Bae Systems Financial Analysis as essay

Download this essay in word format (.doc)

Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formatting

Excerpt from essay:

Clearly the ability to transform critical new product development, supply chain, sourcing and material yield and optimization strategies has paid off, as indicated by the exceptionally strong inventory turns a year in the latest fiscal period (29.78). This was also achieved in FY 2008 and due to several acquisitions during FY 2007 BAE Systems posted 52.31 inventory turns due to the consolidation of financial statements and operations with companies acquired during that time. Finally the metrics illustrate how well BAE is re-architecting key processes to gain high levels of cost efficiencies. This is seen in the trending of Return on Assets (ROA), which in 2005 was 3.03, increasing to 8.52 in 2006 and then dropping to 4.69 in 2007. The FY 2008 timeframe showed exceptional growth with the company reporting 7.58 ROA. On ROE the transition from 20.22 in 2005, to 47.16 in 2006, 17.78 in 2007, and 26.19 in 2008 also illustrates how the overall performance of cost efficiency measures based on process performance significantly improved the performance of the company over time. Finally on ROI, the company increased most consistently on this metric. From 6.57 in 2005, to 7.84 in 2006, 10.38 in 2007, to 13.79 in 2008, the ROI performance has been one of the most consistent over time for the company. This has been anchored in the asset utilization strategies the company continues to pursue and the decision to become an outsource provider on selected processes and systems that are routine and easily controlled for variation (Feeny, Lacity, Willcocks, 2005). When all of these factors are taken into account it is clear to see how BAE Systems has continually excelled across competitive product categories and also in very competitive geographies as well.

Conclusion

Based on the high level of internal process efficiencies, alignment of R&D to core defense markets globally and dominance of the American aerospace and defense market, it is recommended that £.1B be invested in BAE Systems. There are several factors that contribute to this decision. First, the company is attaining performance levels that are exceptional compared to the industry. They have attained this by concentrating on making lean production and Six Sigma engrained into their culture. As the assessment of competitive strengths indicates in this analysis, the company also has a defensible advantage in the market given its level of R&D investment and financial strength in terms of profitability as asset utilization. Further, the ROE and ROI analyses indicate upward trending of asset utilization and indicate Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) is also increasing given the increasing ROI levels as well. Finally the company is well positioned to take advantage of strategic acquisitions and the rising level of global defense spending occurring it is most dominant segments of the market. Finally the quality assurance and ECQM initiatives have given the company the ability to withstand competitive threats in their most critical key accounts. This has become a contributor to the stabilization of their services annuity revenue streams. With all these factors considered and the analysis presented in this report, it is recommended that an investment be made in BAE Systems.

References

John Addey. 2001. Quality management system design: A visionary approach. Total Quality Management 12, no. 7,8, (December 1): 849-854.

Botta, R., and A. Bahill. 2007. A Prioritization Process. Engineering Management Journal 19, no. 4, (December 1): 20-27.

Card, D., K. Domzalski, and G. Davies. 2008. Making Statistics Part of Decision Making in an Engineering Organization. IEEE Software 25, no. 3, (May 1): 37-47.

David Feeny, Mary Lacity, and Leslie P. Willcocks. 2005. Taking the Measure of Outsourcing Providers. MIT Sloan Management Review 46, no. 3, (April 1): 41-48.

BAE looks to fighter jets for growth. 2009. FT.com, November 8, 2009/

Mostafa Jazayeri and Robert W. Scapens. 2008. The Business Values Scorecard within BAE Systems: The evolution of a performance measurement system. The British Accounting Review 40, no. 1, (March 1): 48-70.

Appendix A

2007-2009 Comparative Analysis

Quick Ratio

Current Ratio

Earnings Before Tax Margin %

EBITDA Margin %

Gross Margin %

Inventory Turnover

Net Profit Margin %

Operating Margin %

ROA % (Net)

ROE % (Net)

ROI % (Operating)

Revenue per Employee

Year: 2009

Peer Avg: 0.73

Peer Avg: 1.15

Peer Avg: 10.57

Peer Avg: 14.04

Peer Avg: 16.35

Peer Avg: 21.10

Peer Avg: 6.51

Peer Avg: 8.61

Peer Avg: 5.87

Peer Avg: 24.16

Peer Avg: 22.73

Peer Avg: 293957.33

BAE Systems Plc

0.84

1.09

20.73

28.54

29.78

15.25

11.22

11.04

38.16

20.1

EADS N.V. (France)

0.48

1.53

23.78

3.15

5.08

7.67

2.89

18.04

19.67

General Dynamics Corp.

0.91

1.15

12.3

14.55

12.47

16.01

8.39

12.47

9.06

22.48

25.44

$316,576

Lockheed Martin Corp.

0.71

1.01

10.33

11.61

10.88

23.54

7.53

12.01

10.29

50.64

49.01

$291,878

Northrop Grumman Corp

0.73

0.97

-1.09

1.47

18.26

33

-3.72

-0.33

-3.96

-8.5

-0.59

$273,418

Quick Ratio

Current Ratio

Earnings Before Tax Margin %

EBITDA Margin %

Gross Margin %

Inventory Turnover

Net Profit Margin %

Operating Margin %

ROA % (Net)

ROE % (Net)

ROI % (Operating)

Revenue per Employee

Year: 2008

Peer Avg: 0.73

Peer Avg: 1.15

Peer Avg: 10.57

Peer Avg: 14.04

Peer Avg: 16.35

Peer Avg: 21.10

Peer Avg: 6.51

Peer Avg: 8.61

Peer Avg: 5.87

Peer Avg: 24.16

Peer Avg: 22.73

Peer Avg: 293957.33

BAE Systems Plc

0.84

1.09

20.73

28.54

29.78

15.25

11.22

11.04

38.16

20.1

EADS N.V. (France)

0.48

1.53

23.78

3.15

5.08

7.67

2.89

18.04

19.67

General Dynamics Corp.

0.91

1.15

12.3

14.55

12.47

16.01

8.39

12.47

9.06

22.48

25.44

$316,576

Lockheed Martin Corp.

0.71

1.01

10.33

11.61

10.88

23.54

7.53

12.01

10.29

50.64

49.01

$291,878

Northrop Grumman Corp

0.73

0.97

-1.09

1.47

18.26

33

-3.72

-0.33

-3.96

-8.5

-0.59

$273,418

Quick Ratio

Current Ratio

Earnings Before Tax Margin %

EBITDA Margin %

Gross Margin %

Inventory Turnover

Net Profit Margin %

Operating Margin %

ROA % (Net)

ROE % (Net)

ROI % (Operating)

Revenue per Employee

Year: 2007

Peer Avg: 0.87

Peer Avg: 1.33

Peer Avg: 11.70

Peer Avg: 16.15

Peer Avg: 14.30

Peer Avg: 25.34

Peer Avg: 6.28

Peer Avg: 8.19

Peer Avg: 6.64

Peer Avg: 19.32

Peer Avg: 17.77

Peer Avg: 295466.67

BAE Systems Plc

1.21

1.49

17.29

29.21

52.31

12.61

11.44

9.4

35.62

20.79

EADS N.V. (France)

0.53

1.66

16.25

3.22

-1.68

-2.11

-0.89

-4.99

-4.48

General Dynamics Corp.

1.1

1.34

11.19

13.53

11.43

17.55

7.61

11.43

8.61

19.19

22.92

$326,228

Lockheed Martin Corp.

0.77

1.11

9.95

10.69

10.11

24.81

7.25

10.81

10.61

36.35

35.46

$299,014

Northrop Grumman Corp

0.74

1.05

8.39

11.16

19.41

28.81

5.59

9.39

5.48

10.44

14.14

$261,158

Appendix B

BAE Systems PLC Ratio Analysis (1999-2008)

Profitability Ratios

12/31/2008

12/31/2007

12/31/2006

12/31/2005

12/31/2004

12/31/2003

12/31/2002

12/31/2001

12/31/2000

12/31/1999

ROA % (Net)

7.58

4.69

8.52

3.03

0.04

-4.18

-0.77

-0.07

2.45

ROE % (Net)

26.19

17.78

47.16

20.22

0.11

-11.14

-1.94

-0.18

6.91

ROI % (Operating)

13.79

10.38

7.84

6.57

3.08

-4.18

4.1

1.78

7.52

EBITDA Margin %

19.58

14.58

10.39

11.02

11.15

Calculated Tax Rate %

25.43

27.13

24.8

16.24

26.88

EBT<n
EBT<n
EBT<n
27.01

Liquidity Indicators

Quick Ratio

0.58

0.6

0.65

0.49

0.49

0.62

0.65

0.71

0.6

0.72

Current Ratio

0.75

0.74

0.79

0.68

0.68

0.9

0.91

1.08

0.97

1.2

Net Current Assets % TA

-10.6

-12.16

-9.03

-14.15

-15.04

-4.37

-3.89

3.06

-1.08

7.72

Debt Management

LT Debt to Equity

0.36

0.37

0.67

1.26

0.79

0.31

0.34

0.32

0.15

0.16

Total Debt to Equity

0.38

0.42

0.75

1.58

1.15

0.45

0.53

0.51

0.48

0.43

Interest Coverage

11.36

11.35

74.21

55.65

56.96

1.33

2.43

1.66

Asset Management

Total Asset Turnover…[continue]

Cite This Essay:

"Bae Systems Financial Analysis As" (2009, November 23) Retrieved December 10, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bae-systems-financial-analysis-as-17139

"Bae Systems Financial Analysis As" 23 November 2009. Web.10 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bae-systems-financial-analysis-as-17139>

"Bae Systems Financial Analysis As", 23 November 2009, Accessed.10 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bae-systems-financial-analysis-as-17139

Other Documents Pertaining To This Topic

  • Strategic Financial Management

    market capitalization of 23.011 billion, Boeing is the nation's largest producer of commercial aircraft and the world's leading aerospace company. It operates in four principal segments: Commercial Airplanes, Military Aircraft and Missile Systems, Space and Communications, and Boeing Capital Corporation. As the world's market for air travel fluctuates with the risk of war, so do Boeing's revenues. However, as the United States moves towards a footing that may include

  • IFRS U S GAAP Comparative Report the

    For example, there are many SEC registered companies, and they are not all American companies. Many of them are actually headquartered in foreign countries. In the past they had to change their accounting and financial information over to GAAP requirements, but changes are allowing companies to continue to use IFRS instead. Some of the U.S. based companies are also going to be allowed to use IFRS in order to

  • Health Care System United States

    These stakeholders are also vital in the promotion of the application of standards-based technology. This is critical as it enhances the safety and security of the citizens as they pursue low-cost health care services and products within the context of the United States. The federal and state governments have also been influential in the development and implementation of policies towards addressing security and privacy issues in relation to the utilization

  • Investment Management After Holding a

    29% 2.1 Man Group 12.56% 12.94% 2.34% 1.5 Marks & Spencer Group 4.60% 17.10% 8.33% 0.8 Meggitt 2.62% 65.59% 4.64% 1.0 Morrison (Wm) Supermarkets 3.66% 13.23% 7.00% 0.4 3.05% 69.65% 25.61% 0.6 Old Mutual 3.24% 26.38% 0.41% 1.5 Pearson 3.77% 50.96% 8.51% 0.8 Petrofac Ltd. 2.15% 62.80% 11.03% 1.5 Prudential 3.47% 14.73% 0.54% 1.6 Randgold Resources Ltd. 0.45% 20.71% 14.89% 0.4 Reckitt Benckiser Group 3.57% 0.00% 12.35% 0.6 Reed Elsevier 4.10% 54.47% 34.72% 0.8 Resolution Ltd. 8.21% 0.00% -0.05% 1.0 Rexam 3.43% 23.66% 6.14% 0.8 Rio Tinto 2.66% 15.32% 4.87% 1.7 Rolls-Royce Holdings 2.16% 33.86% 5.18% 2.1 RSA Insurance Group 8.88% 15.67% 1.89% 1.0 SABMiller 2.01% 23.13% 6.16% 1.0 Sage Group 3.39% 6.89% 0.9 Sainsbury (J) 5.00% 11.50% 5.61% 0.8 Schroders 2.68% 8.82% 2.27% 1.4 Schroders (Non-Voting) 3.45% 8.82% 2.27% 0.8 Severn Trent 4.18% 7.81% 3.56% 0.4 Smith & Nephew 1.81% 41.03% 12.26% 0.8 Smiths Group 3.52% 44.25% 10.58% 1.1 Standard Chartered 3.20% 13.15% 0.81% 1.3 Standard Life 6.25% 12.32% 0.19% 1.1 Tate & Lyle 3.44% 16.67% 5.34% 0.6 Tesco 4.49% 16.36% 5.62% 0.7 Tullow Oil 0.83% 30.01% 6.10% 1.3 United Utilities Group 5.05% 7.08% 4.91% 0.4 Vedanta Resources 2.79% 13.60% 2.67% 2.2 Vodafone Group 5.25% 13.41% 5.27% 0.4 Whitbread 2.44% 17.73% 8.01% 0.8 Wolseley 1.91% 14.80% 3.44% 1.3 WPP 2.93% 73.30% 3.34% 1.2 Optimal Portfolio After carefully analyzing the table 1 and calculating the financial measures of all stocks in Table 1, we select one high performing stock from every industry listed to have well diversified portfolio. Based on our

  • Boeing vs Airbus This Paper Focuses on

    Boeing vs. Airbus This paper focuses on Boeing and Airbus. Firstly, the paper discusses the background of both companies and assesses their current performance via SWOT analysis. Secondly, the paper reviews and evaluates the current problem facing both Boeing and Airbus. Thirdly, the paper evaluates alternative policy actions taken by both Boring and Airbus. Lastly, the paper provides recommendations for action. Case background and situation analysis: About Airbus The European Aerospace Company (EADS) has

  • Strategic Management of Huntington Ingalls

    The company conducts research and development on several programs such as on-site warfare testing, and laboratory research for the next generation aircrafts. The company also conducts R&D on the application of new technologies to build aircraft and submarines as well as implementing effective R&D on mechanical and electrical system for the new equipment. Despite the competitive strategic advantages that the company is enjoying, there are external environment affecting the business

  • Lockheed Aerospace Lockheed Martin Aerospace

    This continues act as a barrier to entry for aerospace manufacturers located throughout Asia, specifically China, who are looking to capitalize on increased government spending on defense. The costs associated with hiring, retaining employees and funding security clearances for employees in this industry makes recruitment and retention critical. As a result of all these factors combined the barriers to entry are exceptionally high in the global military aerospace products


Read Full Essay
Copyright 2016 . All Rights Reserved