Corporate Financial Analysis and Decision Making BUS3015
- Subject Code :
BUS3015
Assignment 1: financial performance | Group
Due: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 17:00Due: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 17:00
Ungraded, 30 Possible Points30Points Possible
Attempt
In Progress
NEXT UP: Submit assignment
Add comment
Unlimited Attempts Allowed
Details
|
This assignment gives you an opportunity to leverage on the existing knowledge in the financial performance research and the skill you developed while learning the financial statements and their ratios. The objective is to synthesise the effect of capital structure on firm performance. In other words, you will be able to estimate the direction and magnitude of the capital structure on the firms financial performance. In doing so, you can advise the management on the risks associated with different sources of fund to finance a business. |
Here is how you can achieve the objective.
This is a group assignment. You can complete this task in a group of not more than four members, ideally within the same lab session.
- Download relevant data for 100 Australian companies over a 10-year period. Seeactivity 2.2.1to get an idea. The data should include, but not limited to, the followings.
- Total assets.
- Industry type of each company in your list.
- Net profit margin.
- Return on asset.
- Return on equity.
- Total revenue.
Consider other variables that you think can affect or correlated with firms profitability. You could treat them as control variables. You can look at step 3 to get a better idea.
Watch thisvideoon how to download data from LSEG Workspace using Excel. This is the task fromactivity 3.3.
- Go to Science Direct collection at ECU Library. You will need your ECU access credential to log into the database. Here is the link to the repository.
https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.ecu.edu.au/
- Search for related research articles on capital structure and firm performance. You will use some of them as a foundation for your own analysis. Use the following questions to guide your endeavour. These questions will assist you to make your analysis relevant.
-
- What are the findings?
- What are the variables, including the control variables, they use and why?
- What are the limitations of these existing studies?
- How would your analysis extend the existing research?
- Create a regression model for your analysis.
- Using the model in step 4, run a regression analysis, correlation test (i.e., produce a correlation matrix for the variables in the model). Answer the following questions.
-
- Does the capital structure affect firm performance?
- If it does, what is the magnitude and the direction of the effect?
- Is there any other variable in your model demonstrates a statistically significant effect? Discuss.
- Write a 1500-word report on your analysis. The professional report is to be presented to an intelligent, non-specialist audience. You can use these headings to structure your report.
- Results, discussion, and recommendation.
- Limitations and conclusion.
You may be tempted to simulate the writing structure of the academic literature that you read in step 2. Thats a good sign. However, your report is intended for managerial level decision makers. They dont need standardised beta andp-values. They need actionable results. Include persuasive data visualisation where necessary. What we mean here is - use charts ????.
View Rubric
|
Financial performance analysis |
||
|
Financial performance analysis |
||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Points |
|
Introduction view longer description |
5 to >4 pts High distinction The introduction is comprehensive, succinct and compelling with seamless links between the main elements. The conclusion of findings is systematically, analytically and insightfully provided. 4 to >3.5 pts Distinction The introduction is thorough and contains all required elements of an introduction. The introduction links the main elements well. A strong conclusion is provided, covering all key points. 3.5 to >3 pts Credit Provides a clear and appropriate introduction to the report including information on the chosen company. Most of the elements of an introduction are covered (information on the chosen company, scope, key findings, purpose and an overview of the report structure). 3 to >2.5 pts Pass A superficial introduction to the report is provided. The conclusion is not convincing in its summary of the report and some key points are missing. 2.5 to >0 pts Fail The introduction does not clearly relate to the topic and/or does not introduce the report adequately. Conclusion and/or introduction is inadequate and/or not provided. |
/ 5 pts |
|
Methodology |
10 to >8 pts High distinction Shows a deep and insightful understanding of ratios, items, and the statistical analysis. An acknowledgement of the data structure such as missing values and the outliers is presence, and appropriate remedies are taken. 8 to >7 pts Distinction Shows a strong understanding of ratios, items, and the statistical analysis. An acknowledgement of the data structure such as missing values and the outliers is presence. 7 to >6 pts Credit Shows a working understanding of ratios, items, and the statistical method. 6 to >5 pts Pass Shows a functional understanding of ratios, items, and the statistical method. Analysis is mainly descriptive and may have some inconsistent analysis apparent. 5 to >0 pts Fail Shows little to no OR incorrect understanding of ratios, items, and statistical analysis. |
/ 10 pts |
|
Results, discussion and recommendations, limitation and conclusion |
10 to >8 pts High distinction Shows a deep and insightful understanding of the statistical methods, ratios, and other key metrics. The discussion and recommendations coherent and substantive. The conclusion and limitation are systematically, analytically and insightfully communicated. 8 to >7 pts Distinction Shows a strong understanding of the statistical methods, ratios, and other key metrics. The discussion and recommendations are coherent with a good depth of analysis of the result. A strong conclusion is provided, covering all key points and mirroring the introduction. The limitations are acknowledged and substantively discussed. 7 to >6 pts Credit Shows working understanding of the statistical methods, ratios, and other key metrics. The discussion and recommendations are coherent. The conclusion is provided covering the key points and limitations are acknowledged. 6 to >5 pts Pass Shows functional understanding of the statistical methods, ratios, and other key metrics. Provides descriptive levels of analysis. The conclusion is limited and missing key summaries of the report. 5 to >0 pts Fail Shows little to no OR incorrect understanding of the statistical methods, ratios, and other key metrics. Provides descriptive levels of analysis. The conclusion is inadequate OR is not provided. |
/ 10 pts |
|
Contextual language view longer description |
5 to >4 pts High distinction Virtually free of mechanical errors. Vocabulary is sophisticated and business, academic and/or disciplinary terminology is used to convey nuanced and enhanced meaning. Writing has a sophisticated structure and highly logical order. Sophisticated and seamless transitional expression and other signposts enhance readability as well as advanced use of headings and subheadings, which organise content to guide the reader through the whole report. The writing is fluent, sophisticated and skilfully communicates meaning. 4 to >3.5 pts Distinction Writing has minimal mechanical errors. Writes with a varied vocabulary where business, academic and/or disciplinary terminology conveys meaning with fluency. Writing has a well-balanced structure and cohesive and logical order. Effective use of smooth transitional expressions and other signposts support readability as well as well-developed use of headings and subheadings, which organise content to guide the reader through the report. Meaning is conveyed cohesively and concisely. 3.5 to >3 pts Credit Some mechanical errors are still evident. Writes with a wide vocabulary. Business, academic and/or disciplinary terminology is used consistently and correctly most of the time. Writing has a clear structure and logical order, with consistent use of transitions to link sections. Acceptable use of headings and subheadings, which in part organise content to guide the reader. The meaning is clear. 3 to >2.5 pts Pass Inconsistent use of mechanical elements of writing. Vocabulary is basic. Business, academic and/or disciplinary terminology is used correctly and contextually most of the time. The writing structure is basic but logical; however, there is inconsistent linkage of ideas, concepts and sections and the transitional connections are not always clear. Use of headings and subheadings to distinguish main structural elements but needs improvement to guide the reader. The meaning is not always clear. 2.5 to >0 pts Fail Numerous mechanical errors. Vocabulary is limited and there is incorrect use of discipline terminology or it is used out of context. Writing is not balanced, the structure is not logical and there is no linkage between ideas, concepts and sections. The report is very difficult to read and/or fails to follow the structure outlined. Paragraphs are unfocused, incoherent or lack transition of thoughts. Headings are not used. The written communication issues significantly interfere with the meaning. |
/ 5 pts |
|
Total points: 0 |
||
