Express analysis of the quarterly summary financial reporting enterprises (forms Nos. 1 and 2, balance sheet and profit and loss account), as a rule, is made:

a) employees of the accounting department of the enterprise itself to draw up an analytical note to management based on the results of the company's activities for the reporting period;

b) external users of information (potential creditors, shareholders, state control bodies, etc.) in order to determine the level of financial stability of the company for a possible investment of funds or, conversely, to make a decision on bankruptcy.

The convenience of express analysis of consolidated financial statements is in the simplicity of the information base of the analysis. The two main reporting forms (balance sheet and income statement) are, firstly, standard and, secondly, mandatory for filing in tax office. In other words, there is no need to collect “bit by bit” data in various functional services of the enterprise, to specify information (that is, to find out how this or that figure was calculated and how reliable it is) ...

Analysts, however, often complain that consolidated financial statements, not supported by operational reporting data, can say little about the state of the enterprise. However, with proper handling of the figures of consolidated financial statements and a well-thought-out methodology, express analysis of financial statements can provide a comprehensive overview of the state of the enterprise, which is necessary for making serious management decisions.

GENERAL SCHEME OF EXPRESS ANALYSIS

The most important attribute financial analysis is its system. Since the object of analysis itself (the enterprise) is a system, the approach to its study should be systemic. In other words, financial analysis (including express analysis of financial statements) is more than just a set of ratios.

Each of the coefficients (quantitative indicators) occupies a strictly defined place and has a clearly defined economic sense and economic interconnection with other coefficients in a common "through" block diagram of the analysis. The block diagram (see diagram) is a multi-stage hierarchy of analysis factors, at the head of which is the resulting indicator - the target function, the optimization of which is the main criterion for the analyst.

The objective function of financial analysis is to maximize the expected return on net worth (ERONW - expected return on net worth), which determines market value firms, in particular stock quotes for large companies whose securities are traded on stock exchange. The expected return on equity is determined by two main factors:

• current return on own funds (RONW - return on net worth);
• short-term solvency.

Mathematically, the formula for ERONW as a function of RONW and solvency looks like this

ERONW=E(RONWi*Pi)

where E is the sum, RONWi is the return on equity for outcome i, Pi is the probability of outcome i (the sum of the probabilities of all outcomes is 1).

The economic meaning of the expected return indicator is to formalize the relationship between indicators of short-term solvency and efficiency in the company's activities. The company may have high rate current return on equity and at the same time operate beyond acceptable financial risk, which increases the likelihood of losses and reduced return on equity in the near future.

Choosing one of the alternative options for distributing free cash: into production programs (increase in efficiency) or into an increase in financial reserves (improving financial stability), the manager intuitively tries to optimize the function E (RONWi * Pi) either by increasing RONWi or by increasing the share "favorable" outcomes Pi.

The formalization of this problem requires the use of mathematical modeling methods and a very detailed information support through company reporting data. At the level of express analysis, formalization of the objective function is impossible.

Therefore, in this case, the problem is solved in a more simplified way: maximizing the integral indicator of efficiency (return on equity) while maintaining financial stability indicators in the range of acceptable (normative) values ​​- something like a matrix with one equation and restrictions.

ANALYSIS OF THE EFFICIENCY OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES

Integral indicator of efficiency economic activity is the current return on equity (RONW). RONW is calculated based on the use of forms 1 and 2. Calculation formula:

RONW = net income: equity

where net profit is equal to the value in line 140 of form 2, the indicator is taken as the average for the period, and equity - to the value in line 490 of form 1, the indicator is taken as the average for the period (for the first quarter - the arithmetic average of columns 3 and 4, for other quarters - arithmetic mean of columns of 4 balances of the reporting and previous quarters).

Convenient at the beginning factor analysis build a dynamic table of the resulting indicator. A possible format for such a table is table 1.

To decompose the integral performance indicator (profit / equity), as a rule, a three-factor model is used, which characterizes the return on invested equity capital as a function of three factors:

• profitability (profitability) = profit / sales volume;
• the speed of the financial cycle (turnover) = sales volume / balance sheet currency;
• structures of funding sources (long-term solvency) = own funds / balance sheet currency.

In other words, if we denote profitability as A, turnover as B, the inverse of total solvency as C, then

RONW=A*B:C.

Mathematically, it is possible to calculate the contribution of each of the factors to the change in the resulting indicator. So, denoting the indicators of the reporting period with the index "1", the base period - with the index "0", and the change through "D" (delta), we get

D RONW \u003d (RONW1 - RONW0) \u003d A1B1C1 - A0B0C0 \u003d D A * B1 * C1 + D B * A0 * C0 + D C * A0 * B1,

where D A * B1 * C1 - "contribution" of changes in profitability to the dynamics of returns on equity, D B * A0 * C0 - "contribution" of changes in turnover to the dynamics of returns on equity, D C * A0 * B1- - "contribution" changes in the overall solvency in the dynamics of return on own funds.

Note that in the above three-factor model, indicators of sales volume and balance sheet currency are factors of two coefficients at once. Thus, in the end, the dynamics of the resulting performance indicator is determined by the change in four factors: sales volume (= p.010, f.2), net profit(= line 140, f.2 - line 150, f.2), balance currency (= line 399, f.1 = line 699, f.1), own funds (= line 490, f. one). By the way, the relationship between factors is much more complicated than can be identified on the basis of an express analysis of financial statements.

For example, cost (difference between sales volume and net profit) and sales volume are also indicators that are interrelated through the cost function (an increase in the physical volume of sales leads to an increase in total variable costs).

The analyzer must keep this point in mind, any technique is more or less a simplification of reality, and financial analysis is more of an art than a routine. It is convenient to present the analysis of changes in return on own funds in the form of Table 2.

Based on the table, a number of significant conclusions can be drawn about the change in the efficiency of the company's activities in the 2nd quarter of 1999 compared to the 1st quarter of 1999. So, the return on invested capital (own funds) more than doubled - from 0.67 to 0, 3, that is, if in the 1st quarter the enterprise received 67 kopecks of net profit per 1 ruble of its own funds, then in the 2nd quarter - 30 kopecks.

It is noteworthy that the decrease in the profitability of own funds occurred due to the deterioration of all three factors of efficiency - profitability decreased, the financial cycle slowed down, and the share of attracted funds in the sources of financing of the enterprise decreased. It should be noted that the main role in reducing the profitability of equity was played by the decrease in the share of borrowed funds - this factor accounts for 73% of the fall in the resulting indicator, while the share of turnover - 22% and the share of profitability - 5%.

It should be noted that in the second quarter of 1999, the value of the company's own funds increased significantly due to the capitalization of the profit of the previous quarter (from 90,000 thousand rubles to 150,000 thousand rubles), while total liabilities (sources of financing) decreased from 600,000 thousand rubles up to 540,000 thousand rubles. This means that the company in the II quarter pursued a policy of financial rehabilitation, that is, reducing the attracted sources of financing and increasing the volume of financial reserves.

The course towards improving financial stability in the short term, as a rule, leads to a deterioration in efficiency and a decrease in financial performance. This example is no exception. The decrease in the resource base led to a simultaneous decrease in both the volume of sales (from 150,000 thousand rubles to 120,000 thousand rubles) and net profit (from 60,000 thousand rubles to 45,000 thousand rubles). At the same time, the profitability of sales (from 0.4 to 0.38) and the turnover rate (from 0.25 to 0.22) slightly decreased, but this decrease cannot be considered very significant. Nevertheless, the volume of sales declined ahead of the decline in the resource base, and the fall in the final financial results (net profit) “overtook” the decline in sales volumes - these are characteristic signs of a deterioration in the efficiency of the enterprise.

Based on the foregoing, is it possible to consider that the course towards financial recovery in the second quarter of 1999 was erroneous? No. It has already been noted above that the target function of an enterprise is to maximize not the current return on equity, but the expected (future) return, which is determined, among other things, by the level of financial stability. Therefore, in order to formulate final conclusions, it is necessary to look at how the solvency and financial stability of the enterprise changed in the second quarter of 1999.

ANALYSIS OF THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OF THE ENTERPRISE

Note two key points on which the analysis is based financial stability companies:

a) a normative approach to the analysis of financial stability ratios. Full formalization of the solution of the problem of optimization of the objective function (expected return on own funds) involves the use of a positive approach. This approach means that by probabilistic analysis and modeling of pairs (probability of outcome i, return on own funds for outcome i), a mathematical interdependence between indicators is established financial condition and efficiency.

Thus, there are no normative financial ratios with a positive approach - an arbitrarily large decrease in the level of financial reserves is acceptable if the increase in efficiency is such that the objective function increases. Generally speaking, the positive approach from a theoretical point of view is the most correct, however, as already mentioned, it is very time-consuming, requires detailed information support, and therefore is not applicable when conducting an express analysis of financial statements. More often, a normative approach is used - more rough, but realistically feasible in practice.

The essence of the regulatory approach lies in the fact that for an enterprise, taking into account its industry and individual specifics, standard values coefficients of financial stability. The standards fix the optimal and minimum allowable values ​​of the coefficient. Target financial policy enterprises - to maintain indicators of financial stability at a level close to optimal - in any case, not lower than the minimum acceptable. It is noteworthy that exceeding the optimal value of the coefficient should not be welcomed, since it means excessive immobilization of funds in financial reserves;

b) highlighting the aspects of short-term and long-term financial stability of the enterprise. Distinguishing between short- and long-term solvency in the analysis is necessary because these two aspects of financial stability have a fundamentally different background in the context of managerial decision-making and are differently related to the dynamics of the company's performance. Long-term solvency is a guarantee of an enterprise from bankruptcy in a strategic perspective.

The goals of long-term solvency and the goals of increasing the efficiency of activities in the strategic aspect are interrelated (conjugated), since the capitalization of the profits of the enterprise increases the size of its own funds and, therefore, makes it more sustainable. Short-term solvency is a guarantee of an enterprise against non-payment of current obligations. Here, the goals of improving efficiency and the goals of increasing solvency are conflicting (opposite).

The management of the company, deciding the issue of distribution of free cash, can invest them in the growth of fixed assets and capital construction, that is, to increase current and future profits. However, in this case, the amount of net working capital (own liquid resources) may not be sufficient to pay off current liabilities (current assets). You can do the opposite, reducing the level of financial risk, sacrificing the tasks of increasing production efficiency. It should also be noted that the goals and methods of improving short- and long-term solvency are largely autonomous (independent) from each other.

Thus, the policy of replacing own funds with long-term loans does not affect the current solvency of the enterprise, but reduces its long-term solvency. All of the above requires that the time horizons for considering the problems of maintaining the financial stability of the company are delimited during the analysis.

Now we will show by example how to conduct an express analysis of the balance sheet. So, the comparative analytical balance of our company looks like this:

We begin the analysis, as mentioned above, with an assessment of the change in the value of the property of the enterprise. The figure of 34.7% differs slightly from "33.3%" - accordingly, here percentages can be replaced by shares:

During the reporting period, the value of the company's property increased by more than a third.

Now let's see what caused this increase. To do this, we will evaluate changes in the totals of asset sections. As you can see, both non-current and current assets increased - however, current assets increased by a much larger amount:

This was due to an increase in both non-current (by 17%) and current (by 78%) assets of the enterprise.

Now it is time to evaluate the structure of the asset balance. As you can see, non-current assets make up the majority (72% in 2006 and 62% in 2007), but over the reporting period, the company switched from a conservative asset management policy to a moderate asset management policy. There is a fundamental change:

The share of current assets in the value of property increased during the reporting period from 28% to 38%, thus, the company moved from a conservative asset management policy to a moderate asset management policy.

Now let's look at the liability of the organization and the changes that have taken place in it. We note that the share of short-term loans in the value of property corresponds to a moderate liability management policy, and the change in this share can be neglected (the difference between 8% and 6% is less than the materiality threshold, which we will set here at 5%):

The structure of the sources of property formation is characterized by a moderate liability management policy, and during the reporting period there were no significant changes in this policy.

Now let's look at the share of balance sheet liability sections and note the most important change - a twofold increase in long-term liabilities:

The main factor that influenced the structure of liabilities is a significant increase in the share of long-term liabilities in it - from 42% to 63%, while the share of the company's own capital decreased from 42% to 31%.

Please note that we did not mention in the summary the share of the first and fifth sections of the balance sheet in the value of the property - we do not overload the summary with numbers. But at the same time, if desired, this share can be easily calculated from the data that we mentioned.

Now let's go "inside" the balance sections. A cursory glance at the non-current assets of the enterprise allows us to say that they increased only at the expense of fixed assets:

Non-current assets of the enterprise increased due to the line "Fixed assets".

Inside the section "Current assets" there have been much more serious changes. As you can see, stocks have seriously increased - 4 times. If we look at the structure of inventories, we will see that all the components of this line have increased - raw materials, work in progress, and finished products. Yes, they have increased to varying degrees - but as part of an express analysis, this difference can be neglected so as not to make the summary heavier. Accounts receivable decreased by 20%, but cash increased very significantly - more than 4 times. As you can see, all three components have changed, but two of them have changed to a much greater extent than the third. This is where we need to separate significant changes from just "changes".

The main purpose of the analysis of the structure of current assets is its comparison with the optimal one (65-30-5). At the beginning of the period, we had too little inventory and too much receivables and cash, by the end of the period, despite all the changes, inventory is still low, receivables - still a lot, cash - still a lot. This is the case when very serious and significant changes fundamentally did not change anything:

The structure of working capital of the enterprise has undergone significant, but not fundamental changes. It is far from optimal and is characterized by insufficient inventory and an excessive share of receivables and cash. It should be noted that during the reporting period there was a significant increase in inventories (4 times) and cash assets of the enterprise (more than 4 times) and a slight decrease in accounts receivable (by 20%).

Now let's climb "inside" the sections of the liability of the enterprise. The company's own capital in absolute terms remained the same, however, due to the general increase in the value of the company's property, its share decreased. This should be reflected in the resume. But its structure remained unchanged. Short-term liabilities of the enterprise decreased both in absolute and relative terms, and this happened due to the disappearance of the enterprise accounts payable:

The company's own capital in absolute terms remained the same, however, due to the general increase in the value of the company's property, its share decreased. Short-term liabilities of the enterprise decreased due to the disappearance of accounts payable from the enterprise.

Now let's try to look for "similar" changes and make on their basis some hypotheses about the nature of the change in business processes at the enterprise during the reporting period. So, we have an increase in the balance sheet by 165 million rubles. In the asset, the most significant changes are +50 million for fixed assets, +60 million for inventories and +65 million for cash. Accounts receivable, on the contrary, gave us -20 million rubles.

There are fewer changes in liabilities, but they are more serious: +200 for long-term borrowings and -35 for accounts payable.

It seems obvious to us that the changes at the enterprise began with the fact that it took a long-term loan for 200 million rubles. Further, the following hypothesis can be put forward: with this money, accounts payable were paid off (165 million rubles remained), new fixed assets were purchased (115 million rubles remained) and raw materials for production. The remaining amount settled on the current account of the enterprise, plus it was replenished with money received from debtors. Let's formulate our hypothesis in the correct analytical language, not forgetting to make reservations about its non-100% probability:

Most likely in reporting period the company has increased its production base and output through a long-term loan, which also helped pay off creditors.

The time has come to arrange our disparate findings in the form of a single analytical summary. It is also worth adding to it our assessments of the changes that have taken place at the enterprise. Our final summary will look like this:

During the reporting period, the value of the company's property increased by more than a third. This was due to an increase in both non-current (by 17%) and current (by 78%) assets of the enterprise. This fact characterizes the enterprise as successfully developing.

The share of current assets in the value of property increased during the reporting period from 28% to 38%, thus, the company moved from a conservative asset management policy to a moderate asset management policy, increasing its mobility in the market.

Non-current assets of the enterprise have increased due to the line "Fixed assets", therefore, the enterprise is increasing its production base.

The structure of working capital of the enterprise has undergone significant, but not fundamental changes. It is far from optimal and is characterized by insufficient inventory and an excessive share of receivables and cash. At the same time, it should be noted that during the reporting period there was a significant increase in inventories (4 times) and cash assets of the enterprise (more than 4 times) and a slight decrease in accounts receivable (by 20%). Thus, the company may have seriously increased the volume of production and improved work with debtors, but it is not actively investing money in production, which most likely reduces the efficiency of their use.

The structure of the sources of property formation is characterized by a moderate liability management policy, and during the reporting period there were no significant changes in this policy. The main factor that influenced the structure of liabilities is a significant increase in the share of long-term liabilities in it - from 42% to 63%, while the share of the company's own capital, which remained unchanged in absolute terms decreased from 42% to 31%, which had a positive impact on the financial stability of the enterprise, but increased its financial dependence. Short-term liabilities of the enterprise decreased due to the disappearance of the company's accounts payable, which had a positive impact on its solvency.

Most likely, in the reporting period, the company increased its production base and output through a long-term loan, which also helped pay off creditors. These facts can be assessed as a whole positively, however, it should be recommended to the enterprise to invest more actively in production and reduce financial dependence on attracted capital.

It is worth noting that this summary is only the first in our textbook, and warn readers against mindlessly copying it in their practice. In the future, we will give many more examples of analytical summaries, and very often they will seriously differ from the one above. There are no two identical resumes, since the analysis of financial statements is a creative science!

Analysis of financial statements. Cribs Olshevskaya Natalya

29. Express analysis of financial statements

The purpose of express analysis- a clear and simple assessment of the property status and the effectiveness of the development of an economic entity. This type of analysis can be carried out by the auditor at the preliminary planning stage. audit. Express analysis should be performed in three stages:

1) preparatory;

2) preview financial statements;

3) economic evaluation results of economic activity of the enterprise and its financial condition, i.e. analysis of reporting.

The purpose of the first (preparatory) stage– make a decision on the appropriateness of the analysis of financial statements and make sure they are ready for reading. The first task is solved by preliminary acquaintance with the reporting and the last auditor's report, the second is, to a certain extent, technical in nature. In particular, a visual and simple accounting check of reporting is carried out on formal grounds and in essence: the presence of all necessary forms and applications, details and signatures is determined; the mutual linking of indicators of reporting forms and the main control ratios between them are checked, etc.

The purpose of the second stage(preliminary review of financial statements) - familiarization with the explanatory note to the balance sheet. It has importance to assess working conditions in the reporting period, to identify trends in key performance indicators, as well as to assess qualitative changes in the property and financial position of an economic entity. It is necessary to pay attention to the algorithms for calculating the main indicators. Analyzing trends in key indicators, it is necessary to take into account the influence of some distorting factors, in particular inflation. In addition, it should be noted that the balance sheet itself, being the main reporting and analytical form, is not free from certain restrictions.

The third stage is the main one in express analysis; its purpose is a generalized assessment of the results of the economic activity of the enterprise and its financial condition. This analysis is carried out with varying degrees of detail in the interests of various users.

Chapter 7 The Future of Financial Reporting