PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LISTED MANUFACTURING COMPANIES IN SRI
LANKA AND MALAYSIA
Anura De Zoysa, Athula S. Manawaduge, Palli Mulla K A Chandrakumara
University of Wollongong, Australia
Abstract
This paper uses empirical data on 161 listed manufacturing companies in Sri Lankaand Malaysia over the period of 2006 to 2008, and compares the performance of thesecompanies against two commonly used financial performance indicators: Return onAssets (ROA) and Return on Equity (ROE). The results indicate that during this periodSri Lankan manufacturing companies were considerably more profitable than their counterparts in Malaysia in terms of ROA but less profitable in terms of ROE. It alsoidentifies a relatively weaker position of equity investments in the manufacturing sectorof Sri Lankan companies and attributes this to a number of factors, including: arelatively poor equity market, high interest rates, and excessive fear of highriskinvestment. A similar trend was observed when the profitability and equity ofcompanies were analysed by industry.
Keywords
Profitability, analysis, listed, manufacturing, companies, Sri, Lanka, Malaysia, empirical, investigation
INTRODUCTION
Sri Lanka and Malaysia had many things in common five decades ago. Both countries were British colonies and gained independence from Britain nine years apart – Sri Lanka in 1948 and Malaysia in 1957. Both countries started the post-independence period with a rich mix of resources, strong British legal and political institutions, and similar educational systems. In 1960, Malaysia had a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of about $280 and Sri Lanka had a GNI per capita of US$152 in 1960. “As of 1970, Sri Lanka and Malaysia had similar living standards” (Sally, 2009, p1.). After five decades of independence, Malaysia is now far ahead of Sri Lanka in many fronts, including economic and industrial development. Today, “Malaysia is widely held as a great development success story in the developing world. Not withstanding the massive economic contraction experienced during the 1997-98 financial crisis, Malaysiarsquo;s economic performance has been impressive throughout the postindependence period. Sustained high growth (averaging to nearly 6 per cent per annum for the past four decades) has been accompanied by rising living standards with a relatively equal distribution of income” (Athukorala, 2005, p.19).
DATA AND METHODOLOGY
The data for this study were obtained from Bureau Van Dijkrsquo;s OSIRIS Database which provides financial and other related data for over 34,000 listed companies in 130 countries. Since the main source of data used in this study for measuring the profitability of listed companies in Sri Lanka and Malaysia is published company accounts, the results of this study should be viewed with caution. Data disclosed in public accounts are generally inherited with some limitations, especially if used to compare the performance of companies in different countries. One of the major limitations is that profits determined in company accounts are based on company accounting practices which may vary from company to company. For example, items such as the amount of depreciation and the value of inventory are subject to arbitrary valuation within a fairly wide range. Moreover, particularly in respect of fixed assets, accounting figures based on the historical cost concept may not represent realistic values in a period of inflation. Profits calculated in the company accounts are also influenced by business and tax regulations which also vary between different countries. In the case of multinational companies, profit calculation may be liable to various manipulations through practices such as transfer pricing (Robbins and Stobaugh, 1974). Although compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) – which are used by more than 100 countries including Sri Lanka and Malaysia – facilitate comparability, there are still some inconsistencies in accounting practices which makes it difficult to assess and compare the profitability of firms in a realistic manner, particularly when those firms are from different countries.
SAMPLE OF COMPANIES
The sample companies of this study are manufacturing companies listed on the Colombo Stock
Exchange (CSE) and the Malaysia exchange (MYX), chosen from only the companies on the OSIRIS database with complete financial data for the three years from 2006 to 2008. A screening process was then applied to companies matching the above criteria. First, all remaining companies in the sample were classified by the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) codes to eliminate nonmanufacturing companies as identified by their GICS codes. Second, since the main objective of this study is to examine the profitability of manufacturing companies of both countries, it was considered appropriate to eliminate companies with a negative average ROA for the past three years, since having such companies in the sample distorts the results of the analysis. This screening process left 62 manufacturing companies in the Sri Lankan sample. Third, the GICS codes of these 6
剩余内容已隐藏,支付完成后下载完整资料
在斯里兰卡和马来西亚的上市公司的盈利能力分析
摘要:本文采用在斯里兰卡和马来西亚在2006年至2008年期间161上市制造业公司的经验数据,并比较了这些公司对两种常用的财务业绩指标的表现:资产(ROA)和净资产收益率回报(ROE)。结果表明,在此期间,斯里兰卡制造企业在更有利可图的ROA,但在利润较低的ROE方面均大大高于他们在马来西亚的同行。它还确定股票投资的相对较弱的地位,斯里兰卡公司的制造业和属性这许多因素,其中包括:有相对不佳的股票市场,高利率和过度恐惧高风险的投资。公司的盈利能力和资产行业分析也可以观察到类似的趋势。
关键词:盈利能力分析,上市,制造,企业,斯里兰卡,斯里兰卡,马来西亚,经验,调查
简介
斯里兰卡和马来西亚有许多共同点在五十年以前。这两个国家是英国殖民地,并脱离英国独立9年分开 - 在1957年斯里兰卡在1948年和马来西亚。这两个国家开始了独立后的时期,资源,雄厚的英国的法律和政治制度,以及类似的教育系统的丰富多样。1960年,马来西亚有一个国民总收入(GNI)每280美元的人均和斯里兰卡在1960年的每152美元的人均国民总收入。“由于1970年,斯里兰卡和马来西亚也有类似的生活标准”(莎莉,2009年,P1)。经过五十年的独立性,马来西亚现在远远领先于斯里兰卡的许多方面,包括经济和工业发展。今天,“马来西亚被广泛接受为一个大发展的成功故事在发展中世界。尽管有1997-1998年金融危机期间的大规模经济收缩经验丰富,马来西亚的经济表现一直贯穿独立后期间令人印象深刻。持续高增长(平均近6%年息百分之过去四十年),一直伴随着生活水平的提高与收入的相对平等分配“(Athukorala,2005年,第19页)。
数据和理论:
本研究的数据来自统计局范戴克的OSIRIS数据库,提供财政和其他相关数据超过34000在130个国家的上市公司获得。由于在这项研究中用来测量在斯里兰卡和马来西亚上市公司的盈利能力数据的主要来源是出版公司账户,本次研究的结果应谨慎对待。被公账户披露的数据通常与继承一定的局限性,尤其是用于比较的公司在不同国家的表现。其中一个主要的限制是,在公司帐目确定的利润是在此基础上可能会有所不同,从公司到公司的公司会计实务。例如,如折旧的量和库存价值物品受到任意估值一个相当宽的范围内。此外,特别是在固定资产,基于历史成本会计的概念数字可能并不代表通货膨胀期间实际值。在该公司账目计算的利润也受到企业和税务法规也不同国家之间变化的影响。在跨国公司的情况下,利润的计算可能会容易通过实践各种操作,如转让定价(Robbins和Stobaugh,1974年)。虽然符合国际财务报告准则(IFRS) - 这是使用超过100个国家,包括斯里兰卡和马来西亚 - 方便可比性,还存在会计实务一些不同之处,这使得它难以评估和比较一个企业的盈利能力现实的态度,尤其是当这些企业都来自不同的国家。
公司样本:
这项研究的样本公司制造的科伦坡股票上市公司交易所(CSE)及马来西亚交易所(MYX),只从公司选择了与完整的财务数据为三年,从2006年至2008年的OSIRIS数据库的筛选过程,然后将其应用于企业符合上述标准。首先,样本中所有剩余的公司进行分类的全球行业分类标准(GICS)代码作为识别他们的GICS代码,以消除非制造业公司。其次,由于本研究的主要目的是考察制造业两国企业的盈利能力,它被认为是适当的,以消除企业与负的平均ROA为近三年来,由于样品中有这样的公司扭曲的结果该分析。这个筛选过程留下62制造企业斯里兰卡样本。第三,这些62家公司的GICS代码,然后用剩下的马来西亚公司样本中匹配,消除了马来西亚公司不匹配的公司GICS代码斯里兰卡样本。这种匹配过程中离开,99家马来西亚公司,然后将其选定为马来西亚公司的样本。
经济实力:斯里兰卡vs马来西亚
双方斯里兰卡和马来西亚位于亚洲其中拥有世界人口的60%。这两个地区,东亚,其中马来西亚位于和南亚,其中斯里兰卡所在,也是占世界人口的30%。然而,相较于一些亚洲国家,如中国和印度具有巨大的人口,这两个国家的人口,斯里兰卡(20亿美元)和马来西亚(27亿美元)是比较小的,因为他们占了不到1%总亚裔人口。下面的表2提供了有关这两个国家在过去50年的经济表现一些有用的信息。
表2
在斯里兰卡和马来西亚人口与发展的一些指标
1960 |
2007 |
|||||
斯里兰卡 |
马来西亚 |
% |
斯里兰卡 |
马来西亚 |
% |
|
人口总计(百万) |
10 |
8.1 |
8181 |
20.0 |
26.6 |
133 |
人均GNI(美元) |
152 |
280 |
184 |
1540 |
6540 |
425 |
GDP(十亿美元) |
1.5 |
2.3 |
153 |
32.4 |
186.7 |
577 |
GDP增长(每年%) |
4.6 |
6.5 |
141 |
6.8 |
6.3 |
93 |
农业增长(GDP%) |
32 |
36 |
113 |
12 |
10 |
83 |
工业增长(GDP%) |
20 |
18 |
90 |
30 |
48 |
160 |
服务业增长(GDP%) |
48 |
46 |
96 |
58 |
42 |
72 |
表2清楚地表明,在此期间一九六零年至2007年对一些重要的经济指标,两国之间的差距已经拉大。如人均国民总收入-widely作为一个国家的经济表现的一个基本指标 - 斯里兰卡远远落后于马来西亚,2007年与1540美元其国民总收入的人均收入相比,马来西亚6540美元。 1960年马来西亚的人均国民总收入收入仅为1.84倍斯里兰卡的人均国民总收入的收入,但到2007年这一差距扩大到4.25倍斯里兰卡的人均国民总收入的收入。类似的情况是观察两国的GDP。 1960年,为23十亿马来西亚的GDP只是1.53倍斯里兰卡为15十亿GDP。然而,2007年马来西亚GDP已增至美元的巨额186.7十亿,这是近6倍,斯里兰卡在2007年达32.4十亿GDP两国之间的另一个值得注意的区别是,这两个国家都按比例减少其农业产出,同时增加他们的工业产值之间的两个时期显著。引人注目的是,通过在1960年斯里兰卡的工业产值(占GDP的20%),约10%叔比马来西亚高。然而,虽然斯里兰卡已经从国内生产总值1960年20%的贡献提高到占GDP的30%,2007年(同比增长50%)取得了工业产出的增长显著的进步,马来西亚从18%增加了其工业产值国内生产总值在1960年国内生产总值的48%,2007年(同比增长167%)。总体而言,上述数据清楚地表明,在此期间马来西亚已经由显著保证金外进行斯里兰卡的经济和工业发展方面。
盈利能力:斯里兰卡VS马来西亚
净资产收益率(ROA)
表3显示盈利率的分散,由ROA测得的,其中斯里兰卡和马来西亚的制造企业2006年至2008年,平均ROA为三年期限在一起。如表3所示,斯里兰卡公司的期间为2006年至2008年的平均利润率从10%到11.4%,与3年的平均水平10.9%。总体而言,样本公司中49%已经能够实现ROA大于10%,比3年。而该公司的16%已取得的ROA小于5%效果差,该公司的23%已在3年内达到15%以上,平均ROA。
表3
资产回报率(ROA)的分布
ROA 范围 |
斯里兰卡 |
马来西亚 |
|||||||
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
平均值 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
平均值 |
||
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
||
5以下 |
27 |
16 |
29 |
16 |
32 |
31 |
35 |
30 |
|
5-10 |
15 |
23 |
39 |
35 |
41 |
38 |
32 |
44 |
|
10-15 |
27 |
35 |
15 |
26 |
15 |
12 |
20 |
16 |
|
15-20 |
23 |
18 |
8 |
18 |
7 |
12 |
8 |
5 |
|
20-25 |
6 |
8 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
25以上 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|
总计 |
100 |
100 <!--剩余内容已隐藏,支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号:[504386],资料为PDF文档或Word文档,PDF文档可免费转换为Word |
以上是毕业论文外文翻译,课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。