SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 69
Download to read offline
Running Head: Amazon P a g e | 0
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
ANALYSIS
Amazon, Apple & Alibaba
FISV 5526: Financial Reporting & Controls
Johnson & Wales University
By: Joshua Scott Neeper
April 18, 2017
Financial Analysis P a g e | 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 3
Financial Snapshot.......................................................................................................................... 4
Profitability ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Overall Profitability (ROE)......................................................................................................... 5
Return on Assets (ROA) ............................................................................................................. 8
Return on Net Assets (RONA).................................................................................................. 11
Disaggregating ROA................................................................................................................. 12
ROA....................................................................................................................................... 12
Profit Margin ......................................................................................................................... 13
Asset Turnover ...................................................................................................................... 15
Disaggregating Profit Margin.................................................................................................... 18
Cost of Goods Sold Percentage ............................................................................................. 18
Selling, General & Administrative Expense Percentage....................................................... 20
Other Expense Percentage..................................................................................................... 22
Tax Expense Percentage........................................................................................................ 23
Profit Margin From Above.................................................................................................... 25
Disaggregating Asset Turnover................................................................................................. 26
Accounts Receivable Turnover ............................................................................................. 26
Inventory Turnover................................................................................................................ 28
Fixed Asset Turnover ............................................................................................................ 29
Return on Common Equity (ROCE)......................................................................................... 30
ROCE..................................................................................................................................... 30
Disaggregating (ROCE)............................................................................................................ 32
ROCE..................................................................................................................................... 32
CEL (Common Earnings Leverage)...................................................................................... 33
CSL (Capital Structure Leverage) ......................................................................................... 34
Adjusted Leverage................................................................................................................. 35
Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 38
Short-Term Liquidity ................................................................................................................ 38
Cash Ratio.............................................................................................................................. 39
Financial Analysis P a g e | 2
Current Ratio ......................................................................................................................... 40
Quick Ratio............................................................................................................................ 43
Operating Cash Flow Ratio ................................................................................................... 46
Turnover ratios.......................................................................................................................... 48
Accounts Receivable Turnover Ratio.................................................................................... 48
Inventory Turnover Ratio...................................................................................................... 50
Accounts Payable Turnover Ratio......................................................................................... 53
Debt & Long-Term Solvency.................................................................................................... 54
Long-Term Debt.................................................................................................................... 54
Debt/Equity Ratio.................................................................................................................. 55
Debt/Assets Ratio .................................................................................................................. 56
Interest Coverage (Earnings Basis) ....................................................................................... 57
Capital Expenditures Coverage ............................................................................................. 58
Sales Overview ............................................................................................................................. 59
Decision Process ........................................................................................................................... 62
Would I Invest a $500k Inheritance Into One Company?......................................................... 63
If An Amazon Executive, Would I Want To Be Acquired? ..................................................... 65
If An Amazon Executive, Would I Make an Acquisition? ....................................................... 66
Final Decision............................................................................................................................... 67
Works Cited .................................................................................................................................. 68
Financial Analysis P a g e | 3
INTRODUCTION
This financial statement analysis is divided into two sections, profitability, and risk. Each
calculation and section will encompass graphs and assessments. This data will illustrate my
perception and rationale beyond the numbers. I have chosen Amazon as the leading company to
examine in this analysis. Amazon is a very diversified company regarding revenue streams, and
their economies of scale have allowed them to compete across various industries. Selecting
comparable companies was relatively difficult as no company in the world directly competes with
Amazon as a whole.
Therefore, I’ve selected two companies, Apple and Alibaba, to compare their financials to
Amazon’s. These three companies have experienced abnormal revenue and earnings growth since
their inception, and all of them directly compete with one another to some degree. Whether its
Amazon Video encroaching on Apple TV’s market share or Alibaba’s ability to disrupt Amazon’s
supplier partners with their B2B model; they’re all intertwined, and these meticulous correlations
present different opportunities and weaknesses. I believe that comparing these companies and
analyzing their financials will uncover various economic management philosophies and long-term
fiscal strategies as an executive or a personal investor. Therefore, after assessing all data points,
metrics, and calculations, I will make one of the following decisions per assignment instructions:
1. If I inherited $500,000, would I invest all funds into Amazon?
2. If an executive at Amazon, would I make an acquisition?
3. If an executive at Amazon, would I want to be acquired?
I predict that after this analysis if I were an executive at Amazon – I would acquire Alibaba.
Disclosure: Apple and Alibaba’s annual financial data was derived from (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com,
n.d.). Amazon’s financial information derived from their published 10k.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 4
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Profitability
Overall Profitability (ROE) 12.29% 35.62% 32.93%
Return on Assets (ROA) 3.60% 14.93% 25.07%
Disaggregating ROA
ROA 3.60% 14.93% 25.07%
Profit Margin 1.96% 21% 72.17%
Asset Turnover 0.018 0.710 0.350
Disaggregating Profit Margin
COGS % 64.91% 60.92% 33.97%
SG&A Expense % 32.01% 6.62% 21.59%
Other Expense % 0.12% 0% 3.08%
Tax Expense % 1.05% 7.31% 8.89%
Profit Margin From Above 2.10% 21.29% 77.43%
Disaggregating Asset Turnover
Accounts Receivable Turnover 1.19 0.98 1.04
Inventory Turnover 8.13 58.35 N/A
Days Inventory Held 44.9 days 6.25 days N/A
Fixed Asset Turnover 5.34 8.72 8.21
Return on Common Equity
ROCE 14.52% 27.09% 38.76%
Disaggregating (ROCE)
ROCE 13.58% 27.09% 38.64%
CEL (Common Earnings Leverage) 0.83 0.73 0.98
CSL (Capital Structure Leverage) 4.53 2.47 1.58
Adjusted Leverage 3.77 1.81 1.54
Cash Ratio 0.44 0.26 2.08
Current Ratio 1.04 1.35 2.58
Quick Ratio 0.78 1.22 2.46
Operating Cash Cash Flow Ratio 37.53% 83.32% 109.22%
Efficiency Ratios
Accounts Receivable Turnover Ratio 19.44 7.2 8.99
Days Oustanding 18.78 days 50.69 days 40.60 days
Inventory Turnover Ratio 8.13 58.35 N/A
Days Held 44.9 days 6.25 days N/A
Accounts Payable Turnover Ratio 30.35 days 11.59 days N/A
Debt & Long-Term Solvency
Long-Term Debt 0.29 0.37 0.2
Debt/Equity Ratio 3.32 or 332% 1.51 or 151% .65 or 56%
Debt/Assets Ratio .09 or 9% .23 or 23% .14 or 14%
Interest Coverage (Earnings Basis) 8.84 N/A 42.05
Capital Expenditures Coverage 1.66 5.17 10.45
2016 Formula Snapshot
Short-Term Liquidity / Financial Health
Risk
FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT
Financial Analysis P a g e | 5
PROFITABILITY
To measure a firm’s overall performance, one must use a methodical analysis by starting with
(ROE), return on equity. Profitability is broken into calculations which encompass various
financial metrics. The most attractive profitability calculations used in a financial analysis include
a profit margin, return on assets (ROA), and return on equity (ROE).
However, all three profitability ratios can require disaggregation, depending on the analyst. For
specific purposes, this section will include some disaggregation.
OVERALL PROFITABILITY (ROE)
ROE calculates the profit a company generates from shareholder’s invested funds. ROE is
expressed as a percentage and beneficial to track year-over-year. A sound investor and analyst
want to see a positive ROE. A ROE of 3% or less before disaggregating would indicate severe
financial turmoil and a loss of investor confidence and stock valuation.
ROE = Net Income ÷ Shareholders’ Equity
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 ÷ $19,285,000,000 = 0.1229 = 12.29%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 ÷ $128,249,000,000 = 0.3562 = 35.62%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 ÷ $33,550,000,000 = .3293 = 32.93%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 6
Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 12.29%
Apple, 35.62%
Alibaba, 32.93%
2016 Overall Profitability (ROE)
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon -0.49% 3.06% -2.35% 4.94% 12.29%
Apple 42.84% 30.64% 33.61% 46.25% 35.62%
Alibaba 13.43% 53.42% 157.44% 27.63% 32.93%
-20.00%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
140.00%
160.00%
180.00%
5-Year ROE (2012-2016)
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 7
Assessment:
Graph one illustrates the company’s’ utilization of invested funds from shareholders to generate
returns for the year 2016 while the second graph shows this over a 5-year interim. For comparison
purposes, the average ROE in the United States has been approximately 10% throughout the
1990’s and early 2000’s. Each of these companies has delivered above average returns for 2016,
compared to historical data.
Apple and Alibaba’s supernormal economic profits can be explained by competitive strategies,
lean operating business models, and economic demand. Amazon’s supernormal sales growth
(when compared to Apple and Alibaba) can be defined through economies of scale, revenue
diversification, profit reinvesting, and asset growth. However, Amazon’s cost of capital could be
impacting their ROE. Other consideration, Apple performed a 7-1 stock split back in June of 2014
(Stephens, John, 2014). This stock split made Apple’s share price very affordable while Amazon
has never performed a stock split. Additionally, Alibaba went public in 2014 and was one of the
most anticipated and largest IPOs to date.
The 5-year graph illustrates the 2014 uptick in ROE for Apple and Alibaba. I believe that
Amazon’s ROE will reach if not surpass Apple and Alibaba’s ROE in next 2-3 years. Pre-2012
ROE data shows that Amazon’s ROE ranged from mid-20’s to low 60’s. During this interim,
Amazon made massive investments across various departments that were showing positive
indicators and which explain their steady ROA growth in the following section.
The 5-year percentage trend from 2012-2016 generated the following results: Amazon 103.99%,
Apple -16.85%, and Alibaba 145.20%. Over the past 5-years, Amazon and Alibaba have increased
their ROE while Apple’s ROE has declined. Shareholders’ equity, which measures a firm’s net
worth, will be explained later about this.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 8
RETURN ON ASSETS (ROA)
ROA often referred as ROI (return on investment), measures how efficient a company’s
management is at using their assets to produce earnings. In other words, are a company’s assets
generating positive earnings, i.e. profit? ROA like ROE is expressed as a percentage and is highly
suggested to disaggregate this calculation and monitor it year-over-year. Efficacious and yet few
managers can deliver high ROAs or ROIs with little investment.
= Net income + (1-T) * Interest expense + MI in earning
Average total assets
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $484,000,000 + 0
($64,747,000,000 + $83,402,000,000) ÷ 2
= $2,075,760,000
$74,074,500,000
= 3.60%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 + (1 - 39%) * 0 + 0
($290,345,000,000 + $321,686,000,000) ÷ 2
= 14.93%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000
($52,945,500,000 + $37,108,200,000) ÷ 2
= $11,286,610,000
$45,026,850,000
= 25.07%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 9
Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 3.60%
Apple, 14.93%
Alibaba, 25.07%
2016 ROA
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon -0.13% 0.75% -0.51% 0.99% 3.60%
Apple 28.54% 19.34% 18.01% 20.45% 14.93%
Alibaba 8.96% 15.14% 26.32% 13.16% 25.07%
-5.00%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
5-Year ROA (2012-2016)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 10
Assessment:
Over the past 5-years, I can see that Apple’s ROA has dramatically declined while Alibaba has
surpassed Apple. Amazon’s ROA has been relatively steady over the past 5-years. However,
Amazon’s ROA dipped below zero in 2012 and 2014. Amazon has made ongoing investments in
the years that produced a negative ROA resulting in positive ROA the following year.
Furthermore, Amazon is on track to generate a positive ROA 3-years running, 2015 thru 2017.
Concluding, Amazon has increased its ROA approximately 3% over the past years while Apple’s
ROA has suffered -13.64% but Alibaba has been impressive by producing a 5-year aggregate
increase of 16.20%.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 11
RETURN ON NET ASSETS (RONA)
RONA is calculation used to discern whether a company is positioning their assets in a viable yet
economical way compared to its competitors and the industry. A higher RONA indicates a
healthier profit performance. However, this calculation and not one single calculation can illustrate
the whole story of a company’s fiscal health. Like ROA and ROE, RONA is expressed as a
percentage.
= Net Income ÷ (Fixed Assets + Net Working Capital)
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 ÷ ($29,114,000,000 + $1,965,000,000) = .0763, 7.63%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 ÷ ($27,010,000,000 + $27,863,000,000) = .8326, 83.26%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 ÷ ($2,107,000,000 + $12,683,000,000) = .7471, 74.71%
Assessment:
Apple and Alibaba have respectably high RONAs while Amazon’s is very alarming. However,
Amazon has the lowest net income and lowest working capital. Their fixed assets are surprisingly
higher than Apple’s. This information indicates that Amazon has made investments into PP&E
which are producing low ROIs and a small operating profit margin. Amazon’s fulfillment centers
have a strong bearing on this calculation.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 12
DISAGGREGATING ROA
ROA
ROA = Profit Margin * Asset Turnover
Amazon
= 1.96% * 1.84 = 3.60%
Apple
= 21.19% * .70 = 14.93%
Alibaba
= 72.17% * .35 = 25.07%
Visualization:
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 3.60%
Apple, 14.93%
Alibaba, 25.07%
2016 ROA
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 13
PROFIT MARGIN
= Net Income + (1-T) * Interest Expense + MI in Earnings
Sales
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $484,000,000 + 0
$135,987,000,000
= $2,666,240,000
$135,987,000,000
= 1.96%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 + (1 - 39%) * 0 + 0
$215,639,000,000
= 21%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000
$15,638,000,000
= 72.17%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 14
Visualization:
Assessment:
This graph illustrates the 2016 profit margins for each company. Amazon and Apple maintain
inventory to operate their businesses while Alibaba does not carry product inventory. Each of the
companies operates at their profit margin, but varying margins are contributed to inventory levels,
sales, net income, minority interest earnings, taxes and interest expense. To compare these
companies equally, I used a marginal tax rate of 39% which accounts for the 35% federal rate and
4% for the state rate.
Amazon’s low-profit margin suggests that they have funds invested in assets, and their operating
expenses are higher than Apple and Alibaba’s. Apple’s above average profit margin contributes to
the fact they are maintaining margins, by eliminating any minority interest earnings and interest
expenses. Apple should not have any interest payments given they're $20 billion plus cash and
cash equivalent levels.
Alibaba’s profit margin is impressive but contributed to their low overhead and operating costs.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 1.96%
Apple, 21%
Alibaba, 72.17%
2016 Profit Margin
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 15
ASSET TURNOVER
= Sales ÷ Average Total Assets
Amazon
= $135,987,000,000
($64,747,000,000 + $83,402,000,000) ÷ 2
= 1.836
Apple
= $215,639,000,000
($290,345,000,000 + $321,686,000,000) ÷ 2
= .71
Alibaba
= $15,638,000,000
($52,945,500,000 + $37,108,200,000) ÷ 2
= .35
Financial Analysis P a g e | 16
Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon 2.11 2.05 1.88 1.78 1.83
Apple 1.07 0.89 0.83 0.89 0.71
Alibaba 0.42 0.62 0.6 0.42 0.35
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
5-Year Asset Turnover
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon $32,555,000,000 $40,159,000,000 $54,505,000,000 $64,747,000,000 $83,402,000,000
Apple $176,064,000,00 $207,000,000,00 $231,839,000,00 $290,479,000,00 $321,686,000,00
Alibaba $6,849,871,592 $9,254,944,066 $16,185,052,451 $37,061,853,426 $52,879,383,642
$0
$50,000,000,000
$100,000,000,000
$150,000,000,000
$200,000,000,000
$250,000,000,000
$300,000,000,000
$350,000,000,000
5-Year Total Assets - Alibaba adjusted for
exchange rate
Financial Analysis P a g e | 17
Assessment:
Graph one illustrates that Amazon has the highest asset turnover year-over-year compared to Apple
and Alibaba. These results are indicative of Amazon’s business operations and need for high
turnover. The trends lines show that Amazon has a good asset turnover that is poised to increase
in the years to come, unlike Apple and Alibaba.
Graph two illustrates total asset growth over a 5-year interim. Total assets are referenced because
it’s important to understand that Apple has increased its total assets significantly. This is partially
contributed to Apple’s surplus in cash which has dramatically increased approximately $10 billion
over the past 5-years.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 18
DISAGGREGATING PROFIT MARGIN
COST OF GOODS SOLD PERCENTAGE
= COGS ÷ Sales
Amazon
= $88,265,000,000
$135,987,000,000
= 64.91%
Apple
= $130,723,700,000
$214,568,400,000
= 60.92%
Alibaba
= $4,990,900,000
$14,693,500,000
= 33.97%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 19
Visualization:
Assessment:
This graph illustrates each company’s COGS, direct costs attributed to a company’s production of
goods/services sold by the corporation. Amazon and Apple’s COGS are notably high. This
explains Amazon’s low-profit margin. Amazon’s cost to produce its goods and services requires
more capital to operate as a company. Alibaba’s respective COGS is contributed to low capital
requirements for their operating expenses.
Additional factors that affect each of the company’s COGS include SG&A and R&D expenses.
Apple has the highest R&D spending but is not included in their SG&A expense. The next section
will not factor in Apple’s R&D cost.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 64.91%
Apple, 60.92%
Alibaba, 33.97%
2016 COGS
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 20
SELLING, GENERAL & ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE PERCENTAGE
= SG&A ÷ Sales
Amazon
= $43,536,000,000
$135,987,000,000
= 32.01%
Apple
= $14,194,000,000
$215,568,400,000
= 6.62%
Alibaba
= $3,172,000,000
$14,693,500,000
= 21.59%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 21
Visualization:
Assessment:
This graph illustrates the SG&A expense for 2016. Amazon, which has the highest, contributes to
their growth rate over the past 5-years. Their SG&A expense has more than doubled in the past 5-
years including Alibaba’s. Apple’s SG&A expense has increased less than $4 billion during this
interim while their R&D spending has grown approximately $5 billion.
The abnormal uptick in Amazon and Alibaba’s SG&A expense over the past 5-years is contributed
to revenue growth which requires additional employees and increased overhead. This graph can
be interpreted as a warning for each of the companies. Amazon’s elevated SG&A expenses make
them more susceptible to potential layoffs if their sales and ROA decline. Apple’s abnormally low
SG&A expense indicates a level of stagnation with revenue growth and new product launches.
Their small SG&A expense also explains their cash reserves as it’s not spent on employees or new
assets but rather R&D. Furthermore, Apple’s outsourcing and application developer platform save
them money. Also, this line item is where Amazon accounts for legal and litigation costs.
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 32.01%
Apple, 6.62%
Alibaba, 21.59%
2016 SG&A Expenses Percentage
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 22
OTHER EXPENSE PERCENTAGE
= Other Expenses ÷ Sales
Amazon
= $167,000,000
$135,987,000,000
= .12%
Apple
= $0.00
$215,639,000,000
= 0%
Alibaba
= $453,000,000
$14,693,500,000
= 3.08%
Assessment:
Other expenses for each of the companies does not show abnormality. However, Amazon’s other
expense category encompasses marketing related, contract based, customer intangible asset
amortization expenses, and expenses related to legal settlements which are arguably a tax
deduction. If the other expenses were valued over $500 million, more insight and analysis would
be required.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 23
TAX EXPENSE PERCENTAGE
= Taxes ÷ Sales
Amazon
= $1,425,000,0000
$135,987,000,000
= 1.05%
Apple
= $15,685,000,000
$215,639,000,000
= 7.31%
Alibaba
= $1,306,000,000
$14,693,500,000
= 8.89
Financial Analysis P a g e | 24
Assessment:
The tax expense percentage for each of these companies is not excessive which tells me they are
minimizing their tax exposure and operating efficiently. However, Apple’s controversial tax status
in Ireland benefits them more so than if their tax status was dependent solely on U.S tax code. If
their tax expenses exceeded 20%, it would require further attention. Potential problems could arise
for some of these companies if President Trump’s tax bill gets passed which would eliminate many
tax deductions and ambiguities. Details of those are limited right now. The crux of Trump’s tax
bill is to decrease the corporate tax rate which is good, but it still taxes a company’s money that is
transferred from overseas back to the U.S.
In a recent interview between Apple’s CEO Tim Cook and CNBC’s Mad Money host, Jim Cramer;
Tim Cook talked about this very aspect. His thoughts and insight were valuable to me. Per Tim
Cook, the issue today is that we are a global economy and when a global company produces sales
in another country and pays those country’s taxes, why should a U.S corporation pay additional
taxes to bring that money back into the U.S (CNBC, 2017)? Tim Cook also discussed how this had
impacted their internal reporting and controls. When they invest in R&D or new ventures, they
have to borrow against their cash reserves.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 25
PROFIT MARGIN FROM ABOVE
= NI + (1 – T) * Interest Expense + MI Earnings
Sales
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 1.05%) * $484,000,000 + 0
$135,987,000,000
= 2.10%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 + (1 – 7.31%) * 0 + 0
$215,639,000,000
= 21.29%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 8.89%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000
$14,693,500,000
= 77.43%
Assessment:
This profit margin calculation shows the relationship between net income (mainly) and sales.
Amazon has the lowest profit margin which can indicate a higher risk regarding investment.
However, this calculation doesn’t account for economies of scale which Amazon has increased
year-over-year on a global scale. Alibaba is difficult to read as they are a relatively new company
with a high-profit margin. However, they show tremendous upside as their growth continues, but
their success could make them susceptible to potential acquisition.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 26
DISAGGREGATING ASSET TURNOVER
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE TURNOVER
= Credit Sales ÷ Average Accounts Receivable
Amazon
= $8,339,000,000
($5,654,000,000 + $8,339,000,000) ÷ 2
= 1.19
Apple
= $29,299,000,000
($30,343,000,000 + $29,299,000,000) ÷ 2
= .98
Alibaba
= $1,704,400,000
($1,562,700,000 + $1,704,400,000) ÷ 2
= 1.04
Financial Analysis P a g e | 27
Assessment:
This calculation is very critical to understand some of the risks each of the companies are taking
regarding extending credit. Amazon and Alibaba have a ratio greater than one which indicates they
are collecting their receivable balances which minimize their losses efficiently. Apple’s A/R
turnover raises some concerns. Their A/R turnover is less than one which indicates a struggle to
collect 100% of their receivable balances during a period. If this number continues to decline,
Apple could experience losses. Apple is a consumer products company at heart, and consumer
goods are typically purchased through credit directly by the business (Apple) or through a third-
party financing provider.
In relation to the economy, Apple’s 2016 credit sales of $29.3 billion could quickly decline if credit
markets tighten up or if the economy experiences another crisis on Wall Street or in international
markets. The more diversified each of these company’s sales become (international sales growth),
the more protected they will be against economic volatility instigated in one country.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 28
INVENTORY TURNOVER
= COGS ÷ Average Inventory
Amazon
= $88,265,000,000
($11,461,000,000 + $10,243,000,000) ÷ 2
= 8.13, Inventory turns 8.13 times per year and held approximately 44.9 days.
Apple
= $130,723,700,000
($2,132,000,000 + $2,349,000,000) ÷ 2
= 58.35, Inventory turns 58.35 times per year and held approximately 6.25 days.
Alibaba
= $4,990,900,000
($0.00 + $0.00) ÷ 2
= N/A, Alibaba does not hold any inventory.
Assessment:
Amazon’s inventory turnover could impact their cash outlay for new capital investments and short-
term liquidity if their turnover rates decline. A lower turnover rate increases carrying costs,
consequently reducing operating profit margins and ROA. When cash is tied-up, this limits a
company’s ability to invest in new projects and potentially make acquisitions.
Apple’s high turnover rate represents their ability to efficiently launch new products and speaks to
their streamlined supply chain. This should be no surprise as Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook comes from
a supply chain background.
Alibaba’s zero inventory makes them once again, attractive for an acquisition.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 29
FIXED ASSET TURNOVER
= Sales ÷ Average Fixed Assets (Net)
Amazon
= $135,987,000,000
($29,114,000,000 + $21,838,000,000) ÷ 2
= 5.34
Apple
= $215,639,000,000
($27,010,000,000 + $22,471,000,000) ÷ 2
= 8.72
Alibaba
= $14,693,500,000
($2,107,000,000 + $1,474,000,000) ÷ 2
= 8.21
Assessment:
Alibaba and Apple are experiencing high RORs on their investments in PP&E. Their efficiency
indicates a level of investment attractiveness. Their ability to invest a dollar and generate high
RORs is very appealing which reduces risks compared to Amazon. Amazon’s turnover is still
encouraging in this arena, but their PP&E make-up is different than the others.
When a company can generate high RORs, this indicates a potential increase in ROE.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 30
RETURN ON COMMON EQUITY (ROE)
ROCE
= Net Income – Preferred Dividends
Average Common Equity
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 - $0.00
($19,285,000,000 + $13,384,000,000) ÷ 2
= 14.52%
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 - $12,150,000,000
($128,249,000,000 + $119,355,000,000) ÷ 2
= 27.09%
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 - $0.00
($33,550,000,000 + $23,459,000,000) ÷ 2
= 38.76%
Financial Analysis P a g e | 31
Visualization:
Assessment:
This graph illustrates the 2016 ROCE (Return on Common Equity) for each company. Each
company has an above average ROCE and ROE. Alibaba, which has the highest, is the most
impressive and indicates serious growth but begs the question, is Alibaba’s growth sustainable
when compared to the P/E of Amazon and Apple?
Each of these companies has been able to meet expectations and increase their ROCE. However,
their strategies are different from one another, and their ROCE growth is dictated by management’s
effectiveness to deliver results.
None of these companies are at risk based on this graph. However, stagnant economic/GDP growth
in the U.S. could impact Apple and Amazon’s ROE as the majority of their sales are from the U.S.
Stocks and indexes are hitting all-time highs which have left some investors on edge about a
potential correction. However, a possible correction would not suffice or justify a decrease in these
company’s’ ROCE as long as management delivers results and beats expectations.
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 14.52%
Apple, 27.09%
Alibaba, 38.76%
2016 Return on Common Equity
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 32
DISAGGREGATING (ROCE)
Terms:
ROA - the return from operations independent of financing
CEL - the proportion of operating income (net income before financing costs and related tax
effects) allocable to the common shareholders
CSL - a measure of the degree to which a firm uses common shareholders' funds to finance
assets.
Adjusted leverage - CSL * CEL; indicates the combined multiplier effect of leverage (using
debt and preferred stock financing) to increase or decrease the return to common shareholders.
ROCE
= ROA * (CEL) * (CSL)
Amazon
= 3.60% * .83 * 4.53 = 13.58%
Apple
= 14.93% * .73 * 2.47 = 27.09%
Alibaba
= 25.07% * .98 * 1.58 = 38.64%
Assessment:
Refer to overall leverage assessment.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 33
CEL (COMMON EARNINGS LEVERAGE)
= Net Income – Preferred Dividends
Net income + (1- T) * Interest Expense + MI in Earnings
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 - $0
$2,371,000,000 + (1-1.05) * $484,000,000 + $0
= .83
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 - $12,150,000,000
$45,687,000,000 +(1-7.31%) * $0 + $0
= .73
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 - $0
$11,049,000,000 + (1-8.89%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000
= .98
Assessment:
Refer to overall leverage assessment.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 34
CSL (CAPITAL STRUCTURE LEVERAGE)
= Average Total Assets
Average Common Equity
Amazon
= $74,074,500,000 ÷ $16,334,500,000 = 4.53
Apple
= $306,015,500,000 ÷ $123,802,000,000 = 2.47
Alibaba
= $45,026,850,000 ÷ $28,504,500,000 = 1.58
Assessment:
Refer to overall leverage assessment.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 35
ADJUSTED LEVERAGE
= CSL * CEL
Amazon
= 4.53 *.83 = 3.77
Apple
= 2.47 *.73 = 1.81
Alibaba
= 1.58 * .98 = 1.54
Assessment:
Refer to overall leverage assessment.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 36
Overall Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 3.77
Apple, 1.81
Alibaba, 1.54
2016 Adjusted Leverage
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon 3.97 4.12 5.07 4.89 3.77
Apple 1.49 1.68 2.08 2.43 1.81
Alibaba 1.5 2.65 3.8 1.76 1.54
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
5-Year Financial Leverage Average (2012-2016)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 37
Overall Financial Leverage Assessment:
Amazon’s adjusted leverage indicates that they’re more dependent on borrowing more so than
Apple and Alibaba. Furthermore, Amazon’s high capital structure leverage (CSL) suggests they
use common shareholders’ funds to finance assets at a rate much higher than Apple and Alibaba.
The high nature of Amazon’s leverage is indicative of their capital-intensive industry and debt
dependency.
Capital intensive industries typically have higher leverage than other industries such as the services
sector. Therefore, Amazon’s short-term Debt/Equity ratio could be high and pose concerns about
their liquidity but their long-term D/E ratio not so much. Companies who have more debt than
equity tend to be highly leveraged.
Apple and Alibaba are less dependent on borrowing for their operations, unlike Amazon.
Therefore, I find no significant comparison or concern at this time other than Amazon’s immediate
liquidity.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 38
RISK
Risk reflects the ability of a company to generate cash flows to satisfy its obligations. Failure to
do this generally results in bankruptcy at worst or indicates immediate attention to a company’s
solvency and ability to operate efficiently. Highly leverage companies are most susceptible to
this.
The ratios in this section are divided between short-term risk (liquidity) and long-term risk
(solvency). Liquidity risk relates to cash flows from operations, while solvency risk is influenced
by investing and financing decisions.
SHORT-TERM LIQUIDITY
In general, liquidity ratios are metrics that measures a company’s ability to meet its debt
obligations. Does the company have a healthy margin of safety? A higher ratio indicates a
company’s ability to cover debts.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 39
CASH RATIO
This ratio is commonly used by short-term lenders as it measures a company’s liquidity and how
easily it can service its debt and cover its short-term liabilities. This is a constant ratio which
doesn’t account for accounts receivable. Specifically, can a company meet all its current liabilities
without selling or liquidating other assets in the process?
A ratio greater than one suggests that a company has enough cash and cash equivalents to pay off
all short-term debts and still have cash remaining. If the ratio is less than one, a company does not
have a sufficient level of cash and cash equivalents to pay off its short-term debt. Do a company’s
current liabilities exceed its cash and cash equivalents?
= (Cash + Cash Equivalents) ÷ Current Liabilities
Amazon
= $19,334,000,0000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = .44
Apple
= $20,484,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = .26
Alibaba
= $16,724,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 2.08
Assessment:
Alibaba has highest cash ratio which measures a company’s short-term liquidity and determines
how easily a company can service debt and cover short-term liabilities. Though this ratio is a
decent indicator of a company’s current liquidity, it doesn’t represent the entire picture.
Furthermore, marketable securities and A/R is not accounted for in this calculation.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 40
CURRENT RATIO
Unlike the cash ratio, the current ratio measures a company’s ability to pay both short and long-
term debts. If the ratio is below one, this would indicate a company’s inability to pay off its
liabilities after depleting cash and cash equivalents and liquidating its assets.
However, a ratio that is abnormally high would indicate that a company is not managing their
working capital successfully.
= Current Assets ÷ Current Liabilities
Amazon
= $45,781,000,000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = 1.04
Apple
= $106,869,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = 1.35
Alibaba
= $20,729,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 2.58
Financial Analysis P a g e | 41
Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 1.04
Apple, 1.35
Alibaba, 2.58
2016 Current Ratio
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon 1.12 1.07 1.12 1.08 1.04
Apple 1.5 1.68 1.08 1.11 1.35
Alibaba 2.37 1.8 1.81 3.58 2.58
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5-Year Current Ratio (2012-2016)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 42
Assessment:
Each company has a current ratio greater than one which shows that each of them can pay back
their liabilities. A ratio less than one would specify severe liquidity problems or cash flow
discrepancies that could lead a company into bankruptcy. Furthermore, Amazon and Apple’s
assets allow for this ratio to be greater than one.
Looking deeper, Amazon’s current ratio should make any manager and investor nervous. Their
2016 current ratio of 1.04 barely passes the threshold. If this subpar current ratio for Amazon
continues, it could pose a significant risk in terms of meeting their current obligations. This directly
reflects the risk in which management is currently taking. Their capital is highly leveraged right
now, and any volatility in their operations could have a negative ripple effect.
Apple and Alibaba’s 2016 current ratio poses no concern at this time. However, if Apple’s lack of
new product advancements and launches continues, further insight and analysis would have to be
performed as this could impact their ROCE.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 43
QUICK RATIO
The quick ratio known as the acid test ratio measures a company’s ability to pay current liabilities
with quick assets (current property that can convert into cash within 90 days). A ratio of greater
than one indicates that a company has $1.00 plus and change to cover its current liabilities. A ratio
less than one would indicate a company’s inability to cover 100% of its current liabilities with
quick assets.
= (Cash + Marketable Securities + Receivables) ÷ Current Liabilities
Amazon
= $19,334,000,000 + $6,647,000,000 + $8,339,000,000
$43,816,000,000
= .78
Apple
= $20,484,000,000 + $46,671,000,000 + $29,299,000,000
$79,006,000,000
= 1.22
Alibaba
= $16,724,000,000 + $1,373,000,000 + $1,703,500,000
$8,046,000,000
= 2.46
Financial Analysis P a g e | 44
Visualization:
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 0.78
Apple, 1.22
Alibaba, 2.46
2016 Quick Ratio
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon 0.78 0.75 0.82 0.77 0.78
Apple 1.24 1.4 0.82 0.89 1.22
Alibaba 2.01 1.59 1.63 3.46 2.46
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
5-Year Quick Ratio (2012-2016)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 45
Assessment:
These quick ratios and graphs illustrate each company’s ability to pay its current liabilities with
quick assets (current assets that can convert into cash within 90 days or less). Apple and Alibaba
have quick ratios greater than one. A quick ratio greater than one means a company can sufficiently
meet their short-term liabilities with very liquid assets. This translates into greater financial
security in the short term.
Amazon’s low quick ratio would only be concerning if its 5-year trend was decreasing. If so, that
would indicate Amazon’s difficulty in maintaining or increasing sales, paying bills too quickly,
and/or collecting receivables slowly. None of those scenarios are true for Amazon.
Apple and Alibaba’s high quick ratios suggest they’re experiencing one or all of the following
situations: 1) top-line sales growth, 2) converting receivables in cash quickly, and/or 3) able to
cover financial obligations with ease. High quick ratios are typically associated with companies
with high inventory turnover rates or no inventory at all.
Apple and Alibaba do not concern me in this ratio, but Amazon’s low rate can be concerning to a
conservative investor. However, this rate could suggest some potential issues within Amazon’s
available capital. I do not believe their solvency is in question due to their economies of scale and
year-over-year revenue growth.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 46
OPERATING CASH FLOW RATIO
This ratio measures how well a company’s operations generate cash flows to cover its current
liabilities. However, this ratio can be manipulated by a corporation’s decision to include
depreciation expenses and lengthening their accounts payable periods. A ratio greater than one is
typically desired from investors. However, a ratio less than one could indicate a need for more
capital but is not necessarily bad if a company has made investments in income-producing assets
that are not yet producing.
= Cash Flow from Operations ÷ Current Liabilities
Amazon
= $16,443,000,000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = .38
Apple
= $65,824,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = .83
Alibaba
= $8,788,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 1.09
Financial Analysis P a g e | 47
Visualization:
Assessment:
Amazon and Apple have ratios less than one which indicates a need for more capital or suggests
they’ve made investments in income-producing assets or R&D in Apple’s case. Alibaba’s
operating cash flow ratio means their impressive ability to generate cash flows is valued higher
than their current liabilities. I believe that investors are investing in their long-term abilities rather
than their current situations which have kept their stock valuation respectively high.
Alibaba’s operating cash flows are not only attractive for a potential acquisition, but it also
suggests that Alibaba’s fiscal policy has positioned themselves to make potential acquisitions. All
financial indicators and calculations suggest Alibaba’s recent growth is just the beginning.
Overall, Amazon and Apple seem to be moderately leveraged and waiting on their investments to
start producing new cash flows in the near future. If they don’t, or they miss their expectations,
they will endure a stock value decrease.
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 0.38
Apple, 0.83
Alibaba, 1.09
2016 Operating Cash Flow Ratio
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 48
TURNOVER RATIOS
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE TURNOVER RATIO
= Sales ÷ Average Accounts Receivable
Amazon
= $135,987,000,000
($8,339,000,000 + $5,654,000,000) ÷ 2
= 19.44 = (365 ÷ 19.44) = 18.78 days
Apple
= $215,639,000,000
($29,299,000,000 + $30,343,000,000) ÷ 2
= 7.20 = (365 ÷ 7.20) = 50.69 days
Alibaba
= $15,638,000,000
($1,703,500,000 + $1,561,900,000) ÷ 2
= 8.99 = (365 ÷ 8.99) = 40.60 days
Financial Analysis P a g e | 49
Visualization:
Assessment:
This graph illustrates each company’s accounts receivable turnover ratio which is represented in
days. Given the principle, time value of money, a company loses money when collection duration
increases on its credit sales.
For companies like Apple who run periodic sales promotions advertising 0% interest; this directly
affects this ratio. Amazon, who is arguably leveraged in the short-term, has maintained a healthy
accounts receivable turnover rate. Alibaba’s 40.6 days is not surprising given their position in
international trade and their ability to offer trade assurance. International trade typically
experiences different payment/Incoterms which lengthen the transaction time. Therefore,
Alibaba’s 40.6 ratio is relatively low and non-concerning given their impressive short-term
liquidity.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 18.78
Apple, 50.69
Alibaba, 40.6
2016 Accounts Receivables (Represented in
Days)
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 50
INVENTORY TURNOVER RATIO
= Cost of Goods Sold ÷ Average Inventory
Amazon
= $88,265,000,000
($11,461,000,000 + $10,243,000,000) ÷ 2
= 8.13, Inventory turns 8.13 times per year and held approximately 44.9 days.
Apple
= $130,723,700,000
($2,132,000,000 + $2,349,000,000) ÷ 2
= 58.35, Inventory turns 58.35 times per year and held approximately 6.25 days.
Alibaba
= $4,990,900,000
($0.00 + $0.00) ÷ 2
= N/A, Alibaba does not hold any inventory.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 51
Visualization:
2012-2015 data provided by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon, 44.9
Apple, 6.25
Alibaba, 0
2016 Inventory Turnover (represented in
days)
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon 43.77 45.29 45.68 47.22 44.89
Apple 3.26 4.37 6.3 5.81 6.25
Alibaba 0 0 0 0 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-Year Inventory Turnover (2012-2016)
(represented days)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 52
Assessment:
Theses graphs illustrate the 2016 and 5-year inventory turnover ratio represented in days.
Alibaba’s inventory turnover ratio is not applicable as they do not carry inventory. Amazon and
Apple’s inventory turnover is not concerning when examining the 5-year trend. However,
Amazon’s inventory turnover is worth monitoring from a management perspective. If Amazon’s
inventory turnover increase in days, this will increase carrying costs.
At this time neither of them are concerning. If either company experiences an increase or decrease
of 5-days, then further examination will be needed. Alibaba’s zero inventory makes it attractive
for an acquisition and justifies their profit margins.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 53
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TURNOVER RATIO
= Purchases ÷ Average Accounts Payable
Accounts payable for these companies is tough to dissect in their financial statements. The
purchases item for this calculation should be represented as such in an income statement. These
companies do not provide individual purchases in their financial statements. However,
Morningstar.com has calculated this ratio, and the results are below.
Amazon
= 30.35 days
Apple
= 11.59 days
Alibaba
= N/A, not listed
Assessment:
This ratio shows Amazon and Apple’s average amount of time to pay its suppliers. Apple’s short-
term liquidity is stronger than Amazon’s, but Amazon’s A/P turnover is within normal payment
terms. Net 30 is very common in business. Therefore, this ratio is non-concerning.
Amazon could renegotiate with suppliers for more favorable pricing if they can pay quicker than
30 days.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 54
DEBT & LONG-TERM SOLVENCY
Solvency, not to be confused with liquidity, measures a company’s ability to pay long-term
debts. Solvency is a standing and for a company to be considered solvent its assets must be
valued higher than its debts.
LONG-TERM DEBT
= Long-Term Debt ÷ (Long-Term Debt + Shareholders’ Equity)
Amazon
= $7,694,000,000 ÷ ($7,694,000,000 + $19,285,000,000)
= .29
Apple
= $75,427,000,000 ÷ ($75,427,000,000 + $128,249,000,000)
= .37
Alibaba
= $7,779,380,949 ÷ ($7,779,380,949 + $31,465,404,108)
= .20
Assessment:
Not significant to assess.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 55
DEBT/EQUITY RATIO
= Total Liabilities ÷ Shareholders’ Equity
Amazon
= $64,117,000,000 ÷ $19,285,000,000 = 3.32 or 332%
Apple
= $193,437,000,000 ÷ $128,249,000,000 = 1.51 or 151%
Alibaba
= $ 21,800,000,000 ÷ $33,550,000,000 = .65 or 65%
Assessment:
This ratio measures how much debt the company is using to finance its assets in relation to
shareholders’ equity. A ratio great than one or 100% means a company is considered somewhat
high-risk as they aggressively fund their growth with debt. Their highly-leveraged position is
associated with high-risk and potentially resulting in volatile earnings on a short-term basis.
Alibaba’s D/E is conservative and considered low-risk. Amazon and Apple’s high D/E might be
high-risk and unpredictable, but the potential for high returns is considerably high.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 56
DEBT/ASSETS RATIO
= Long-Term Debt ÷ Total Assets
Amazon
= $7,694,000,000 ÷ $83,402,000,000 = .09 or 9%
Apple
= $75,427,000,000 ÷ $321,686,000,000 = .23 or 23%
Alibaba
= $8,267,000,000 ÷ $56,350,000,000 = .14 or 14%
Assessment:
This ratio measures how much a company finances its assets through debt. If the ratio is less than
.5 or 50%, then this suggests a company’s debt is primarily financed through equity. This
calculation can also be adjusted to account for both short and long-term debt over total assets. I’ve
chosen to use long-term debt in this calculation.
Amazon has the lowest long-term debt. However, this ratio does not account for the quality of
assets as it combines tangible and intangible assets together. Therefore, reading beyond the
numbers, this ratio does not consider long-term debt used for acquisitions which allows a company
like Amazon to book portions of acquisition costs under goodwill. Each of these company’s total
assets outweighs their long-term debt obligations.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 57
INTEREST COVERAGE (EARNINGS BASIS)
= Net Income + Interest Expense + Tax. Exp.
Interest Expense
Amazon
= $2,371,000,000 + $484,000,000 + $1,430,000,000
$484,000,000
= 8.84
Apple
= $45,687,000,000 + $0.00 + $15,690,000,000
$0.00
= N/A
Alibaba
= $11,049,000,000 + $301,000,000 +$1,306,000,000
$301,000,000
= 42.05
Assessment:
This ratio calculates the margin of safety a company has which is aimed at meeting their interest
obligations. A ratio of 1.5 is considered the bare minimum that is acceptable to lenders. Low-
interest coverage questions a company’s solvency and increases their default risk.
None of the companies have a concerning interest coverage ratio. However, Alibaba’s is very
respectable and speaks to their high liquidity and solvency.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 58
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COVERAGE
= Cash Flow from Operations ÷ Capital Expenditures
Amazon
= $16,443,000,000 ÷ $9,876,000,000 = 1.66
Apple
= $65,824,000,000 ÷ $12,734,000,000 = 5.17
Alibaba
= $8,788,000,000 ÷ $841,000,000 = 10.45
Assessment:
This ratio calculates a company’s ability to generate cash flows from operations to fund capital
expenditures. These companies have positive ratios, and cash flows from operations which are
higher than their capital expenditures. A lower ratio would indicate a company’s struggle to
produce positive cash flows to cover their growth and investments.
Apple and Alibaba are non-concerning at this time. However, Amazon can be concerning to
potential investors if this was the only ratio they examined. This ratio does not explain Amazon’s
previous investments which are generating growth.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 59
SALES OVERVIEW
2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.)
$0
$50,000,000,000
$100,000,000,000
$150,000,000,000
$200,000,000,000
$250,000,000,000
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Amazon,
$135,987,000,000
Apple,
$215,639,000,000
Alibaba,
$15,900,000,000
2016 Sales/Revenue
Amazon Apple Alibaba
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Amazon $61,093,000,000 $74,452,000,000 $88,988,000,000 $107,006,000,00 $135,987,000,00
Apple $156,508,000,00 $170,910,000,00 $182,795,000,00 $233,715,000,00 $215,639,000,00
Alibaba $3,140,000,000 $5,500,000,000 $8,580,000,000 $12,300,000,000 $15,900,000,000
$0
$50,000,000,000
$100,000,000,000
$150,000,000,000
$200,000,000,000
$250,000,000,000
$300,000,000,000
5-Year Sales/Revenue Trend (2012-2016)
Financial Analysis P a g e | 60
Assessment:
These graphs show a plethora of future opportunities and projected sales growth. Alibaba seems
attractive for an acquisition while Amazon is poised to surpass Apple’s revenue/sales by 2020 or
earliest of 2018 if Amazon acquired Alibaba.
I measured percentage change between 2012-2016, and it generated the following results:
Amazon 122.59%
Apple 37.78%
Alibaba 405.8%
After measuring this percentage change between 2012-2016, I averaged the year-over-year growth
increase then average all of them to generate an annual average year-over-year growth rate.
Amazon experiences an annual sales growth rate of 22.18% compared to Apple’s 9.07% and
Alibaba’s 50.9%.
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Amazon $166,148,916,60 $203,000,746,30 $248,026,311,83 $303,038,547,79 $370,252,497,69
Apple $235,197,457,30 $256,529,866,67 $279,797,125,58 $305,174,724,87 $332,854,072,42
Alibaba $24,001,050,000 $36,229,584,975 $54,688,558,520 $82,552,379,086 $124,612,816,23
$0
$50,000,000,000
$100,000,000,000
$150,000,000,000
$200,000,000,000
$250,000,000,000
$300,000,000,000
$350,000,000,000
$400,000,000,000
$450,000,000,000
5-Year Projected Sales Growth (2017-2021)
Amazon Apple Alibaba
Financial Analysis P a g e | 61
Alibaba’s IPO was in September 2014. Their sales growth is expected after the IPO. However,
Amazon’s trend line shows consistent year-over-year sales growth. Apple’s weak sales growth is
due to limited product launches and increased competition within the media industry. Apple TV
has seen increased threats from companies like Amazon Video, Hulu, and Netflix. Secondly,
Apple’s iWatch has seen major threats from companies like Garmin and Fitbit. Lastly, Apple’s
iTunes has taken some dramatic hits from companies like Spotify. This doesn’t mean that Apple
doesn’t have a pipeline of new products to debut soon.
This sales overview provides more insight and indicates a need for additional calculations that are
focused on geographical locations and individual product/service revenue streams. The following
section will present other data. This information will allow one to make a strategic decision as a
hypothetical investor with $500,000 to invest, or as an Amazon executive; should Amazon make
an acquisition or should Amazon be acquired?
Financial Analysis P a g e | 62
DECISION PROCESS
As I outlined in the introduction, I must select one of three decisions. Therefore, I will use the data
in this analysis coupled with additional factors outside of this analysis to decide. This review has
been very thorough which has uncovered certain correlations and opportunities for all three
companies. Though financial data presents many trends, correlations, and facts; it does not speak
to management’s philosophy or long-term strategies and visions.
Each of these decisions can be made through varying perceptions and positions. Thusly, any
decision made and/or recommended is neither right nor wrong. As I walk through this decision
process, I will be asking myself several questions such as:
- If an individual investor, how much risk would I be comfortable with?
- What long-term goals do I have personally and as a potential executive?
- Should I decide based on past results, present conditions, or future potential?
- Where do I see each of these company’s industries headed?
- What is each company’s future benefit to society and how impactful is it?
- Economically speaking, should I account for true economic profit and future demand?
I will walk through each decision individually as a process and end with my final decision.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 63
WOULD I INVEST A $500K INHERITANCE INTO ONE COMPANY?
This analysis standalone has illustrated some very critical factors in which I’ve learned. Financial
leverage is nothing to dismiss. History has proven that companies with high financial leverage are
not only volatile and susceptible to economic crisis, but they pose almost an unquantifiable risk
that leads to insolvency.
The last financial crisis the United States experienced proved just this. Dozens and dozens of banks
coupled with General Motors and AIG suffered massive losses and in some cases, became
insolvent. This was contributed to abnormally high financial leverage positions.
In the wake of the crisis and economic turmoil, the biggest concerns were disruptions in the credit
markets. These credit markets were and are utilized by publicly traded companies. When a
corporation’s dependency increases on financing their operations, this can produce catastrophic
liquidity issues and disrupt a company’s ability to grow in the wake of an economic crisis.
Amazon has proven to be questionably leveraged in this analysis and is still considered a high-risk
investment given their profitability. Apple is not concerning in this aspect due to their high
liquidity ratios. Alibaba is the most conservative investment at this time.
Without performing a stock analysis, of the three, Alibaba would be the safest investment for
$500,000. However, Amazon’s forward P/E is stronger than Apple’s, but Apple has proven to be
very fiscally responsible.
Each of these companies has or still is experiencing abnormal growth. It would be fiduciarily
irresponsible of me to use the discounted abnormal earnings valuation i.e. the Random Walk
Model, to value any of these companies as companies with high growth rates more often than not,
attract competition which reduces their growth rates over time. Therefore, their abnormal growth
is not sustainable in the long-run. As Amazon’s achieves their economies of scale, as Apple’s
Financial Analysis P a g e | 64
limited product launches and increased competition from Samsung and Microsoft continues, and
as Alibaba’s uncertain future is debated, these companies will plateau, and their abnormal earnings
will return to normal levels.
The question any long-term investor must ask themselves is, are these company’s growth rates and
returns sustainable for the next 5-10 years? I do not have the answer for that. However, I believe
that any of these companies would be safe for a $500,000 investment during a short-term 1-3 year
interim. Per, (MSN Money, n.d.), Amazon, Apple, and Alibaba’s current beta in order are 1.48,
1.17, and Alibaba is shown as N/A.
If I had to choose one company to invest all $500,000 into at this time, I would select Alibaba for
their financial leverage, liquidity, sales growth, and ROE growth. I would combine this with my
economic perception that this is just the beginning for Alibaba and their future is undoubtedly
attractive. Their business model is more appealing to me than Amazon or Apple’s.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 65
IF AN AMAZON EXECUTIVE, WOULD I WANT TO BE ACQUIRED?
To put it simply, NO. Amazon is not on the brink of failure or insolvency. However, their ratios
might indicate a need for more capital. If my assessments are valuable and accurate, I predict that
Amazon will perform a 10 to 1 stock split when their stock price reaches or hovers around the
$1,000 per share price for a length of time. By doing so, Amazon would attract new investors and
raise more capital.
Furthermore, there is not one company that could afford and/or have the scope to acquire or merge
with Amazon other than Wal-Mart. Even if Wal-Mart entertained the idea, I’m not sure it would
be approved by either side’s board of directors or investors. This acquisition or merger would be
the largest in world history. Soo large, it would have the greatest market cap in the world that
would equate close to if not surpass the $1 trillion mark. If this option were on the table, as an
executive, I would want to be acquired or merge.
To be specific, if an Amazon executive, I would not want to be acquired by either Apple or Alibaba.
I do believe there are potential opportunities that both Amazon and Apple could collaborate on
such as merging Amazon Video with Apple TV and the potential to start an internet service that
competes with Century Link and Google Fiber.
Apple is one company that could afford to buy Amazon, but it’s not within their scope. Microsoft
would have a better chance to acquire Amazon and would be fascinating to explore the future
possibilities of what those two companies could accomplish. Alibaba cannot afford Amazon, but
this leads to the last decision I can make.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 66
IF AN AMAZON EXECUTIVE, WOULD I MAKE AN ACQUISITION?
An acquisition for Amazon is very attractive. However, it would make no sense for Amazon to
acquire Apple but buying Alibaba would have both short and long-term benefits. Alibaba is within
the scope of Amazon.
Amazon would see an increase in their ROE, ROA, profit margin, cash & cash equivalents,
operating cash flow and other liquidity ratios. However, Alibaba’s sales do not compare with
Amazon’s, but their projected growth of abnormal earnings is impressive enough to indicate
positive returns for Amazon across the board. The question remaining is if Amazon could afford
Alibaba?
Financial Analysis P a g e | 67
FINAL DECISION
At the end of my introduction, I predicted that Amazon needs to acquire Alibaba. After examining
the data in this analysis and walking through each decision, I select the choice: if an Amazon
executive, I would make an acquisition, specifically Alibaba. This is a long-term decision. If I
were making a short-term decision, this would not be my decision.
Alibaba’s scope aligns with Amazon’s and helps Amazon grow into new business segments which
complement their existing supply chains and sourcing capabilities. Furthermore, Alibaba’s
position within China would allow Amazon to penetrate the Chinese market quicker and more
successfully.
Alibaba is viewed as the Amazon of wholesale and international trade. Amazon and their suppliers
connect (B2C) as Alibaba joins (B2B). Combining these two models would allow Amazon to
diversify their business outside of B2C and into B2B. This combination would present new
opportunities that would require another analysis and possible case study.
From a financial perspective, this acquisition would immediately impact Amazon’s bottom line. It
would add approximately $56 billion in new sales over the next three years if my sales projections
are accurate. Additionally, Alibaba’s profit margin would yield Amazon a minimum of 1/3 of
sales.
Calculating the present value of forecasted abnormal earnings would put this into perspective.
However, this calculation assumes that a company’s forecasted earnings = their current abnormal
earnings. The discounted cash flow model can also be used for a valuation.
Of the ratios I calculated, Alibaba is a conservative acquisition and financially healthy. The ratios
did not indicate any concern for Alibaba’s fiscal health.
Financial Analysis P a g e | 68
WORKS CITED
CNBC. (2017, May 4). Jim Cramer talks with Tim Cook: The full interview . Retrieved from
MSN Money: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/videos/jim-cramer-talks-with-tim-cook-
the-full-interview/vi-BBAIlWR
Investopedia.com. (n.d.). Economic Value Added - EVA. Retrieved May 3, 2017, from
Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/eva.asp
Morningstar. (n.d.). AMZN, AAPL, BABA. Retrieved from MORNINGSTAR:
http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios/r.html?t=AMZN
MSN Money. (n.d.). AMZN, APPL, BABA. Retrieved May 4, 2017, from MSN Money:
www.msn.com/money
Nasdaq.com. (n.d.). AAPL, BABA Company Financials. Retrieved April 18, 2017, from
Nasdaq.com: www.nasdaq.com
Stephens, John. (2014, June 13). A Split Decision on Stock Splits, Such As Apple's (AAPL).
Retrieved from Nasdaq.com: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/a-split-decision-on-stock-
splits-such-as-apples-aapl-cm361551

More Related Content

What's hot

Amazon strategic and financial planning
Amazon strategic and financial planningAmazon strategic and financial planning
Amazon strategic and financial planningSujal Padhiyar
 
Strategy Presentation on Amazon
Strategy Presentation on AmazonStrategy Presentation on Amazon
Strategy Presentation on AmazonGabbi Baker
 
Corporate strategy project of amazon
Corporate strategy project of amazonCorporate strategy project of amazon
Corporate strategy project of amazonArumoyDutta1
 
Case study on amazon.com
Case study on amazon.comCase study on amazon.com
Case study on amazon.comKaushik Panta
 
Ratio Analysis of Coca-Cola
Ratio Analysis of Coca-ColaRatio Analysis of Coca-Cola
Ratio Analysis of Coca-ColaWajid Ali
 
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COM
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COMBusiness Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COM
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COMVipul Dinodia
 
Supply chain management of amazon
Supply chain management  of amazonSupply chain management  of amazon
Supply chain management of amazonRaunaqSingh28
 
Amazon Presentation
Amazon PresentationAmazon Presentation
Amazon PresentationSarathym
 
Amazon's Organizational structure
Amazon's Organizational structureAmazon's Organizational structure
Amazon's Organizational structureRuquiyaFathima
 
Amazon ppt
Amazon pptAmazon ppt
Amazon pptaftabssm
 
Case study on Business Statistics
Case study on Business Statistics Case study on Business Statistics
Case study on Business Statistics Aditya Purohit
 
wal mart case study
wal mart case study wal mart case study
wal mart case study Crystal lee
 
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTD
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTDRatio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTD
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTDIsham Rashik
 

What's hot (20)

Amazon strategic and financial planning
Amazon strategic and financial planningAmazon strategic and financial planning
Amazon strategic and financial planning
 
Presentation on Amazon
Presentation on AmazonPresentation on Amazon
Presentation on Amazon
 
Amazon
Amazon Amazon
Amazon
 
Strategy Presentation on Amazon
Strategy Presentation on AmazonStrategy Presentation on Amazon
Strategy Presentation on Amazon
 
Amazon
AmazonAmazon
Amazon
 
Corporate strategy project of amazon
Corporate strategy project of amazonCorporate strategy project of amazon
Corporate strategy project of amazon
 
Case study on amazon.com
Case study on amazon.comCase study on amazon.com
Case study on amazon.com
 
Marketing strategies of Amazon
Marketing strategies of AmazonMarketing strategies of Amazon
Marketing strategies of Amazon
 
Ratio Analysis of Coca-Cola
Ratio Analysis of Coca-ColaRatio Analysis of Coca-Cola
Ratio Analysis of Coca-Cola
 
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COM
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COMBusiness Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COM
Business Policy Strategic Analysis & Management of AMAZON.COM
 
Amazon assignment
Amazon assignmentAmazon assignment
Amazon assignment
 
Supply chain management of amazon
Supply chain management  of amazonSupply chain management  of amazon
Supply chain management of amazon
 
Amazon Presentation
Amazon PresentationAmazon Presentation
Amazon Presentation
 
Amazon's Organizational structure
Amazon's Organizational structureAmazon's Organizational structure
Amazon's Organizational structure
 
Amazon Case
Amazon CaseAmazon Case
Amazon Case
 
AMAZON-CASE STUDY
AMAZON-CASE STUDYAMAZON-CASE STUDY
AMAZON-CASE STUDY
 
Amazon ppt
Amazon pptAmazon ppt
Amazon ppt
 
Case study on Business Statistics
Case study on Business Statistics Case study on Business Statistics
Case study on Business Statistics
 
wal mart case study
wal mart case study wal mart case study
wal mart case study
 
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTD
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTDRatio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTD
Ratio Analysis - Case Study - ITC LTD
 

Similar to Final Project: Amazon Financial Statement Analysis

Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan Sample
Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan SampleIce Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan Sample
Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan SamplePradeep Subedi
 
about start up for you 9
about start up for you 9about start up for you 9
about start up for you 9aliaalistartup
 
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sector
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate SectorThe Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sector
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sectorscottbrooker
 
about start up for you 3
about start up for you 3about start up for you 3
about start up for you 3aliaalistartup
 
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdf
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdfPrinciples-of-Financial-Accounting.pdf
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdfEdenAlemu3
 
fannie mae 2007 3rd
fannie mae 2007 3rdfannie mae 2007 3rd
fannie mae 2007 3rdfinance6
 
Placement Portfolio
Placement PortfolioPlacement Portfolio
Placement PortfolioJPC Hanson
 
cardinal health 2008 Proxy
cardinal health 2008 Proxycardinal health 2008 Proxy
cardinal health 2008 Proxyfinance2
 
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdf
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdfPrinciples of Managerial Accounting.pdf
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdfEdenAlemu3
 
fannie mae 2007 1st
fannie mae 2007 1stfannie mae 2007 1st
fannie mae 2007 1stfinance6
 
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1Akshay Shah
 
Acc 300 final draft
Acc 300 final draftAcc 300 final draft
Acc 300 final drafttgda222
 

Similar to Final Project: Amazon Financial Statement Analysis (20)

Coinaid earth pilot
Coinaid earth pilotCoinaid earth pilot
Coinaid earth pilot
 
Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan Sample
Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan SampleIce Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan Sample
Ice Cream Dreams - Bussiness Plan Sample
 
about start up for you 9
about start up for you 9about start up for you 9
about start up for you 9
 
Buisness Plan V1
Buisness Plan V1Buisness Plan V1
Buisness Plan V1
 
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sector
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate SectorThe Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sector
The Economics of Sustainability in the Comemrcial Real Estate Sector
 
Business plan startup
Business plan startupBusiness plan startup
Business plan startup
 
Rand rr2504
Rand rr2504Rand rr2504
Rand rr2504
 
about start up for you 3
about start up for you 3about start up for you 3
about start up for you 3
 
sg248293
sg248293sg248293
sg248293
 
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdf
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdfPrinciples-of-Financial-Accounting.pdf
Principles-of-Financial-Accounting.pdf
 
Agile Project Management.pdf
Agile Project Management.pdfAgile Project Management.pdf
Agile Project Management.pdf
 
fannie mae 2007 3rd
fannie mae 2007 3rdfannie mae 2007 3rd
fannie mae 2007 3rd
 
Placement Portfolio
Placement PortfolioPlacement Portfolio
Placement Portfolio
 
cardinal health 2008 Proxy
cardinal health 2008 Proxycardinal health 2008 Proxy
cardinal health 2008 Proxy
 
Rand rr2364
Rand rr2364Rand rr2364
Rand rr2364
 
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdf
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdfPrinciples of Managerial Accounting.pdf
Principles of Managerial Accounting.pdf
 
fannie mae 2007 1st
fannie mae 2007 1stfannie mae 2007 1st
fannie mae 2007 1st
 
Moroccan or Thai market... apple next step with IWatch
Moroccan or Thai market... apple next step with IWatchMoroccan or Thai market... apple next step with IWatch
Moroccan or Thai market... apple next step with IWatch
 
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1
The-New-Business-Kit-2016-2017 v1
 
Acc 300 final draft
Acc 300 final draftAcc 300 final draft
Acc 300 final draft
 

Recently uploaded

Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Winbusinessin
 
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfPDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfHajeJanKamps
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..dlewis191
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfTalent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfCharles Cotter, PhD
 
MC Heights construction company in Jhang
MC Heights construction company in JhangMC Heights construction company in Jhang
MC Heights construction company in Jhangmcgroupjeya
 
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb to
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb toLecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb to
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb toumarfarooquejamali32
 
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinAnton Skornyakov
 
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsIntellect Design Arena Ltd
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsFabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsWristbands Ireland
 
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...Brian Solis
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyHanna Klim
 
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig OnlineTo Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Onlinelng ths
 
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)tazeenaila12
 
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Lviv Startup Club
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023Steve Rader
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
 
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdfPDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
PDT 88 - 4 million seed - Seed - Protecto.pdf
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
 
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfTalent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
 
MC Heights construction company in Jhang
MC Heights construction company in JhangMC Heights construction company in Jhang
MC Heights construction company in Jhang
 
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb to
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb toLecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb to
Lecture_6.pptx English speaking easyb to
 
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
 
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
 
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and FestivalsFabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
Fabric RFID Wristbands in Ireland for Events and Festivals
 
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consu...
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
 
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig OnlineTo Create Your Own Wig Online  To Create Your Own Wig Online
To Create Your Own Wig Online To Create Your Own Wig Online
 
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
 
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
Michael Vidyakin: Introduction to PMO (UA)
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
 

Final Project: Amazon Financial Statement Analysis

  • 1. Running Head: Amazon P a g e | 0 FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS Amazon, Apple & Alibaba FISV 5526: Financial Reporting & Controls Johnson & Wales University By: Joshua Scott Neeper April 18, 2017
  • 2. Financial Analysis P a g e | 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 3 Financial Snapshot.......................................................................................................................... 4 Profitability ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Overall Profitability (ROE)......................................................................................................... 5 Return on Assets (ROA) ............................................................................................................. 8 Return on Net Assets (RONA).................................................................................................. 11 Disaggregating ROA................................................................................................................. 12 ROA....................................................................................................................................... 12 Profit Margin ......................................................................................................................... 13 Asset Turnover ...................................................................................................................... 15 Disaggregating Profit Margin.................................................................................................... 18 Cost of Goods Sold Percentage ............................................................................................. 18 Selling, General & Administrative Expense Percentage....................................................... 20 Other Expense Percentage..................................................................................................... 22 Tax Expense Percentage........................................................................................................ 23 Profit Margin From Above.................................................................................................... 25 Disaggregating Asset Turnover................................................................................................. 26 Accounts Receivable Turnover ............................................................................................. 26 Inventory Turnover................................................................................................................ 28 Fixed Asset Turnover ............................................................................................................ 29 Return on Common Equity (ROCE)......................................................................................... 30 ROCE..................................................................................................................................... 30 Disaggregating (ROCE)............................................................................................................ 32 ROCE..................................................................................................................................... 32 CEL (Common Earnings Leverage)...................................................................................... 33 CSL (Capital Structure Leverage) ......................................................................................... 34 Adjusted Leverage................................................................................................................. 35 Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 38 Short-Term Liquidity ................................................................................................................ 38 Cash Ratio.............................................................................................................................. 39
  • 3. Financial Analysis P a g e | 2 Current Ratio ......................................................................................................................... 40 Quick Ratio............................................................................................................................ 43 Operating Cash Flow Ratio ................................................................................................... 46 Turnover ratios.......................................................................................................................... 48 Accounts Receivable Turnover Ratio.................................................................................... 48 Inventory Turnover Ratio...................................................................................................... 50 Accounts Payable Turnover Ratio......................................................................................... 53 Debt & Long-Term Solvency.................................................................................................... 54 Long-Term Debt.................................................................................................................... 54 Debt/Equity Ratio.................................................................................................................. 55 Debt/Assets Ratio .................................................................................................................. 56 Interest Coverage (Earnings Basis) ....................................................................................... 57 Capital Expenditures Coverage ............................................................................................. 58 Sales Overview ............................................................................................................................. 59 Decision Process ........................................................................................................................... 62 Would I Invest a $500k Inheritance Into One Company?......................................................... 63 If An Amazon Executive, Would I Want To Be Acquired? ..................................................... 65 If An Amazon Executive, Would I Make an Acquisition? ....................................................... 66 Final Decision............................................................................................................................... 67 Works Cited .................................................................................................................................. 68
  • 4. Financial Analysis P a g e | 3 INTRODUCTION This financial statement analysis is divided into two sections, profitability, and risk. Each calculation and section will encompass graphs and assessments. This data will illustrate my perception and rationale beyond the numbers. I have chosen Amazon as the leading company to examine in this analysis. Amazon is a very diversified company regarding revenue streams, and their economies of scale have allowed them to compete across various industries. Selecting comparable companies was relatively difficult as no company in the world directly competes with Amazon as a whole. Therefore, I’ve selected two companies, Apple and Alibaba, to compare their financials to Amazon’s. These three companies have experienced abnormal revenue and earnings growth since their inception, and all of them directly compete with one another to some degree. Whether its Amazon Video encroaching on Apple TV’s market share or Alibaba’s ability to disrupt Amazon’s supplier partners with their B2B model; they’re all intertwined, and these meticulous correlations present different opportunities and weaknesses. I believe that comparing these companies and analyzing their financials will uncover various economic management philosophies and long-term fiscal strategies as an executive or a personal investor. Therefore, after assessing all data points, metrics, and calculations, I will make one of the following decisions per assignment instructions: 1. If I inherited $500,000, would I invest all funds into Amazon? 2. If an executive at Amazon, would I make an acquisition? 3. If an executive at Amazon, would I want to be acquired? I predict that after this analysis if I were an executive at Amazon – I would acquire Alibaba. Disclosure: Apple and Alibaba’s annual financial data was derived from (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.). Amazon’s financial information derived from their published 10k.
  • 5. Financial Analysis P a g e | 4 Amazon Apple Alibaba Profitability Overall Profitability (ROE) 12.29% 35.62% 32.93% Return on Assets (ROA) 3.60% 14.93% 25.07% Disaggregating ROA ROA 3.60% 14.93% 25.07% Profit Margin 1.96% 21% 72.17% Asset Turnover 0.018 0.710 0.350 Disaggregating Profit Margin COGS % 64.91% 60.92% 33.97% SG&A Expense % 32.01% 6.62% 21.59% Other Expense % 0.12% 0% 3.08% Tax Expense % 1.05% 7.31% 8.89% Profit Margin From Above 2.10% 21.29% 77.43% Disaggregating Asset Turnover Accounts Receivable Turnover 1.19 0.98 1.04 Inventory Turnover 8.13 58.35 N/A Days Inventory Held 44.9 days 6.25 days N/A Fixed Asset Turnover 5.34 8.72 8.21 Return on Common Equity ROCE 14.52% 27.09% 38.76% Disaggregating (ROCE) ROCE 13.58% 27.09% 38.64% CEL (Common Earnings Leverage) 0.83 0.73 0.98 CSL (Capital Structure Leverage) 4.53 2.47 1.58 Adjusted Leverage 3.77 1.81 1.54 Cash Ratio 0.44 0.26 2.08 Current Ratio 1.04 1.35 2.58 Quick Ratio 0.78 1.22 2.46 Operating Cash Cash Flow Ratio 37.53% 83.32% 109.22% Efficiency Ratios Accounts Receivable Turnover Ratio 19.44 7.2 8.99 Days Oustanding 18.78 days 50.69 days 40.60 days Inventory Turnover Ratio 8.13 58.35 N/A Days Held 44.9 days 6.25 days N/A Accounts Payable Turnover Ratio 30.35 days 11.59 days N/A Debt & Long-Term Solvency Long-Term Debt 0.29 0.37 0.2 Debt/Equity Ratio 3.32 or 332% 1.51 or 151% .65 or 56% Debt/Assets Ratio .09 or 9% .23 or 23% .14 or 14% Interest Coverage (Earnings Basis) 8.84 N/A 42.05 Capital Expenditures Coverage 1.66 5.17 10.45 2016 Formula Snapshot Short-Term Liquidity / Financial Health Risk FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT
  • 6. Financial Analysis P a g e | 5 PROFITABILITY To measure a firm’s overall performance, one must use a methodical analysis by starting with (ROE), return on equity. Profitability is broken into calculations which encompass various financial metrics. The most attractive profitability calculations used in a financial analysis include a profit margin, return on assets (ROA), and return on equity (ROE). However, all three profitability ratios can require disaggregation, depending on the analyst. For specific purposes, this section will include some disaggregation. OVERALL PROFITABILITY (ROE) ROE calculates the profit a company generates from shareholder’s invested funds. ROE is expressed as a percentage and beneficial to track year-over-year. A sound investor and analyst want to see a positive ROE. A ROE of 3% or less before disaggregating would indicate severe financial turmoil and a loss of investor confidence and stock valuation. ROE = Net Income ÷ Shareholders’ Equity Amazon = $2,371,000,000 ÷ $19,285,000,000 = 0.1229 = 12.29% Apple = $45,687,000,000 ÷ $128,249,000,000 = 0.3562 = 35.62% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 ÷ $33,550,000,000 = .3293 = 32.93%
  • 7. Financial Analysis P a g e | 6 Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 12.29% Apple, 35.62% Alibaba, 32.93% 2016 Overall Profitability (ROE) Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon -0.49% 3.06% -2.35% 4.94% 12.29% Apple 42.84% 30.64% 33.61% 46.25% 35.62% Alibaba 13.43% 53.42% 157.44% 27.63% 32.93% -20.00% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 140.00% 160.00% 180.00% 5-Year ROE (2012-2016) Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 8. Financial Analysis P a g e | 7 Assessment: Graph one illustrates the company’s’ utilization of invested funds from shareholders to generate returns for the year 2016 while the second graph shows this over a 5-year interim. For comparison purposes, the average ROE in the United States has been approximately 10% throughout the 1990’s and early 2000’s. Each of these companies has delivered above average returns for 2016, compared to historical data. Apple and Alibaba’s supernormal economic profits can be explained by competitive strategies, lean operating business models, and economic demand. Amazon’s supernormal sales growth (when compared to Apple and Alibaba) can be defined through economies of scale, revenue diversification, profit reinvesting, and asset growth. However, Amazon’s cost of capital could be impacting their ROE. Other consideration, Apple performed a 7-1 stock split back in June of 2014 (Stephens, John, 2014). This stock split made Apple’s share price very affordable while Amazon has never performed a stock split. Additionally, Alibaba went public in 2014 and was one of the most anticipated and largest IPOs to date. The 5-year graph illustrates the 2014 uptick in ROE for Apple and Alibaba. I believe that Amazon’s ROE will reach if not surpass Apple and Alibaba’s ROE in next 2-3 years. Pre-2012 ROE data shows that Amazon’s ROE ranged from mid-20’s to low 60’s. During this interim, Amazon made massive investments across various departments that were showing positive indicators and which explain their steady ROA growth in the following section. The 5-year percentage trend from 2012-2016 generated the following results: Amazon 103.99%, Apple -16.85%, and Alibaba 145.20%. Over the past 5-years, Amazon and Alibaba have increased their ROE while Apple’s ROE has declined. Shareholders’ equity, which measures a firm’s net worth, will be explained later about this.
  • 9. Financial Analysis P a g e | 8 RETURN ON ASSETS (ROA) ROA often referred as ROI (return on investment), measures how efficient a company’s management is at using their assets to produce earnings. In other words, are a company’s assets generating positive earnings, i.e. profit? ROA like ROE is expressed as a percentage and is highly suggested to disaggregate this calculation and monitor it year-over-year. Efficacious and yet few managers can deliver high ROAs or ROIs with little investment. = Net income + (1-T) * Interest expense + MI in earning Average total assets Amazon = $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $484,000,000 + 0 ($64,747,000,000 + $83,402,000,000) ÷ 2 = $2,075,760,000 $74,074,500,000 = 3.60% Apple = $45,687,000,000 + (1 - 39%) * 0 + 0 ($290,345,000,000 + $321,686,000,000) ÷ 2 = 14.93% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000 ($52,945,500,000 + $37,108,200,000) ÷ 2 = $11,286,610,000 $45,026,850,000 = 25.07%
  • 10. Financial Analysis P a g e | 9 Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 3.60% Apple, 14.93% Alibaba, 25.07% 2016 ROA Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon -0.13% 0.75% -0.51% 0.99% 3.60% Apple 28.54% 19.34% 18.01% 20.45% 14.93% Alibaba 8.96% 15.14% 26.32% 13.16% 25.07% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 5-Year ROA (2012-2016)
  • 11. Financial Analysis P a g e | 10 Assessment: Over the past 5-years, I can see that Apple’s ROA has dramatically declined while Alibaba has surpassed Apple. Amazon’s ROA has been relatively steady over the past 5-years. However, Amazon’s ROA dipped below zero in 2012 and 2014. Amazon has made ongoing investments in the years that produced a negative ROA resulting in positive ROA the following year. Furthermore, Amazon is on track to generate a positive ROA 3-years running, 2015 thru 2017. Concluding, Amazon has increased its ROA approximately 3% over the past years while Apple’s ROA has suffered -13.64% but Alibaba has been impressive by producing a 5-year aggregate increase of 16.20%.
  • 12. Financial Analysis P a g e | 11 RETURN ON NET ASSETS (RONA) RONA is calculation used to discern whether a company is positioning their assets in a viable yet economical way compared to its competitors and the industry. A higher RONA indicates a healthier profit performance. However, this calculation and not one single calculation can illustrate the whole story of a company’s fiscal health. Like ROA and ROE, RONA is expressed as a percentage. = Net Income ÷ (Fixed Assets + Net Working Capital) Amazon = $2,371,000,000 ÷ ($29,114,000,000 + $1,965,000,000) = .0763, 7.63% Apple = $45,687,000,000 ÷ ($27,010,000,000 + $27,863,000,000) = .8326, 83.26% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 ÷ ($2,107,000,000 + $12,683,000,000) = .7471, 74.71% Assessment: Apple and Alibaba have respectably high RONAs while Amazon’s is very alarming. However, Amazon has the lowest net income and lowest working capital. Their fixed assets are surprisingly higher than Apple’s. This information indicates that Amazon has made investments into PP&E which are producing low ROIs and a small operating profit margin. Amazon’s fulfillment centers have a strong bearing on this calculation.
  • 13. Financial Analysis P a g e | 12 DISAGGREGATING ROA ROA ROA = Profit Margin * Asset Turnover Amazon = 1.96% * 1.84 = 3.60% Apple = 21.19% * .70 = 14.93% Alibaba = 72.17% * .35 = 25.07% Visualization: 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 3.60% Apple, 14.93% Alibaba, 25.07% 2016 ROA Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 14. Financial Analysis P a g e | 13 PROFIT MARGIN = Net Income + (1-T) * Interest Expense + MI in Earnings Sales Amazon = $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $484,000,000 + 0 $135,987,000,000 = $2,666,240,000 $135,987,000,000 = 1.96% Apple = $45,687,000,000 + (1 - 39%) * 0 + 0 $215,639,000,000 = 21% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 39%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000 $15,638,000,000 = 72.17%
  • 15. Financial Analysis P a g e | 14 Visualization: Assessment: This graph illustrates the 2016 profit margins for each company. Amazon and Apple maintain inventory to operate their businesses while Alibaba does not carry product inventory. Each of the companies operates at their profit margin, but varying margins are contributed to inventory levels, sales, net income, minority interest earnings, taxes and interest expense. To compare these companies equally, I used a marginal tax rate of 39% which accounts for the 35% federal rate and 4% for the state rate. Amazon’s low-profit margin suggests that they have funds invested in assets, and their operating expenses are higher than Apple and Alibaba’s. Apple’s above average profit margin contributes to the fact they are maintaining margins, by eliminating any minority interest earnings and interest expenses. Apple should not have any interest payments given they're $20 billion plus cash and cash equivalent levels. Alibaba’s profit margin is impressive but contributed to their low overhead and operating costs. 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 1.96% Apple, 21% Alibaba, 72.17% 2016 Profit Margin Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 16. Financial Analysis P a g e | 15 ASSET TURNOVER = Sales ÷ Average Total Assets Amazon = $135,987,000,000 ($64,747,000,000 + $83,402,000,000) ÷ 2 = 1.836 Apple = $215,639,000,000 ($290,345,000,000 + $321,686,000,000) ÷ 2 = .71 Alibaba = $15,638,000,000 ($52,945,500,000 + $37,108,200,000) ÷ 2 = .35
  • 17. Financial Analysis P a g e | 16 Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon 2.11 2.05 1.88 1.78 1.83 Apple 1.07 0.89 0.83 0.89 0.71 Alibaba 0.42 0.62 0.6 0.42 0.35 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 5-Year Asset Turnover 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon $32,555,000,000 $40,159,000,000 $54,505,000,000 $64,747,000,000 $83,402,000,000 Apple $176,064,000,00 $207,000,000,00 $231,839,000,00 $290,479,000,00 $321,686,000,00 Alibaba $6,849,871,592 $9,254,944,066 $16,185,052,451 $37,061,853,426 $52,879,383,642 $0 $50,000,000,000 $100,000,000,000 $150,000,000,000 $200,000,000,000 $250,000,000,000 $300,000,000,000 $350,000,000,000 5-Year Total Assets - Alibaba adjusted for exchange rate
  • 18. Financial Analysis P a g e | 17 Assessment: Graph one illustrates that Amazon has the highest asset turnover year-over-year compared to Apple and Alibaba. These results are indicative of Amazon’s business operations and need for high turnover. The trends lines show that Amazon has a good asset turnover that is poised to increase in the years to come, unlike Apple and Alibaba. Graph two illustrates total asset growth over a 5-year interim. Total assets are referenced because it’s important to understand that Apple has increased its total assets significantly. This is partially contributed to Apple’s surplus in cash which has dramatically increased approximately $10 billion over the past 5-years.
  • 19. Financial Analysis P a g e | 18 DISAGGREGATING PROFIT MARGIN COST OF GOODS SOLD PERCENTAGE = COGS ÷ Sales Amazon = $88,265,000,000 $135,987,000,000 = 64.91% Apple = $130,723,700,000 $214,568,400,000 = 60.92% Alibaba = $4,990,900,000 $14,693,500,000 = 33.97%
  • 20. Financial Analysis P a g e | 19 Visualization: Assessment: This graph illustrates each company’s COGS, direct costs attributed to a company’s production of goods/services sold by the corporation. Amazon and Apple’s COGS are notably high. This explains Amazon’s low-profit margin. Amazon’s cost to produce its goods and services requires more capital to operate as a company. Alibaba’s respective COGS is contributed to low capital requirements for their operating expenses. Additional factors that affect each of the company’s COGS include SG&A and R&D expenses. Apple has the highest R&D spending but is not included in their SG&A expense. The next section will not factor in Apple’s R&D cost. 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 64.91% Apple, 60.92% Alibaba, 33.97% 2016 COGS Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 21. Financial Analysis P a g e | 20 SELLING, GENERAL & ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE PERCENTAGE = SG&A ÷ Sales Amazon = $43,536,000,000 $135,987,000,000 = 32.01% Apple = $14,194,000,000 $215,568,400,000 = 6.62% Alibaba = $3,172,000,000 $14,693,500,000 = 21.59%
  • 22. Financial Analysis P a g e | 21 Visualization: Assessment: This graph illustrates the SG&A expense for 2016. Amazon, which has the highest, contributes to their growth rate over the past 5-years. Their SG&A expense has more than doubled in the past 5- years including Alibaba’s. Apple’s SG&A expense has increased less than $4 billion during this interim while their R&D spending has grown approximately $5 billion. The abnormal uptick in Amazon and Alibaba’s SG&A expense over the past 5-years is contributed to revenue growth which requires additional employees and increased overhead. This graph can be interpreted as a warning for each of the companies. Amazon’s elevated SG&A expenses make them more susceptible to potential layoffs if their sales and ROA decline. Apple’s abnormally low SG&A expense indicates a level of stagnation with revenue growth and new product launches. Their small SG&A expense also explains their cash reserves as it’s not spent on employees or new assets but rather R&D. Furthermore, Apple’s outsourcing and application developer platform save them money. Also, this line item is where Amazon accounts for legal and litigation costs. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 32.01% Apple, 6.62% Alibaba, 21.59% 2016 SG&A Expenses Percentage Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 23. Financial Analysis P a g e | 22 OTHER EXPENSE PERCENTAGE = Other Expenses ÷ Sales Amazon = $167,000,000 $135,987,000,000 = .12% Apple = $0.00 $215,639,000,000 = 0% Alibaba = $453,000,000 $14,693,500,000 = 3.08% Assessment: Other expenses for each of the companies does not show abnormality. However, Amazon’s other expense category encompasses marketing related, contract based, customer intangible asset amortization expenses, and expenses related to legal settlements which are arguably a tax deduction. If the other expenses were valued over $500 million, more insight and analysis would be required.
  • 24. Financial Analysis P a g e | 23 TAX EXPENSE PERCENTAGE = Taxes ÷ Sales Amazon = $1,425,000,0000 $135,987,000,000 = 1.05% Apple = $15,685,000,000 $215,639,000,000 = 7.31% Alibaba = $1,306,000,000 $14,693,500,000 = 8.89
  • 25. Financial Analysis P a g e | 24 Assessment: The tax expense percentage for each of these companies is not excessive which tells me they are minimizing their tax exposure and operating efficiently. However, Apple’s controversial tax status in Ireland benefits them more so than if their tax status was dependent solely on U.S tax code. If their tax expenses exceeded 20%, it would require further attention. Potential problems could arise for some of these companies if President Trump’s tax bill gets passed which would eliminate many tax deductions and ambiguities. Details of those are limited right now. The crux of Trump’s tax bill is to decrease the corporate tax rate which is good, but it still taxes a company’s money that is transferred from overseas back to the U.S. In a recent interview between Apple’s CEO Tim Cook and CNBC’s Mad Money host, Jim Cramer; Tim Cook talked about this very aspect. His thoughts and insight were valuable to me. Per Tim Cook, the issue today is that we are a global economy and when a global company produces sales in another country and pays those country’s taxes, why should a U.S corporation pay additional taxes to bring that money back into the U.S (CNBC, 2017)? Tim Cook also discussed how this had impacted their internal reporting and controls. When they invest in R&D or new ventures, they have to borrow against their cash reserves.
  • 26. Financial Analysis P a g e | 25 PROFIT MARGIN FROM ABOVE = NI + (1 – T) * Interest Expense + MI Earnings Sales Amazon = $2,371,000,000 + (1 – 1.05%) * $484,000,000 + 0 $135,987,000,000 = 2.10% Apple = $45,687,000,000 + (1 – 7.31%) * 0 + 0 $215,639,000,000 = 21.29% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 + (1 – 8.89%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000 $14,693,500,000 = 77.43% Assessment: This profit margin calculation shows the relationship between net income (mainly) and sales. Amazon has the lowest profit margin which can indicate a higher risk regarding investment. However, this calculation doesn’t account for economies of scale which Amazon has increased year-over-year on a global scale. Alibaba is difficult to read as they are a relatively new company with a high-profit margin. However, they show tremendous upside as their growth continues, but their success could make them susceptible to potential acquisition.
  • 27. Financial Analysis P a g e | 26 DISAGGREGATING ASSET TURNOVER ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE TURNOVER = Credit Sales ÷ Average Accounts Receivable Amazon = $8,339,000,000 ($5,654,000,000 + $8,339,000,000) ÷ 2 = 1.19 Apple = $29,299,000,000 ($30,343,000,000 + $29,299,000,000) ÷ 2 = .98 Alibaba = $1,704,400,000 ($1,562,700,000 + $1,704,400,000) ÷ 2 = 1.04
  • 28. Financial Analysis P a g e | 27 Assessment: This calculation is very critical to understand some of the risks each of the companies are taking regarding extending credit. Amazon and Alibaba have a ratio greater than one which indicates they are collecting their receivable balances which minimize their losses efficiently. Apple’s A/R turnover raises some concerns. Their A/R turnover is less than one which indicates a struggle to collect 100% of their receivable balances during a period. If this number continues to decline, Apple could experience losses. Apple is a consumer products company at heart, and consumer goods are typically purchased through credit directly by the business (Apple) or through a third- party financing provider. In relation to the economy, Apple’s 2016 credit sales of $29.3 billion could quickly decline if credit markets tighten up or if the economy experiences another crisis on Wall Street or in international markets. The more diversified each of these company’s sales become (international sales growth), the more protected they will be against economic volatility instigated in one country.
  • 29. Financial Analysis P a g e | 28 INVENTORY TURNOVER = COGS ÷ Average Inventory Amazon = $88,265,000,000 ($11,461,000,000 + $10,243,000,000) ÷ 2 = 8.13, Inventory turns 8.13 times per year and held approximately 44.9 days. Apple = $130,723,700,000 ($2,132,000,000 + $2,349,000,000) ÷ 2 = 58.35, Inventory turns 58.35 times per year and held approximately 6.25 days. Alibaba = $4,990,900,000 ($0.00 + $0.00) ÷ 2 = N/A, Alibaba does not hold any inventory. Assessment: Amazon’s inventory turnover could impact their cash outlay for new capital investments and short- term liquidity if their turnover rates decline. A lower turnover rate increases carrying costs, consequently reducing operating profit margins and ROA. When cash is tied-up, this limits a company’s ability to invest in new projects and potentially make acquisitions. Apple’s high turnover rate represents their ability to efficiently launch new products and speaks to their streamlined supply chain. This should be no surprise as Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook comes from a supply chain background. Alibaba’s zero inventory makes them once again, attractive for an acquisition.
  • 30. Financial Analysis P a g e | 29 FIXED ASSET TURNOVER = Sales ÷ Average Fixed Assets (Net) Amazon = $135,987,000,000 ($29,114,000,000 + $21,838,000,000) ÷ 2 = 5.34 Apple = $215,639,000,000 ($27,010,000,000 + $22,471,000,000) ÷ 2 = 8.72 Alibaba = $14,693,500,000 ($2,107,000,000 + $1,474,000,000) ÷ 2 = 8.21 Assessment: Alibaba and Apple are experiencing high RORs on their investments in PP&E. Their efficiency indicates a level of investment attractiveness. Their ability to invest a dollar and generate high RORs is very appealing which reduces risks compared to Amazon. Amazon’s turnover is still encouraging in this arena, but their PP&E make-up is different than the others. When a company can generate high RORs, this indicates a potential increase in ROE.
  • 31. Financial Analysis P a g e | 30 RETURN ON COMMON EQUITY (ROE) ROCE = Net Income – Preferred Dividends Average Common Equity Amazon = $2,371,000,000 - $0.00 ($19,285,000,000 + $13,384,000,000) ÷ 2 = 14.52% Apple = $45,687,000,000 - $12,150,000,000 ($128,249,000,000 + $119,355,000,000) ÷ 2 = 27.09% Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 - $0.00 ($33,550,000,000 + $23,459,000,000) ÷ 2 = 38.76%
  • 32. Financial Analysis P a g e | 31 Visualization: Assessment: This graph illustrates the 2016 ROCE (Return on Common Equity) for each company. Each company has an above average ROCE and ROE. Alibaba, which has the highest, is the most impressive and indicates serious growth but begs the question, is Alibaba’s growth sustainable when compared to the P/E of Amazon and Apple? Each of these companies has been able to meet expectations and increase their ROCE. However, their strategies are different from one another, and their ROCE growth is dictated by management’s effectiveness to deliver results. None of these companies are at risk based on this graph. However, stagnant economic/GDP growth in the U.S. could impact Apple and Amazon’s ROE as the majority of their sales are from the U.S. Stocks and indexes are hitting all-time highs which have left some investors on edge about a potential correction. However, a possible correction would not suffice or justify a decrease in these company’s’ ROCE as long as management delivers results and beats expectations. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 14.52% Apple, 27.09% Alibaba, 38.76% 2016 Return on Common Equity Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 33. Financial Analysis P a g e | 32 DISAGGREGATING (ROCE) Terms: ROA - the return from operations independent of financing CEL - the proportion of operating income (net income before financing costs and related tax effects) allocable to the common shareholders CSL - a measure of the degree to which a firm uses common shareholders' funds to finance assets. Adjusted leverage - CSL * CEL; indicates the combined multiplier effect of leverage (using debt and preferred stock financing) to increase or decrease the return to common shareholders. ROCE = ROA * (CEL) * (CSL) Amazon = 3.60% * .83 * 4.53 = 13.58% Apple = 14.93% * .73 * 2.47 = 27.09% Alibaba = 25.07% * .98 * 1.58 = 38.64% Assessment: Refer to overall leverage assessment.
  • 34. Financial Analysis P a g e | 33 CEL (COMMON EARNINGS LEVERAGE) = Net Income – Preferred Dividends Net income + (1- T) * Interest Expense + MI in Earnings Amazon = $2,371,000,000 - $0 $2,371,000,000 + (1-1.05) * $484,000,000 + $0 = .83 Apple = $45,687,000,000 - $12,150,000,000 $45,687,000,000 +(1-7.31%) * $0 + $0 = .73 Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 - $0 $11,049,000,000 + (1-8.89%) * $301,000,000 + $54,000,000 = .98 Assessment: Refer to overall leverage assessment.
  • 35. Financial Analysis P a g e | 34 CSL (CAPITAL STRUCTURE LEVERAGE) = Average Total Assets Average Common Equity Amazon = $74,074,500,000 ÷ $16,334,500,000 = 4.53 Apple = $306,015,500,000 ÷ $123,802,000,000 = 2.47 Alibaba = $45,026,850,000 ÷ $28,504,500,000 = 1.58 Assessment: Refer to overall leverage assessment.
  • 36. Financial Analysis P a g e | 35 ADJUSTED LEVERAGE = CSL * CEL Amazon = 4.53 *.83 = 3.77 Apple = 2.47 *.73 = 1.81 Alibaba = 1.58 * .98 = 1.54 Assessment: Refer to overall leverage assessment.
  • 37. Financial Analysis P a g e | 36 Overall Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 3.77 Apple, 1.81 Alibaba, 1.54 2016 Adjusted Leverage Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon 3.97 4.12 5.07 4.89 3.77 Apple 1.49 1.68 2.08 2.43 1.81 Alibaba 1.5 2.65 3.8 1.76 1.54 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 5-Year Financial Leverage Average (2012-2016)
  • 38. Financial Analysis P a g e | 37 Overall Financial Leverage Assessment: Amazon’s adjusted leverage indicates that they’re more dependent on borrowing more so than Apple and Alibaba. Furthermore, Amazon’s high capital structure leverage (CSL) suggests they use common shareholders’ funds to finance assets at a rate much higher than Apple and Alibaba. The high nature of Amazon’s leverage is indicative of their capital-intensive industry and debt dependency. Capital intensive industries typically have higher leverage than other industries such as the services sector. Therefore, Amazon’s short-term Debt/Equity ratio could be high and pose concerns about their liquidity but their long-term D/E ratio not so much. Companies who have more debt than equity tend to be highly leveraged. Apple and Alibaba are less dependent on borrowing for their operations, unlike Amazon. Therefore, I find no significant comparison or concern at this time other than Amazon’s immediate liquidity.
  • 39. Financial Analysis P a g e | 38 RISK Risk reflects the ability of a company to generate cash flows to satisfy its obligations. Failure to do this generally results in bankruptcy at worst or indicates immediate attention to a company’s solvency and ability to operate efficiently. Highly leverage companies are most susceptible to this. The ratios in this section are divided between short-term risk (liquidity) and long-term risk (solvency). Liquidity risk relates to cash flows from operations, while solvency risk is influenced by investing and financing decisions. SHORT-TERM LIQUIDITY In general, liquidity ratios are metrics that measures a company’s ability to meet its debt obligations. Does the company have a healthy margin of safety? A higher ratio indicates a company’s ability to cover debts.
  • 40. Financial Analysis P a g e | 39 CASH RATIO This ratio is commonly used by short-term lenders as it measures a company’s liquidity and how easily it can service its debt and cover its short-term liabilities. This is a constant ratio which doesn’t account for accounts receivable. Specifically, can a company meet all its current liabilities without selling or liquidating other assets in the process? A ratio greater than one suggests that a company has enough cash and cash equivalents to pay off all short-term debts and still have cash remaining. If the ratio is less than one, a company does not have a sufficient level of cash and cash equivalents to pay off its short-term debt. Do a company’s current liabilities exceed its cash and cash equivalents? = (Cash + Cash Equivalents) ÷ Current Liabilities Amazon = $19,334,000,0000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = .44 Apple = $20,484,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = .26 Alibaba = $16,724,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 2.08 Assessment: Alibaba has highest cash ratio which measures a company’s short-term liquidity and determines how easily a company can service debt and cover short-term liabilities. Though this ratio is a decent indicator of a company’s current liquidity, it doesn’t represent the entire picture. Furthermore, marketable securities and A/R is not accounted for in this calculation.
  • 41. Financial Analysis P a g e | 40 CURRENT RATIO Unlike the cash ratio, the current ratio measures a company’s ability to pay both short and long- term debts. If the ratio is below one, this would indicate a company’s inability to pay off its liabilities after depleting cash and cash equivalents and liquidating its assets. However, a ratio that is abnormally high would indicate that a company is not managing their working capital successfully. = Current Assets ÷ Current Liabilities Amazon = $45,781,000,000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = 1.04 Apple = $106,869,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = 1.35 Alibaba = $20,729,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 2.58
  • 42. Financial Analysis P a g e | 41 Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 1.04 Apple, 1.35 Alibaba, 2.58 2016 Current Ratio Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon 1.12 1.07 1.12 1.08 1.04 Apple 1.5 1.68 1.08 1.11 1.35 Alibaba 2.37 1.8 1.81 3.58 2.58 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5-Year Current Ratio (2012-2016)
  • 43. Financial Analysis P a g e | 42 Assessment: Each company has a current ratio greater than one which shows that each of them can pay back their liabilities. A ratio less than one would specify severe liquidity problems or cash flow discrepancies that could lead a company into bankruptcy. Furthermore, Amazon and Apple’s assets allow for this ratio to be greater than one. Looking deeper, Amazon’s current ratio should make any manager and investor nervous. Their 2016 current ratio of 1.04 barely passes the threshold. If this subpar current ratio for Amazon continues, it could pose a significant risk in terms of meeting their current obligations. This directly reflects the risk in which management is currently taking. Their capital is highly leveraged right now, and any volatility in their operations could have a negative ripple effect. Apple and Alibaba’s 2016 current ratio poses no concern at this time. However, if Apple’s lack of new product advancements and launches continues, further insight and analysis would have to be performed as this could impact their ROCE.
  • 44. Financial Analysis P a g e | 43 QUICK RATIO The quick ratio known as the acid test ratio measures a company’s ability to pay current liabilities with quick assets (current property that can convert into cash within 90 days). A ratio of greater than one indicates that a company has $1.00 plus and change to cover its current liabilities. A ratio less than one would indicate a company’s inability to cover 100% of its current liabilities with quick assets. = (Cash + Marketable Securities + Receivables) ÷ Current Liabilities Amazon = $19,334,000,000 + $6,647,000,000 + $8,339,000,000 $43,816,000,000 = .78 Apple = $20,484,000,000 + $46,671,000,000 + $29,299,000,000 $79,006,000,000 = 1.22 Alibaba = $16,724,000,000 + $1,373,000,000 + $1,703,500,000 $8,046,000,000 = 2.46
  • 45. Financial Analysis P a g e | 44 Visualization: 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 0.78 Apple, 1.22 Alibaba, 2.46 2016 Quick Ratio Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon 0.78 0.75 0.82 0.77 0.78 Apple 1.24 1.4 0.82 0.89 1.22 Alibaba 2.01 1.59 1.63 3.46 2.46 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 5-Year Quick Ratio (2012-2016)
  • 46. Financial Analysis P a g e | 45 Assessment: These quick ratios and graphs illustrate each company’s ability to pay its current liabilities with quick assets (current assets that can convert into cash within 90 days or less). Apple and Alibaba have quick ratios greater than one. A quick ratio greater than one means a company can sufficiently meet their short-term liabilities with very liquid assets. This translates into greater financial security in the short term. Amazon’s low quick ratio would only be concerning if its 5-year trend was decreasing. If so, that would indicate Amazon’s difficulty in maintaining or increasing sales, paying bills too quickly, and/or collecting receivables slowly. None of those scenarios are true for Amazon. Apple and Alibaba’s high quick ratios suggest they’re experiencing one or all of the following situations: 1) top-line sales growth, 2) converting receivables in cash quickly, and/or 3) able to cover financial obligations with ease. High quick ratios are typically associated with companies with high inventory turnover rates or no inventory at all. Apple and Alibaba do not concern me in this ratio, but Amazon’s low rate can be concerning to a conservative investor. However, this rate could suggest some potential issues within Amazon’s available capital. I do not believe their solvency is in question due to their economies of scale and year-over-year revenue growth.
  • 47. Financial Analysis P a g e | 46 OPERATING CASH FLOW RATIO This ratio measures how well a company’s operations generate cash flows to cover its current liabilities. However, this ratio can be manipulated by a corporation’s decision to include depreciation expenses and lengthening their accounts payable periods. A ratio greater than one is typically desired from investors. However, a ratio less than one could indicate a need for more capital but is not necessarily bad if a company has made investments in income-producing assets that are not yet producing. = Cash Flow from Operations ÷ Current Liabilities Amazon = $16,443,000,000 ÷ $43,816,000,000 = .38 Apple = $65,824,000,000 ÷ $79,006,000,000 = .83 Alibaba = $8,788,000,000 ÷ $8,046,000,000 = 1.09
  • 48. Financial Analysis P a g e | 47 Visualization: Assessment: Amazon and Apple have ratios less than one which indicates a need for more capital or suggests they’ve made investments in income-producing assets or R&D in Apple’s case. Alibaba’s operating cash flow ratio means their impressive ability to generate cash flows is valued higher than their current liabilities. I believe that investors are investing in their long-term abilities rather than their current situations which have kept their stock valuation respectively high. Alibaba’s operating cash flows are not only attractive for a potential acquisition, but it also suggests that Alibaba’s fiscal policy has positioned themselves to make potential acquisitions. All financial indicators and calculations suggest Alibaba’s recent growth is just the beginning. Overall, Amazon and Apple seem to be moderately leveraged and waiting on their investments to start producing new cash flows in the near future. If they don’t, or they miss their expectations, they will endure a stock value decrease. 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 0.38 Apple, 0.83 Alibaba, 1.09 2016 Operating Cash Flow Ratio Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 49. Financial Analysis P a g e | 48 TURNOVER RATIOS ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE TURNOVER RATIO = Sales ÷ Average Accounts Receivable Amazon = $135,987,000,000 ($8,339,000,000 + $5,654,000,000) ÷ 2 = 19.44 = (365 ÷ 19.44) = 18.78 days Apple = $215,639,000,000 ($29,299,000,000 + $30,343,000,000) ÷ 2 = 7.20 = (365 ÷ 7.20) = 50.69 days Alibaba = $15,638,000,000 ($1,703,500,000 + $1,561,900,000) ÷ 2 = 8.99 = (365 ÷ 8.99) = 40.60 days
  • 50. Financial Analysis P a g e | 49 Visualization: Assessment: This graph illustrates each company’s accounts receivable turnover ratio which is represented in days. Given the principle, time value of money, a company loses money when collection duration increases on its credit sales. For companies like Apple who run periodic sales promotions advertising 0% interest; this directly affects this ratio. Amazon, who is arguably leveraged in the short-term, has maintained a healthy accounts receivable turnover rate. Alibaba’s 40.6 days is not surprising given their position in international trade and their ability to offer trade assurance. International trade typically experiences different payment/Incoterms which lengthen the transaction time. Therefore, Alibaba’s 40.6 ratio is relatively low and non-concerning given their impressive short-term liquidity. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 18.78 Apple, 50.69 Alibaba, 40.6 2016 Accounts Receivables (Represented in Days) Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 51. Financial Analysis P a g e | 50 INVENTORY TURNOVER RATIO = Cost of Goods Sold ÷ Average Inventory Amazon = $88,265,000,000 ($11,461,000,000 + $10,243,000,000) ÷ 2 = 8.13, Inventory turns 8.13 times per year and held approximately 44.9 days. Apple = $130,723,700,000 ($2,132,000,000 + $2,349,000,000) ÷ 2 = 58.35, Inventory turns 58.35 times per year and held approximately 6.25 days. Alibaba = $4,990,900,000 ($0.00 + $0.00) ÷ 2 = N/A, Alibaba does not hold any inventory.
  • 52. Financial Analysis P a g e | 51 Visualization: 2012-2015 data provided by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, 44.9 Apple, 6.25 Alibaba, 0 2016 Inventory Turnover (represented in days) Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon 43.77 45.29 45.68 47.22 44.89 Apple 3.26 4.37 6.3 5.81 6.25 Alibaba 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 5-Year Inventory Turnover (2012-2016) (represented days)
  • 53. Financial Analysis P a g e | 52 Assessment: Theses graphs illustrate the 2016 and 5-year inventory turnover ratio represented in days. Alibaba’s inventory turnover ratio is not applicable as they do not carry inventory. Amazon and Apple’s inventory turnover is not concerning when examining the 5-year trend. However, Amazon’s inventory turnover is worth monitoring from a management perspective. If Amazon’s inventory turnover increase in days, this will increase carrying costs. At this time neither of them are concerning. If either company experiences an increase or decrease of 5-days, then further examination will be needed. Alibaba’s zero inventory makes it attractive for an acquisition and justifies their profit margins.
  • 54. Financial Analysis P a g e | 53 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TURNOVER RATIO = Purchases ÷ Average Accounts Payable Accounts payable for these companies is tough to dissect in their financial statements. The purchases item for this calculation should be represented as such in an income statement. These companies do not provide individual purchases in their financial statements. However, Morningstar.com has calculated this ratio, and the results are below. Amazon = 30.35 days Apple = 11.59 days Alibaba = N/A, not listed Assessment: This ratio shows Amazon and Apple’s average amount of time to pay its suppliers. Apple’s short- term liquidity is stronger than Amazon’s, but Amazon’s A/P turnover is within normal payment terms. Net 30 is very common in business. Therefore, this ratio is non-concerning. Amazon could renegotiate with suppliers for more favorable pricing if they can pay quicker than 30 days.
  • 55. Financial Analysis P a g e | 54 DEBT & LONG-TERM SOLVENCY Solvency, not to be confused with liquidity, measures a company’s ability to pay long-term debts. Solvency is a standing and for a company to be considered solvent its assets must be valued higher than its debts. LONG-TERM DEBT = Long-Term Debt ÷ (Long-Term Debt + Shareholders’ Equity) Amazon = $7,694,000,000 ÷ ($7,694,000,000 + $19,285,000,000) = .29 Apple = $75,427,000,000 ÷ ($75,427,000,000 + $128,249,000,000) = .37 Alibaba = $7,779,380,949 ÷ ($7,779,380,949 + $31,465,404,108) = .20 Assessment: Not significant to assess.
  • 56. Financial Analysis P a g e | 55 DEBT/EQUITY RATIO = Total Liabilities ÷ Shareholders’ Equity Amazon = $64,117,000,000 ÷ $19,285,000,000 = 3.32 or 332% Apple = $193,437,000,000 ÷ $128,249,000,000 = 1.51 or 151% Alibaba = $ 21,800,000,000 ÷ $33,550,000,000 = .65 or 65% Assessment: This ratio measures how much debt the company is using to finance its assets in relation to shareholders’ equity. A ratio great than one or 100% means a company is considered somewhat high-risk as they aggressively fund their growth with debt. Their highly-leveraged position is associated with high-risk and potentially resulting in volatile earnings on a short-term basis. Alibaba’s D/E is conservative and considered low-risk. Amazon and Apple’s high D/E might be high-risk and unpredictable, but the potential for high returns is considerably high.
  • 57. Financial Analysis P a g e | 56 DEBT/ASSETS RATIO = Long-Term Debt ÷ Total Assets Amazon = $7,694,000,000 ÷ $83,402,000,000 = .09 or 9% Apple = $75,427,000,000 ÷ $321,686,000,000 = .23 or 23% Alibaba = $8,267,000,000 ÷ $56,350,000,000 = .14 or 14% Assessment: This ratio measures how much a company finances its assets through debt. If the ratio is less than .5 or 50%, then this suggests a company’s debt is primarily financed through equity. This calculation can also be adjusted to account for both short and long-term debt over total assets. I’ve chosen to use long-term debt in this calculation. Amazon has the lowest long-term debt. However, this ratio does not account for the quality of assets as it combines tangible and intangible assets together. Therefore, reading beyond the numbers, this ratio does not consider long-term debt used for acquisitions which allows a company like Amazon to book portions of acquisition costs under goodwill. Each of these company’s total assets outweighs their long-term debt obligations.
  • 58. Financial Analysis P a g e | 57 INTEREST COVERAGE (EARNINGS BASIS) = Net Income + Interest Expense + Tax. Exp. Interest Expense Amazon = $2,371,000,000 + $484,000,000 + $1,430,000,000 $484,000,000 = 8.84 Apple = $45,687,000,000 + $0.00 + $15,690,000,000 $0.00 = N/A Alibaba = $11,049,000,000 + $301,000,000 +$1,306,000,000 $301,000,000 = 42.05 Assessment: This ratio calculates the margin of safety a company has which is aimed at meeting their interest obligations. A ratio of 1.5 is considered the bare minimum that is acceptable to lenders. Low- interest coverage questions a company’s solvency and increases their default risk. None of the companies have a concerning interest coverage ratio. However, Alibaba’s is very respectable and speaks to their high liquidity and solvency.
  • 59. Financial Analysis P a g e | 58 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COVERAGE = Cash Flow from Operations ÷ Capital Expenditures Amazon = $16,443,000,000 ÷ $9,876,000,000 = 1.66 Apple = $65,824,000,000 ÷ $12,734,000,000 = 5.17 Alibaba = $8,788,000,000 ÷ $841,000,000 = 10.45 Assessment: This ratio calculates a company’s ability to generate cash flows from operations to fund capital expenditures. These companies have positive ratios, and cash flows from operations which are higher than their capital expenditures. A lower ratio would indicate a company’s struggle to produce positive cash flows to cover their growth and investments. Apple and Alibaba are non-concerning at this time. However, Amazon can be concerning to potential investors if this was the only ratio they examined. This ratio does not explain Amazon’s previous investments which are generating growth.
  • 60. Financial Analysis P a g e | 59 SALES OVERVIEW 2012-2015 Chart Data Supported by (Morningstar, n.d.) and (Nasdaq.com, n.d.) $0 $50,000,000,000 $100,000,000,000 $150,000,000,000 $200,000,000,000 $250,000,000,000 Amazon Apple Alibaba Amazon, $135,987,000,000 Apple, $215,639,000,000 Alibaba, $15,900,000,000 2016 Sales/Revenue Amazon Apple Alibaba 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Amazon $61,093,000,000 $74,452,000,000 $88,988,000,000 $107,006,000,00 $135,987,000,00 Apple $156,508,000,00 $170,910,000,00 $182,795,000,00 $233,715,000,00 $215,639,000,00 Alibaba $3,140,000,000 $5,500,000,000 $8,580,000,000 $12,300,000,000 $15,900,000,000 $0 $50,000,000,000 $100,000,000,000 $150,000,000,000 $200,000,000,000 $250,000,000,000 $300,000,000,000 5-Year Sales/Revenue Trend (2012-2016)
  • 61. Financial Analysis P a g e | 60 Assessment: These graphs show a plethora of future opportunities and projected sales growth. Alibaba seems attractive for an acquisition while Amazon is poised to surpass Apple’s revenue/sales by 2020 or earliest of 2018 if Amazon acquired Alibaba. I measured percentage change between 2012-2016, and it generated the following results: Amazon 122.59% Apple 37.78% Alibaba 405.8% After measuring this percentage change between 2012-2016, I averaged the year-over-year growth increase then average all of them to generate an annual average year-over-year growth rate. Amazon experiences an annual sales growth rate of 22.18% compared to Apple’s 9.07% and Alibaba’s 50.9%. 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Amazon $166,148,916,60 $203,000,746,30 $248,026,311,83 $303,038,547,79 $370,252,497,69 Apple $235,197,457,30 $256,529,866,67 $279,797,125,58 $305,174,724,87 $332,854,072,42 Alibaba $24,001,050,000 $36,229,584,975 $54,688,558,520 $82,552,379,086 $124,612,816,23 $0 $50,000,000,000 $100,000,000,000 $150,000,000,000 $200,000,000,000 $250,000,000,000 $300,000,000,000 $350,000,000,000 $400,000,000,000 $450,000,000,000 5-Year Projected Sales Growth (2017-2021) Amazon Apple Alibaba
  • 62. Financial Analysis P a g e | 61 Alibaba’s IPO was in September 2014. Their sales growth is expected after the IPO. However, Amazon’s trend line shows consistent year-over-year sales growth. Apple’s weak sales growth is due to limited product launches and increased competition within the media industry. Apple TV has seen increased threats from companies like Amazon Video, Hulu, and Netflix. Secondly, Apple’s iWatch has seen major threats from companies like Garmin and Fitbit. Lastly, Apple’s iTunes has taken some dramatic hits from companies like Spotify. This doesn’t mean that Apple doesn’t have a pipeline of new products to debut soon. This sales overview provides more insight and indicates a need for additional calculations that are focused on geographical locations and individual product/service revenue streams. The following section will present other data. This information will allow one to make a strategic decision as a hypothetical investor with $500,000 to invest, or as an Amazon executive; should Amazon make an acquisition or should Amazon be acquired?
  • 63. Financial Analysis P a g e | 62 DECISION PROCESS As I outlined in the introduction, I must select one of three decisions. Therefore, I will use the data in this analysis coupled with additional factors outside of this analysis to decide. This review has been very thorough which has uncovered certain correlations and opportunities for all three companies. Though financial data presents many trends, correlations, and facts; it does not speak to management’s philosophy or long-term strategies and visions. Each of these decisions can be made through varying perceptions and positions. Thusly, any decision made and/or recommended is neither right nor wrong. As I walk through this decision process, I will be asking myself several questions such as: - If an individual investor, how much risk would I be comfortable with? - What long-term goals do I have personally and as a potential executive? - Should I decide based on past results, present conditions, or future potential? - Where do I see each of these company’s industries headed? - What is each company’s future benefit to society and how impactful is it? - Economically speaking, should I account for true economic profit and future demand? I will walk through each decision individually as a process and end with my final decision.
  • 64. Financial Analysis P a g e | 63 WOULD I INVEST A $500K INHERITANCE INTO ONE COMPANY? This analysis standalone has illustrated some very critical factors in which I’ve learned. Financial leverage is nothing to dismiss. History has proven that companies with high financial leverage are not only volatile and susceptible to economic crisis, but they pose almost an unquantifiable risk that leads to insolvency. The last financial crisis the United States experienced proved just this. Dozens and dozens of banks coupled with General Motors and AIG suffered massive losses and in some cases, became insolvent. This was contributed to abnormally high financial leverage positions. In the wake of the crisis and economic turmoil, the biggest concerns were disruptions in the credit markets. These credit markets were and are utilized by publicly traded companies. When a corporation’s dependency increases on financing their operations, this can produce catastrophic liquidity issues and disrupt a company’s ability to grow in the wake of an economic crisis. Amazon has proven to be questionably leveraged in this analysis and is still considered a high-risk investment given their profitability. Apple is not concerning in this aspect due to their high liquidity ratios. Alibaba is the most conservative investment at this time. Without performing a stock analysis, of the three, Alibaba would be the safest investment for $500,000. However, Amazon’s forward P/E is stronger than Apple’s, but Apple has proven to be very fiscally responsible. Each of these companies has or still is experiencing abnormal growth. It would be fiduciarily irresponsible of me to use the discounted abnormal earnings valuation i.e. the Random Walk Model, to value any of these companies as companies with high growth rates more often than not, attract competition which reduces their growth rates over time. Therefore, their abnormal growth is not sustainable in the long-run. As Amazon’s achieves their economies of scale, as Apple’s
  • 65. Financial Analysis P a g e | 64 limited product launches and increased competition from Samsung and Microsoft continues, and as Alibaba’s uncertain future is debated, these companies will plateau, and their abnormal earnings will return to normal levels. The question any long-term investor must ask themselves is, are these company’s growth rates and returns sustainable for the next 5-10 years? I do not have the answer for that. However, I believe that any of these companies would be safe for a $500,000 investment during a short-term 1-3 year interim. Per, (MSN Money, n.d.), Amazon, Apple, and Alibaba’s current beta in order are 1.48, 1.17, and Alibaba is shown as N/A. If I had to choose one company to invest all $500,000 into at this time, I would select Alibaba for their financial leverage, liquidity, sales growth, and ROE growth. I would combine this with my economic perception that this is just the beginning for Alibaba and their future is undoubtedly attractive. Their business model is more appealing to me than Amazon or Apple’s.
  • 66. Financial Analysis P a g e | 65 IF AN AMAZON EXECUTIVE, WOULD I WANT TO BE ACQUIRED? To put it simply, NO. Amazon is not on the brink of failure or insolvency. However, their ratios might indicate a need for more capital. If my assessments are valuable and accurate, I predict that Amazon will perform a 10 to 1 stock split when their stock price reaches or hovers around the $1,000 per share price for a length of time. By doing so, Amazon would attract new investors and raise more capital. Furthermore, there is not one company that could afford and/or have the scope to acquire or merge with Amazon other than Wal-Mart. Even if Wal-Mart entertained the idea, I’m not sure it would be approved by either side’s board of directors or investors. This acquisition or merger would be the largest in world history. Soo large, it would have the greatest market cap in the world that would equate close to if not surpass the $1 trillion mark. If this option were on the table, as an executive, I would want to be acquired or merge. To be specific, if an Amazon executive, I would not want to be acquired by either Apple or Alibaba. I do believe there are potential opportunities that both Amazon and Apple could collaborate on such as merging Amazon Video with Apple TV and the potential to start an internet service that competes with Century Link and Google Fiber. Apple is one company that could afford to buy Amazon, but it’s not within their scope. Microsoft would have a better chance to acquire Amazon and would be fascinating to explore the future possibilities of what those two companies could accomplish. Alibaba cannot afford Amazon, but this leads to the last decision I can make.
  • 67. Financial Analysis P a g e | 66 IF AN AMAZON EXECUTIVE, WOULD I MAKE AN ACQUISITION? An acquisition for Amazon is very attractive. However, it would make no sense for Amazon to acquire Apple but buying Alibaba would have both short and long-term benefits. Alibaba is within the scope of Amazon. Amazon would see an increase in their ROE, ROA, profit margin, cash & cash equivalents, operating cash flow and other liquidity ratios. However, Alibaba’s sales do not compare with Amazon’s, but their projected growth of abnormal earnings is impressive enough to indicate positive returns for Amazon across the board. The question remaining is if Amazon could afford Alibaba?
  • 68. Financial Analysis P a g e | 67 FINAL DECISION At the end of my introduction, I predicted that Amazon needs to acquire Alibaba. After examining the data in this analysis and walking through each decision, I select the choice: if an Amazon executive, I would make an acquisition, specifically Alibaba. This is a long-term decision. If I were making a short-term decision, this would not be my decision. Alibaba’s scope aligns with Amazon’s and helps Amazon grow into new business segments which complement their existing supply chains and sourcing capabilities. Furthermore, Alibaba’s position within China would allow Amazon to penetrate the Chinese market quicker and more successfully. Alibaba is viewed as the Amazon of wholesale and international trade. Amazon and their suppliers connect (B2C) as Alibaba joins (B2B). Combining these two models would allow Amazon to diversify their business outside of B2C and into B2B. This combination would present new opportunities that would require another analysis and possible case study. From a financial perspective, this acquisition would immediately impact Amazon’s bottom line. It would add approximately $56 billion in new sales over the next three years if my sales projections are accurate. Additionally, Alibaba’s profit margin would yield Amazon a minimum of 1/3 of sales. Calculating the present value of forecasted abnormal earnings would put this into perspective. However, this calculation assumes that a company’s forecasted earnings = their current abnormal earnings. The discounted cash flow model can also be used for a valuation. Of the ratios I calculated, Alibaba is a conservative acquisition and financially healthy. The ratios did not indicate any concern for Alibaba’s fiscal health.
  • 69. Financial Analysis P a g e | 68 WORKS CITED CNBC. (2017, May 4). Jim Cramer talks with Tim Cook: The full interview . Retrieved from MSN Money: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/videos/jim-cramer-talks-with-tim-cook- the-full-interview/vi-BBAIlWR Investopedia.com. (n.d.). Economic Value Added - EVA. Retrieved May 3, 2017, from Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/eva.asp Morningstar. (n.d.). AMZN, AAPL, BABA. Retrieved from MORNINGSTAR: http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios/r.html?t=AMZN MSN Money. (n.d.). AMZN, APPL, BABA. Retrieved May 4, 2017, from MSN Money: www.msn.com/money Nasdaq.com. (n.d.). AAPL, BABA Company Financials. Retrieved April 18, 2017, from Nasdaq.com: www.nasdaq.com Stephens, John. (2014, June 13). A Split Decision on Stock Splits, Such As Apple's (AAPL). Retrieved from Nasdaq.com: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/a-split-decision-on-stock- splits-such-as-apples-aapl-cm361551