This paper presents a comparative financial analysis of two major retail companies, Nordstrom and H&M, evaluated through the lens of long-term career viability. The analysis examines key financial metrics including liquidity ratios, solvency, profit margins, inventory and receivables turnover, return on assets, return on equity, and dividend policy. Additional considerations include each company's accounting standards (GAAP vs. IFRS), geographic diversification, and responses to macroeconomic conditions. The paper concludes that H&M offers stronger overall financials and superior long-term growth prospects, making it the more attractive employer despite its use of IFRS accounting standards.
Both Nordstrom and H&M are highly respected, successful retailers. This paper analyzes the two companies on the basis of which might be the better employer for a long-term career. In the real world, both companies are likely to survive over the long run and will continue to be successful, so the decision would not ultimately come down to financials alone. For the purposes of this analysis, however, the financials will be given significant consideration.
H&M has the stronger financials of the two. Once Swedish crowns are adjusted to USD, H&M's metrics are almost universally better than those of Nordstrom. In terms of liquidity, both companies have a healthy current ratio above 2, so neither faces any immediate risk of short-term liquidity issues that might cause default or financial distress.
In terms of long-run solvency, however, there is a significant difference between the two. H&M has a debt ratio of 0.27, none of which is long-term debt. This compares with Nordstrom, which has a debt ratio of 0.76, including $3.1 billion in long-term debt — representing 38% of its total capital structure. This ratio has remained consistent over the past five years, indicating it is the result of deliberate strategy on Nordstrom's part, as the company has taken on increasing amounts of long-term debt to fund its growth. Clearly, the two companies differ significantly in their risk tolerance, with Nordstrom being considerably more comfortable carrying debt.
In terms of profit margins, H&M carries superior margins on its goods. This is a counterintuitive finding: H&M sells at relatively low prices, which would typically imply thin margins, while Nordstrom targets a higher-end market. However, Nordstrom operates predominantly in the United States, where intense retail competition compresses margins. The bulk of H&M's revenues come from Europe, where competitive intensity is lower, which supports higher margins. As a result, H&M carries a gross margin of 59% and a net margin of nearly 14%. Nordstrom's gross margin is just under 39%, while its net margin is approximately 6%. While these figures are higher than those of discount retailers such as Walmart and Target, they are not as high as one might expect from a retailer with a premium market position.
Nordstrom is the more operationally efficient of the two companies. Its inventory turnover cycle is 67 days, compared with 114 days for H&M. One possible explanation is that Europe's climate is less seasonally distinct than that of most of the United States, reducing the urgency of keeping inventory turnover under 90 days. In the U.S., by contrast, it is critical to manage inventory around four distinct seasons. That said, 114 days still appears high for the clothing industry and should raise a red flag.
"Inventory turnover and receivables collection periods"
"ROTA, ROE, DuPont analysis, and dividends"
"Geographic diversification, accounting standards, macroeconomic outlook"
All told, based on the future prospects for these two companies and their current financials, H&M is the stronger choice for a long-term career. While working at H&M would require engagement with IFRS rather than the more familiar GAAP framework, that is a modest trade-off for the opportunity to work at a well-run company with superior financial metrics and impressive global growth prospects.
You’re 42% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.