Business and Financial Analysis Case Studies BFA302
- Subject Code :
BFA302
DEGREE: MSC in Finance and Investment (UCA)
Module: Business and Financial Analysis
Assignment Title: Business and Financial Analysis Case Studies Assignment Type: Essay
Plagiarism:
When submitting work for assessment, students should be aware of the Inter Active/Canvas guidance and regulations in concerning plagiarism. All submissions should be your own, original work.
You must submit an electronic copy of your work. Your submission will be electronically checked.
Learner declaration |
I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own and research sources are fully acknowledged. Student signature: Date: |
Harvard Referencing:
The Harvard Referencing System must be used. The Wikipedia, UKEssays.com or similar websites must not be used or referenced in your work.
Introduction :
This assignment aims to assess your business and financial analysis expertise through a series of case studies, enabling you to apply these skills in practical, real-world scenarios. You are required to download the annual reports from the past three years for two selected companies (Excludes Banks and financial services companies) listed in the NYSE TOP US 100 Index. Utilize these reports to address the following case studies, employing various analytical tools as specified below:
- As a credit risk analyst at Bank of America , you specialize in evaluating corporate loan applications. Two corporate clients, owners of the selected companies listed on the NYSE, have requested $20 million in You need to analyze their financial status using common size statement analysis (both vertical and horizontal). Additionally, assess their financial health by examining liquidity, solvency, profitability, asset management efficiency, and stock market value through financial ratios. Compare these results with industry averages to decide whether to approve or reject the loan applications. LO1, LO4.
- As a financial consultant at Deloitte, you have been approached by two companies fromthe selected NYSE-listed firms seeking advice on their business and financial risk exposure. Utilize the Altman Z-score model to predict the likelihood of bankruptcy for both companies, providing insights into their financial stability and potential risks. Assess their business risk exposure and the degree of financial and operating Review their cash flow statements and calculate key ratios, including cash flow and free cash flow (FCF) ratios. Based on this analysis, advise which company has a higher exposure to business and financial risk. LO2, LO4.
- Asa financial manager at Volkswagen in Germany, you are tasked with advising top management on expanding and diversifying businesses into the US market by acquiring one of the two selected companies listed in the NYSE TOP 100 Index. Calculate the fair value of both companies using the Free Cash Flow (FCF) model and compare these values with their market values. Provide a recommendation on which company to acquire based on this analysis. LO3, LO4.
- Asa financial advisor at JPMorgan Chase , a client has sought your technical advice on investing in one of the two selected NYSE-listed companies. Utilize the Dividend Discount Model (DDM) and Free Cash Flow (FCF) models to assess the intrinsic value of the stocks. Advise the client on which stock is a better investment and explain your reasoning.LO3, LO4.
Note: For grading purposes, it is essential to include all relevant formulas, calculations, interpretations, analyses, conclusions, recommendations, and decision-making processes in your report.
READING LISTS1
Essential Johnson G and Scholes K. 2005. Exploring Corporate Strategy 7th edition Prentice Hall
Fridson, M.S. and Alvarez, F. 2005 Financial Statement Analysis Workbook: A Practitioners Guide, 4th Edition. Wiley. ISBN: 978-0-470-64003-6
Palepu, K.G., Healy, P.M., Wright, S., Bradbury, M. and Coulton, J., 2020. Business analysis and valuation: Using financial statements. Cengage AU.
Wahlen, J.M., Baginski, S.P. and Bradshaw, M.T., 2018. Financial reporting, financial statement analysis, and valuation: A strategic perspective. Cengage learning.
Rashid, C.A., 2018. Efficiency of financial ratios analysis for evaluating companies liquidity. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 4(4), p.110.
Fridson, M.S. and Alvarez, F., 2022. Financial statement analysis: a practitioner's guide. John Wiley & Sons.
GRADING DESCRIPTORS: LEVEL 7
EXPERIMENTATION & INNOVATION |
||||||||
FAIL |
PASS |
|||||||
Threshold Criteria |
0- 29% |
30- 39% |
40- 49% |
50- 59% |
60- 69% |
70- 79% |
80- 89% |
90- 100% |
Deals with complex issues both systematically and creatively demonstrating self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems |
Little to no ability to use techniques to deal with complex issues systematically (including those of ethics and sustainability) and creatively to solve problems and/or make decisions. |
Low utilisation of established techniques to deal with complex issues systematically (including those of ethics and sustainability) and creatively to solve problems and/or make decisions, but with limitations in techniques or approach. |
Limited research or advanced scholarship to their area of study by using a range of information and established and advanced techniques |
Competent understanding of solving problems, through own research or advanced scholarship displaying a comprehensive understanding of established and advanced techniques |
Good understanding of solving problems through own research and advanced scholarship critically selecting and displaying a comprehensive understanding of established and advanced techniques. |
Very Good problem-solving skills displaying a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship |
Excellent range of extremely well- developed problem- solving displaying an understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship beyond which is taught. |
Exceptional problem-solving skills with sophisticated evaluation and application of a wide range of advanced information and techniques to undertake projects. |
Comprehensive |
Little to no |
Low |
Limited |
Competent |
Good understanding |
Very good |
Excellent |
Exceptional |
understanding of |
understanding of |
understanding of |
understanding of |
understanding of |
of techniques |
understanding of |
understanding of |
understanding of |
techniques applicable to their |
techniques applicable to their own research |
techniques applicable to their own research |
key techniques applicable to their |
techniques applicable to their own research |
applicable to their own research or |
techniques applicable to their own research |
techniques applicable to their own research |
techniques applicable to their |
own research or |
or advanced |
or advanced |
own research or |
or advanced |
advanced scholarship |
or advanced |
or advanced |
own research or |
advanced |
scholarship or their |
scholarship including |
advanced |
scholarship including |
and a some |
scholarship and a |
scholarship and |
advanced |
scholarship |
limitations and |
their limitations and |
scholarship including |
their limitations and |
understanding of |
some understanding |
mastery of some |
scholarship and |
ambiguities. |
ambiguities. |
their limitations and ambiguities. |
ambiguities |
more specialised techniques. |
of more specialised techniques. |
more specialised areas. |
mastery of some more specialised |
|
areas. |
GRADING DESCRIPTORS: LEVEL 7
RESEARCH & ANALYSIS |
||||||||
FAIL |
PASS |
|||||||
Threshold Criteria |
0- 29% |
30- 39% |
40- 49% |
50- 59% |
60- 69% |
70- 79% |
80- 89% |
90- 100% |
Systematic |
Little to no |
Low knowledge of |
Limited knowledge to |
Competent |
Good knowledge of |
Very good knowledge |
Excellent knowledge |
Exceptional |
understanding of |
knowledge of the |
the subject lacking |
deal with terminology, |
knowledge of ideas |
ideas or arguments at |
of ideas or arguments |
of ideas or arguments |
knowledge of ideas |
knowledge, and a |
subject with limited |
coherence, breadth, |
facts and concepts |
or arguments at the |
the forefront of any |
at the forefront of |
at the forefront of |
or arguments at the |
critical awareness of |
breadth or depth or |
or detail with only |
some of which is |
forefront of any |
part of the subject |
the subject some of |
the subject many of |
forefront of the |
current problems |
deficiencies in major |
some reference to |
informed by the |
part of the subject |
showing a clear, |
which are |
which are |
subject most of which |
and/or new insights, |
areas or currency. |
ideas or arguments at |
forefront of defined |
sufficient to deal |
critical insight into |
significantly beyond |
significantly beyond |
are significantly |
much of which is at, |
the forefront of any |
areas of the subject. |
with current issues |
the discipline as |
what has been taught |
what has been taught |
beyond what has |
|
or informed by, the |
part of the subject. |
in the discipline, |
whole and current |
and show a critical |
and show a critical |
been taught and |
||
forefront of their |
generally more |
issues/problems. |
insight into the |
insight into the |
show a critical insight |
|||
academic discipline, |
descriptive than |
discipline and current |
discipline and current |
into the discipline |
||||
field of study or area |
critical or |
issues/problems. |
issues/problems. |
and current |
||||
of professional |
analytical. |
issues/problems. |
||||||
practice |
||||||||
Conceptual |
Little to no conceptual |
Low conceptual |
Limited conceptual |
Competent |
Good conceptual |
Very good conceptual |
Excellent conceptual |
Exceptional |
understanding that |
understanding or |
understanding and |
understanding and |
conceptual |
understanding which |
understanding which |
understanding which |
conceptual |
enables the student |
argument and a focus |
arguments are weak |
argument |
understanding and |
critically evaluate and |
systematically |
critically apply a wide |
understanding of |
to display originality |
on descriptive |
or poorly |
construction with |
argument |
synthesise other |
synthesises a wide |
range of views |
publishable quality |
in the application of |
explanations which |
constructed, and the |
critical evaluation of |
construction with |
views and |
range of views with a |
through a perceptive |
with systematic |
knowledge |
do not comment on |
work does not |
alternative views or |
critical evaluation |
information with a |
critical insight into |
use of advanced |
engagement and |
arguments of others |
critically evaluate the |
comment on advanced |
of a range of views |
thoughtful |
advanced |
scholarship. |
usage of advanced |
|
or alternative views. |
arguments of others |
scholarship. |
and consistent |
interpretation of |
scholarship. |
scholarship. |
||
or consider |
engagement with |
advanced |
||||||
alternative views. |
advanced |
scholarship. |
||||||
scholarship. |
GRADING DESCRIPTORS: LEVEL 7
ENGAGING WITH PRACTICE |
||||||||
FAIL |
PASS |
|||||||
Threshold Criteria |
0- 29% |
30- 39% |
40- 49% |
50- 59% |
60- 69% |
70- 79% |
80- 89% |
90- 100% |
Practical |
Little to no evidence |
Low evidence of |
Limited |
Competent |
Good background |
Very good, |
Excellent |
Exceptional |
understanding of |
of background |
background |
background |
investigation, |
investigation, |
independent, |
independent, |
investigation, |
how established |
investigation, |
investigation, |
investigation, |
analysis, research, |
analysis, research, |
extensive and |
extensive and |
analysis, research, |
techniques of |
analysis, research, |
analysis, research, |
analysis, research, |
enquiry, ethical |
enquiry, ethical |
appropriate |
appropriate |
enquiry, ethical |
research and |
enquiry, ethical |
enquiry, ethical |
enquiry , ethical |
awareness, and/or |
awareness, and/or |
investigation, |
investigation, |
awareness, and/or |
enquiry are used |
awareness, and/or |
awareness, and/or |
awareness, and/or |
study using |
study using |
analysis, research, |
analysis, research, |
study which |
to create and |
study. |
study. |
study using |
established |
established |
enquiry, ethical |
enquiry, ethical |
demonstrates |
interpret |
established |
techniques |
techniques |
awareness, and/or |
awareness, and/or |
carefully considered |
||
knowledge in the |
techniques, with |
accurately, and can |
accurately, and |
study beyond the |
study well beyond |
depth and breadth |
||
discipline |
the ability to |
critically appraise and |
possesses a well- |
usual range, and |
the usual range, and |
and critically |
||
extract relevant |
use academic |
developed ability to |
critically evaluates |
critically evaluates |
synthesises this to |
|||
points. |
sources. |
critically appraise a |
this to advance the |
this to advance the |
advance the work |
|||
wide range of |
work and/or direct |
work and/or direct |
and/or direct |
|||||
sources. |
arguments. |
arguments. |
arguments. |
|||||
Originality in |
Little to no technical, |
Low technical, |
Limited |
Competent technical, |
Good technical, |
Very good range of |
Excellent range of |
Exceptional range of |
the |
creative or artistic |
creative or artistic |
technical, |
creative or artistic |
creative or artistic |
technical, creative or |
technical, creative or |
technical, creative or |
application of |
skills related to their |
skills related to their |
creative or |
skills required for |
skills required for |
artistic skills. |
artistic skills |
artistic skills |
knowledge |
area of study. |
area of study. |
artistic skills |
area of study. |
area of study. |
|||
required for |
||||||||
area of study. |
||||||||
Independently |
Little to no |
Low contribution to |
Limited contribution |
Competent |
Good contribution to |
Very good |
Excellent |
Exceptional |
advance your own |
contribution to group |
group activity and/or |
to group activity |
contribution to group |
group activity and/or |
contribution to group |
contribution to group |
contribution to group |
knowledge and |
activity and/or |
undertaking further |
and/or undertaking |
activity and/or |
independently |
activity and/or |
activity and/or |
activity and/or |
understanding, and |
undertaking further |
training at a |
further training at a |
independently |
undertakes further |
independently |
independently |
independently |
to develop new |
training at a |
high/advanced level. |
high/advanced level. |
undertakes further |
training at a |
undertakes further |
undertakes further |
undertakes further |
skills to a high |
high/advanced level. |
training at a |
high/advanced level |
training at a |
training at a |
training at a |
||
level. |
high/advanced level. |
with an |
high/advanced level |
high/advanced level |
high/advanced level |
|||
understanding of |
with an |
with teamwork and |
with teamwork and |
|||||
team roles |
understanding of |
leadership |
strong leadership. |
|||||
team roles |
GRADING DESCRIPTORS: LEVEL 7
REALISATION & COMMUNICATION |
||||||||
FAIL |
PASS |
|||||||
Threshold Criteria |
0- 29% |
30- 39% |
40- 49% |
50- 59% |
60- 69% |
70- 79% |
80- 89% |
90- 100% |
Communicate |
Little to no clarity in |
Low clarity in the |
Limited clarity in the |
Competent |
Good, confident and |
Very good, confident |
Excellent |
Exceptional |
information, ideas, |
the communication |
communication of |
communication of |
communication of |
clear communication |
and clear |
communication of |
communication of |
problems and |
of ideas, problems |
ideas, problems and |
ideas, problems and |
ideas, problems and |
of ideas, problems |
communication of |
ideas, problems and |
ideas, problems and |
solutions to both |
and solutions to |
solutions to |
solutions to |
solutions to |
and solutions to |
ideas, problems and |
solutions to |
solutions to |
specialist and non- |
audiences. |
audiences. |
audiences. |
audiences. |
audiences in a range |
solutions to |
audiences in a range |
audiences in a range |
specialist audiences. |
of means / media. |
audiences in a range |
of means / media. |
of means / media. |
||||
of means / media. |
GRADING DESCRIPTORS: LEVEL 7
PERSONAL & PROFESSIONAL CONNECTIVITY |
||||||||
FAIL |
PASS |
|||||||
Threshold Criteria |
0- 29% |
30- 39% |
40- 49% |
50- 59% |
60- 69% |
70- 79% |
80- 89% |
90- 100% |
Independently advance your own knowledge and understanding, and develop new skills to a high level. |
Little to no contribution to group activity and/or undertaking further training at a high/advanced level. |
Low contribution to group activity and/or undertaking further training at a high/advanced level. |
Limited contribution to group activity and/or undertaking further training at a high/advanced level. |
Competent contribution to group activity and/or independently undertakes further training at a high/advanced level. |
Good contribution to group activity and/or independently undertakes further training at a high/advanced level with an understanding of team roles |
Very good contribution to group activity and/or independently undertakes further training at a high/advanced level with an understanding of team roles |
Excellent contribution to group activity and/or independently undertakes further training at a high/advanced level with teamwork and leadership |
Exceptional contribution to group activity and/or independently undertakes further training at a high/advanced level with teamwork and strong leadership. |
Qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring: (a) the exercise of initiative, ethical and personal responsibility (b) decision- making in complex and unpredictable contexts |
Little to no ability to manage learning and/or exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility and/or decision- making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Low ability to manage learning and/or exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility and/or decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Limited ability to manage learning and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Competent ability to manage learning, and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Good ability to systematically manage learning, and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Very good ability to systematically manage learning, and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations. |
Excellent ability to manage learning on own initiative, and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Exceptional ability to manage learning on own initiative, and exercise initiative, ethical and personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations |
Little to no use of appropriate terminology, limited vocabulary and many errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. |
Low use of appropriate terminology, with many errors in spelling, vocabulary and syntax. |
Limited expression, style and appropriate vocabulary with errors in spelling, grammar and syntax which affect understanding. |
Competent expression, style, and appropriate vocabulary with some errors in spelling, grammar and syntax which do not affect understanding. |
Good expression, style and appropriate vocabulary with some errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. |
Very good expression, style and appropriate vocabulary with minimal errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. |
Excellent expression, style and appropriate vocabulary with minimal errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. |
Exceptional expression, style and appropriate vocabulary with no errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. |
|
Little to no evidence of basic numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills |
Low evidence of basic numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
Limited evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
Adequate evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
Good evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
Very good evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills |
Excellent evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
Exceptional evidence of numeracy or digital literacy, hardware and software skills competency. |
competency. |
competency. |
|||||||
Does not demonstrate achievement of professional competence when assessed against the requirements of a professional, statutory or regulatory body (PSRB). |
The student has demonstrated achievement of professional competence when assessed against the requirements of a PSRB. |
|||||||
Inaccurate use of terminology with limited vocabulary and many errors in spelling, grammar and syntax. Inaccurate terminology, with many errors in spelling, vocabulary and syntax. |
The student has adhered to the appropriate rules and/or conventions set by regulators or the industry. |
Performance criteria |
Feedback and questions |