883
payables
Net defined benefit
14 268,370 465,884 207,854 360,829
liabilities
Deferred income tax
25 5,111,332 23,198,205 3,958,748 17,967,108
liabilities
Long-term provisions 15 1,928,518 2,306,994 1,493,645 1,786,777
Other non-current
4, 17, 28 1,171,761 1,267,183 907,535 981,439
liabilities
15,330,051 33,604,094 11,873,190 26,026,514
Total liabilities 93,674,903 121,721,227 72,551,611 94,273,608
 36

December
December 31, December 31, December 31,
31,
Notes 2022 2021 2022 2021
KRW KRW USD USD

Equity
attributable
to owners of
the
Company 18

Preference
119,467 119,467 92,528 92,528
shares

Ordinary 602,60
18 778,047 778,047 602,601
shares 1
Share
4,403,893 4,403,893 3,410,834 3,410,834
premium
Retained
19 337,946,407 293,064,763 261,740,930 226,979,906
earnings

Other
components 20 1,938,328 -2,128,473 1,501,243 -1,648,512
of equity

345,186,142 296,237,697 267,348,136 229,437,357

Non-
controlling 31 9,563,462 8,662,234 7,406,942 6,708,937
interests

Total equity 354,749,604 304,899,931 274,755,078 236,146,294

Total
liabilities 448,424,507 426,621,158 347,306,689 330,419,902
and equity
 37

Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PROFIT OR LOSS

won, in thousands of US dollars (Note 2.29))

For the years ended December 31,

Notes 2022 2021 2022 2021
KRW KRW USD USD

Revenue 29 302,231,360 279,604,799 234,079,475 216,555,107

Cost of sales 21 190,041,770 147,188,160 128,886,293
Gross profit 112,189,590 86,891,315 87,668,814
Selling and administrative expenses 21, 22 68,812,960 61,559,601 53,295,930 47,678,173
Operating profit 29 43,376,630 51,633,856 33,595,385 39,990,641
Other non-operating income 23 1,962,071 2,205,695 1,519,632 1,708,320
Other non-operating expense 23 1,790,176 2,055,971 1,386,499 1,592,358
Share of net profit of associates and joint ventures
9 1,090,643 729,614 844,708 565,089
Financial income 24 20,828,995 8,543,187 16,132,145 6,616,735
Financial expense 24 19,027,689 7,704,554 14,737,026 5,967,210
Profit before income tax 46,440,474 53,351,827 35,968,345 41,321,217
Income tax expense 25 -9,213,603 13,444,377 -7,135,975 10,412,727
Profit for the year 55,654,077 39,907,450 43,104,320 30,908,490
Profit attributable to
Owners of the Company 54,730,018 39,243,791 42,388,632 30,394,483
Non-controlling interests 924,059 663,659 715,688 514,007
Earnings per share 26
(in Korean won, in US dollars)
- Basic 8,057 5,777 6.24 4.47
- Diluted 8,057 5,777 6.24 4.47