JSC "Arsenal" (EXAMPLE)

as of 01.01.2015

Taking into account the variety of financial processes, the plurality of indicators of financial stability, the difference in the level of their critical assessments, the emerging degree of deviation from them of the actual values ​​of the coefficients and the resulting difficulties in the overall assessment of the financial stability of enterprises, an integral scoring is carried out.

The essence of the methodology lies in the classification of enterprises according to the level of risk, i.e. any analyzed enterprise can be assigned to a certain class, depending on the "scored" number of points, based on the actual values ​​of financial stability indicators.

Criteria for assessing indicators of the financial stability of an enterprise

No. p.p.	Indicators financial condition	Ratings bye- contributors	C R I T E R I I
			higher	lower	Decrease Conditions criteria
1	Absolute liquidity ratio (L2)	20	0.5 and above - 20 points	less than 0.1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points reduction compared to from 0.5, removed by 4 points
2	Critical coefficient grades (P3)	18	1.5 and above - 18 points	less than 1.0 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points reduction compared to from 1.5, removed by 3 points
3	current coefficient liquidity (L4)	16,5	2.0 and above - 16.5 points	less than 1.0 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points reduction compared to from 2.0, removed by 1.5 points
4	Financial independence (U12)	17	0.6 and above - 17 points	less than 0.4 - 0 points	For every 0.01 points reduction compared to from 0.6, removed by 0.8 points
5	Security ratio own sources of financing (U1)	15	0.5 and above - 15 points	less than 0.1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points reduction compared to from 0.5, removed by 3 points
6	Financial independence in terms of stock formation and costs (U24)	13,5	1.0 and above - 13.5 points	less than 0.5 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points reduction compared to from 1.0, removed by 2.5 points
Total:		100,0	100,0	0

Classification of financial stability by the amount of points

The number of points scored characterizing financial stability

Indicators financial condition	01.01.2014		01.01.2015
	Actual values	Number of points	Actual values	Number of points
1. Absolute liquidity ratio (L2)	0.233	9.32	0.413	16.52
2. Coefficient of critical evaluation (P3)	0.239	0	0.429	0
3. Current liquidity ratio (L4)	1.387	7.31	2.202	16.5
4. Financial independence ratio (U12)	0.43	3.4	0.601	17
5. Coefficient of provision with own sources of financing (U1)	124.245	15	124.459	15
6. The coefficient of financial independence in terms of the formation of reserves and costs (U24)	0.943	12.08	1.474	13.5
		47.11		78.52

At the beginning of the period: 01/01/2014: 4th class of financial stability

The company has a satisfactory financial condition close to bankruptcy. The risk of partner relationships with this enterprise is very significant.

At the end of the period: 01/01/2015: 2nd class of financial stability

The company is in good financial condition. There is an insignificant level of risk in the relationship of partners with this enterprise.

In agricultural enterprises, financial stability and security is difficult for the following reasons:

Lack of a constant stream of income due to the volatility of market activity for agricultural products;

The specificity of commodity production in the industry contains a set of risk conditions, which is accompanied by the need for interaction of financial mechanisms for neutralization;

Low liquidity of fixed capital and turnover of the organization's funds.

Negative correlation of comparative indicators of profitability of the capital of agricultural - x. organizations and interest rates on credit resources;

Lack of mechanisms for regulating pricing processes for production (financial) resources and agricultural products (variability of the ratio of receivables and payables).

There is a technique integral assessment financial position of the agricultural enterprise. The interpretation of the values ​​(changes) of the set of financial indicators considered in the methods described above is summarized in the table below.

Table - Summary coefficients for the integral analysis of the financial condition

Group of coefficients	Description and interpretation
Business activity ratios	Demonstrate the operational efficiency of the enterprise. Usually calculated on the basis of working capital items such as inventories, receivables or payables. A high inventory/sales ratio may indicate operational difficulties and a high probability of default
Liability coverage	Cash flow/interest ratio or some other measure of liability. High coverage of obligations reduces the probability of default.
Growth Variables	Usually they include revenue growth. These variables show the stability of the enterprise. The probability of default increases both in the case of a rapid growth and in the event of a rapid decline.
Leverage ratios	Includes equity/assets ratio or liability/assets ratio. High leverage increases the probability of default.
Liquidity ratios	They include money ratio and liquid securities/liabilities, current liquidity ratio. They show whether the company's liquid assets are comparable to its assets or liabilities. High liquidity reduces the probability of default.
Profitability ratios	These include ratios that have the numerator net income, net income excluding extraordinary items, profit before tax, or operating income, and the denominator - the total value of assets, tangible assets, fixed assets or revenue. High profitability reduces the risk of default
Enterprise size	May be valued at total asset value or revenue recalculated at prices of a particular base year to ensure comparability. Large enterprises less prone to default.

To complete the assessment of the financial condition, calculations are carried out to determine the integral assessment of the financial position of an agricultural enterprise based on methodological recommendations for the analysis of financial and economic activity agricultural producers.

The above requirements are satisfied by the model of the relationship between the probability of an enterprise insolvency (loss of financial stability) and a number of its financial characteristics Moody's RiskCalc of the analytical division of Moody's. Taking into account the results of studies of enterprises in various sectors of the Russian economy, undertaken by Moody's, the rating function, i.e. the analytical type of dependence between the financial stability rating of an enterprise and its determining factors (explanatory variables) is formulated as follows:

Table - Interpretation of explanatory variables Moody's RiskCalc v3.1 Russia for reporting by agricultural producers*

Group	Definition	Communication with f.1,2
Activity (A)	Accounts payable/revenue	Line 1520 f.1 / line 2110 f2 (12 months)
Liability Coverage (CL)	Operating Profit/Liabilities	Line 2200f.2/(line 1450+line 1500 - line 1530); line 2200 f.2 for 12m
Height (P)	Change in sales volume	(St.2110 f.2)1/(St.2110 f.2)0 y-o-y or av0
Leverage (L)	Total Equity/Total Assets, Retained Earnings/Current Liabilities	Line 1300 f.1 / line 1700 f.1; line 1370 f.1/line 1510+line 1520 + line 1550
Liquidity (LC)	Cash and equivalents/Total assets	Line 1240f.1+line 1250f.1)/ line 1600 f.1
Profitability (Rentab)	Return on assets (RoAA)	2*str.2400f.2/[(str.1600f.1)+ (str.1600f.1)1]*365/Т**

In practice, a methodology has been developed for calculating indicators of the financial condition of agricultural producers, as part of the implementation of the Federal Law of July 9, 2002 "On the financial recovery of agricultural producers" .

According to this methodology, the financial condition of agricultural producers is determined using the following coefficients:

Absolute liquidity - calculated as a ratio Money to the amount of liabilities (short-term), accounts payable and other short-term liabilities;

Quick liquidity - calculated as the ratio of the amount of monetary assets and receivables to the volume of short-term liabilities, accounts payable and other short-term liabilities of the economy;

Current liquidity - determined by the ratio total amount current assets to the volume of current liabilities, accounts payable and others;

The provision with own funds is the difference between equity and non-current assets divided by the total of current assets, that is, it shows the share of financing from own sources of current assets;

The value of each of the coefficients is estimated in points in accordance with the methodology.

Security with own funds (Ko), which characterizes the presence of the enterprise's own working capital necessary for its sustainability:

Coverage ratio (Cl), which is characterized by the degree of total coverage by all working capital of the enterprise of the amount of urgent obligations. Regulatory requirement: Kl> 2.

The intensity of the turnover of advanced capital (Ki), which characterizes the volume of sales per ruble of funds (assets) invested in the activities of the enterprise. Normative requirement: Х > 2.5.

Management (efficiency of enterprise management) (Km), which is characterized by the ratio of profit from sales and sales proceeds. The regulatory requirement is indirectly determined by the level of the discount rate of the Central Bank of Russia: R, = 0.13.

Profitability (profitability) of an enterprise (Ren), which characterizes the amount of profit before tax per ruble equity:

Thus, the financial condition can be defined as the result of a system of relations that arise in the process of circulation of funds, as well as the sources of these funds, characterizing the presence of various assets, the amount of liabilities, the ability of an enterprise to function and develop in a changing environment at a certain date. external environment, the current and future ability to meet the requirements of creditors, as well as the investment attractiveness of the company.

1. Civil Code Russian Federation(part one): [adopted by State. Duma 21 Oct. 1994: accessed 15 February 2013]. – M.: Eksmo, 2013. – 412 p.

2. tax code Russian Federation (parts one and two): [adopted by the State. Duma July 19, 2000: accessed February 1, 2013]. - M .: CJSC "GrossMedia Ferlag", 2013. - 432 p.

3. Government program development Agriculture and regulation of markets for agricultural products, raw materials and food for 2013-2020: [approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 14, 2012 - No. 717]. // Official website of the Government of the Russian Federation. - Access mode: http: //www.gov.ru.

4. Abalakina T.V., Financial management[Text]: tutorial/Abalakina T.V., Abramova K.V., Ageeva O.A., ISBN: 978-5-900792-95-8 UMO stamp, 2011

5. Analysis and diagnostics of financial and economic activities of enterprises: a textbook for students. universities on special 080502 "Economics and management at the enterprise" (by industry); add. UMO / ed. V. Ya. Pozdnyakov. - M.: Infra-M, 2013. - 617 p. -( Higher education). - ISBN 978-5-16-003462-1

6. Andreev V.I. Financial management [Text]: a course of lectures / V. I. Andreev. - Saratov: Nauka, 2011. - 152 p.

7. Barylenko V. I. Analysis financial reporting[Text]: textbook vulture umo / Barilenko V. I. ed., Kairo O. V., Kuznetsov S. I., Plotnikova L. K. - M .: KNORUS, 2016. - . 240 s.

8. Brusov, Petr Nikitovich. Financial management. Long-term financial policy. Investments: textbook / P. N. Brusov, T. V. Filatova; FGOBU VPO "Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation". - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M. : Knorus, 2014. - 304 p. - (Bachelor's degree). - ISBN 978-5-406-03083-7

9. Vasilyeva L. S. Financial analysis [Text]: textbook vulture of the Ministry of Education and Science / Vasilyeva L. S., Petrovskaya M. V. - M .: KNORUS, 2016. - . 880 s.

10. Vasina, N.V. Modeling the financial condition of agricultural organizations in assessing their creditworthiness: monograph / N.V. Vasina; scientific ed. O.Yu. Patlasov. - Omsk: Publishing house of NOU VPO OmGA, 2012. - 252 p.

11. Endovitsky D. A. Analysis of the investment attractiveness of the organization [Text]: monograph / Endovitsky D. A. ed. and others - M. : KNORUS, 2016. - . 376 s

12. Endovitsky D.A. Analysis of the creditworthiness of an organization and a group of companies [Text]: textbook / D. A. Endovitsky, K. V. Bakhtin, D. V. Kovtun; ed. D. A. Endovitsky. - M. : KNORUS, 2012. - 376 p.

13. Efimova M.R. Financial calculations. Workshop: study guide / M.R. Efimov. – M.: KNORUS, 2013. – 184 p. ISBN 978-5-390-00070-0

14. Kazakova N.A. Financial analysis [Text]: textbook and workshop / N.A. Kazakova. - M .: Yurayt Publishing House, 2015. - 539 p. – Series: Bachelor. Advanced course. ISBN 978-5-9916-3671-1

15. Kandrashina E.A., Financial management [Text]: textbook for a bachelor / Kandrashina E.A., Dashkov and K),., ISBN: 978-5-394-01579-3 UMO stamp, 2012

16. Kiseleva O. V. Investment analysis [Text]: textbook grif umo / Kiseleva O. V., Makeeva F. S. - M .: KNORUS, 2016. - . 208 p.

17. Kovalev V.V. Course of financial management: textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. And extra. - Moscow: Prospect, 2011. - 480 p. ISBN 978-5-392-01613-6

18. Nikitin N.V. Corporate finance [Text]: textbook / N.V. Nikitina, V. V. Yanov. - 3rd ed., erased. – M.: KNORUS, 2014. – 512 p. - ISBN 978-5-406-03232-9.

19. Turmanidze T. U. Financial analysis [Text]: textbook for students. universities in economics. specialist. 080502 (060800) "Economics and management at the enterprise"; add. MES RF, rec. UMC / T. U. Turmanidze. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: UNITI-Dana, 2013. - 287 p.\Financial management [Text]: textbook / team of authors; ed. N.I. Berzon and T.V. Thermal. - M. : KNORUS, 2015. - 654 p. - (Bachelor's degree).

20. Financial management [Text]: textbook for applied undergraduate studies / K.V. Ekimova, I.P. Savelyeva, K.V. Kardapoltsev. - M .: Yurayt Publishing House, 2014. - 381 p. – Series: Bachelor. Applied course

21. Financial management: a textbook for students. universities on special "Finance and credit", "Accounting, analysis and audit"; add. MES RF / ed. E. I. Shokhin. - 4th ed., erased. - M.: Knorus, 2012. - 480 p. - (For bachelors). - ISBN 978-5-406-02169-9

22. Finance [Text]: textbook for students. universities, for example. preparation 080100 "Economics" - bachelor; rec. FGBOU VPO "State University of Management" / ed. E. V. Markina. - M. : Knorus, 2014. - 432 p. - (Bachelor's degree). - ISBN 978-5-406-03215-2

23. Official website of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. - Access mode http://www.minfin.ru/ru/

24. Official website of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation. - Access mode: http://www.mch.ru.

25. Official site of the Saratov Regional Duma. Access mode: www.srd.ru.

the federal law dated February 25, 1999 No. 39-FZ "On investment activities in the Russian Federation", carried out in the form of capital investments

When generalizing the results of the performed analytical calculations, it is sometimes difficult to give overall score the level of financial stability. This is due to the fact that it is recommended to use and use many indicators to characterize it, some of which were discussed above. For many indicators, there are no standard values ​​or there are differences in the level of recommended standards. In addition, the analysis reveals multidirectional dynamics of individual indicators and deviations of their actual values ​​from established standards.

To overcome these difficulties, it is possible to apply the methodology of the integral assessment of the financial condition 1, in which the multi-criteria method of assessing the financial condition is reduced to a single-criterion one.

V practical work the method of integral scoring of the degree of stability of the financial condition can be used, which is based on the ranking of organizations (assignment to one of five classes) according to the level of risk of relationships with them associated with the loss of money or their incomplete return. At the same time, organizations assigned to a certain class are characterized by their stability as follows:

I class - organizations with high financial stability. Their financial condition allows us to be confident in the timely and complete fulfillment of all obligations with a sufficient margin in case of a possible mistake in management.

Class II - organizations with good financial condition. Their financial stability as a whole is close to optimal, but some lag is allowed for certain coefficients. There is practically no risk in dealing with such organizations.

Class III - organizations whose financial condition can be assessed as satisfactory. The analysis revealed the weakness of individual coefficients. In relationships with such organizations, there is hardly a threat of losing the funds themselves, but the fulfillment of obligations on time seems doubtful.

Class IV - organizations with an unstable financial condition. They have an unsatisfactory capital structure, and solvency (liquidity) is at the lower limit of acceptable values. They belong to the organizations of special attention, tk. in dealing with them there is a certain risk of loss of funds.

Class V - organizations with a financial crisis, practically insolvent. Relationships with them are extremely risky.

The constituent elements of the proposed methodology for the integral scoring of financial stability are:

The system of basic coefficients (K 1? K 2, K 3, K 4, K5, K5, the content and calculation method of which were discussed above), characterizing the financial condition of the organization;

Rating of coefficients in points, characterizing their significance in assessing the financial condition, the upper and lower limits of their values ​​and the order of transition from upper to lower limits, necessary to classify the organization as a certain class (rating, boundaries and order of transition are established by expert means) - table. 12.15. The definition of the class of organizations according to the level of values ​​of indicators of financial condition is given in Table. 12.16.

Based on the table 12.16 and the actual values ​​of the coefficients calculated in 12.5 and 12.6 in Table. 12.17 an integral assessment of the stability of the financial condition was made. She showed that if at the beginning of the year the organization, Form No. 1 financial statements which is given in table. 12.1, can be attributed with some stretch only to class III, then the increase in the level of coefficients brought it closer to class II at the end of the reporting period. Calculations based on the revised indicators make it possible to fairly confidently attribute the organization to class II, i.e. to the class of organizations with financial stability close to optimal, in relations with which there is practically no risk.

Of interest are other methods of rating assessment, different from the ones discussed above, proposed by V.V. Kovalev and O.N. Volkova, as well as A.D. Sheremet, R.S. Saifu-lin and E.V. Negashev.

It should be noted that the need to assess the financial stability of organizations when determining the possibility of issuing loans to them has led to the development by almost every commercial bank of its own methodology for the integral assessment of the borrower's creditworthiness 1 .

This assessment is based on:

Indicators selected by the bank that most fully characterize, in his opinion, the financial condition of the organization (in addition to traditional indicators, profitability is usually included in the composition of indicators);

Calculation of the actual values ​​of these indicators according to the method adopted by the bank and comparing them with the criterion level established by it for each class of the borrowing organization. At the same time, the criteria levels are usually set differentially by sectors of the national economy;

Determining the number of points for each indicator and the total amount of points that allows the organization to be attributed, as a rule, to one of the five creditworthiness classes, which is understood as the client's ability to pay off his obligations to the bank in a timely and complete manner.

Basically, the characteristics of the creditworthiness of organizations belonging to each of the five classes are identical for banks:

The 1st class includes clients with a very stable financial position. The loans they provide have a low degree of credit risk;

Table 12.17

integral assessment of financial stability

organizations

No. p / p	Financial stability indicators	At the beginning of the reporting year	At the end of the reporting period
actual value	number of points	actual value	number of points
		0,23		0,99
	Quick (urgent) liquidity ratio (k5)	1,04		1,14
	Current liquidity ratio (K 6)	1,52		1,92
		0,60		0,74
		0,34		0,47
	Financial independence ratio in terms of reserves (k3)	1,26	13,5	1,31	13,5
	Total	X	50,5	X	71,5
updated financial stability indicators
	Absolute liquidity ratio (K 4)	0,37		1,19
	Quick (urgent) liquidity ratio (k5)	1,49		1,23
	Current ratio (Kg)	1,62		1,97	1,5
	Overall Financial Independence Ratio (Kj)	0,65		0,76
	Financial independence ratio in terms of current assets (K 2)	0,42		0,52
	Financial independence ratio in terms of reserves (K 3)	1,55	13,5	1,44	13,5
	Total	X	76,5	X	76,0

The 2nd class includes clients with a fairly stable financial position. The loans provided by them have a low degree of credit risk, subject to a sufficiently high category of corporateness. With a low category of corporateness, loans have a normal (permissible) degree of credit risk;

The 3rd class includes clients with a fairly stable financial position. The loans provided by him have a normal (permissible) degree of credit risk, and under the condition of a high category of corporatism - low;

The 4th class includes clients with a satisfactory financial situation. The loans provided by him have a normal (permissible) degree of credit risk, subject to a high category of corporatism or sufficiency of collateral;

The 5th class includes clients who are provided with loans that have a normal (acceptable) degree of credit risk, provided that high category corporatism and sufficiency of provision. It should be noted that in almost all commercial banks, a client who does not conduct financial and economic activities or does not carry out it for more than six months (in the absence of cash flow on settlement accounts) belongs to the 5th class of creditworthiness.

Consideration of banking methods for the integral assessment of the financial condition (creditworthiness) of organizations showed that, despite the general principles of their construction, they differ both in the system of indicators, and in the procedure for calculating essentially identical indicators, and in criteria boundaries, and rating values.

In connection with the above, important methodological tasks in the field of increasing the objectivity of the integral assessment of the stability of the financial condition are the development of an optimal system of indicators, a reasonable methodology for their calculation, as well as the establishment of their standard values, differentiated by individual industries and based on the values ​​that have developed in the industry and take into account the regulatory (normal) their values ​​in countries with developed market economies. A serious attempt in this direction was made by the Ministry of Economy of Russia, which approved by its order of October 1, 1997 No. 118 Methodological recommendations for the reform of enterprises (organizations).

However, in these methodological recommendations there is no unified terminology regarding the designation of indicators, there are many criteria, the calculation procedure and standards for many of them are not given, and the methodology itself is cumbersome and logically incomplete, i.e. this document does not give specific recommendations for determining the average integral assessment, which makes it extremely difficult to carry out analytical work in practice.

It should be noted that the methods for assessing potential bankruptcy considered in 12.9 are, in fact, also methods for an integral assessment of the financial condition of an organization.

In conclusion, it should be noted that currently:

Firstly, in publications and official documents there is no unity in the definition of basic concepts related to the financial condition;

Secondly, the recommendations of specialists in the field of financial analysis are very diverse both in terms of the system of indicators used and in the terminology used, and instructions (recommendations) executive bodies the authorities are not systemic enough and are not coordinated among themselves;

Thirdly, the possibilities of external and internal analysis are largely determined by analytical information, which is constantly changing and improving;

Fourthly, the analysis of the financial condition is quite complicated creative work which requires knowledge of methods of express assessments, external and internal analysis, operational and in-depth studies, the ability to select the necessary minimum of indicators from a variety of randomly proposed ones, give them a systematic sound, reasonably apply standards, correctly assess dynamic changes, perform factor analysis, etc.

The foregoing indicates that the methodology for analyzing the financial condition requires constant further reflection and improvement.

Control questions

1. What are the main tasks and directions of the analysis of the financial condition?

2.What methods are used to analyze the financial condition?

3. What is the composition and content of financial statements, including each section of the sample of its forms?

4.What regulatory framework determines the content of the balance sheet items?

5. What is the composition of the system of main indicators for assessing the financial condition?

6. What is the essence of the express analysis of the financial condition?

7. What is financial independence and what is the system of absolute and relative indicators characterizing it? What is the method of their calculation?

8. What are the criteria for assessing financial independence?

9. What is solvency and liquidity and how do they differ? What indicators are they characterized by and what is the methodology for calculating these indicators?

10. What is net assets and what is the method of their calculation?

11. What is meant by cash flows and what is the purpose of their analysis?

12. What factors determine the amount of the final cash balance?

13. What indicators are used to assess the potential bankruptcy of an organization?

14. What is the factor-by-factor mechanism for the formation of retained earnings, reflected in the form No. 1 of financial statements?

15.What is the calculation procedure net profit in Form No. 2 of the financial statements?

16. What elements does borrowed capital consist of and under what condition is its attraction effective?

17. What is the essence of the calculation of the effect financial leverage?

18. What is the composition of accounts receivable and what factors affect its value?

19. What is the composition of external and internal accounts payable and what indicators are used in its analysis?

20. What is meant by the current financial needs of the organization?

21. What are the main stages in the analysis of the state of settlements with the budget?

22. What is the purpose of factor analysis of tax payments?

24. What is the system of indicators of the effectiveness of the use of current assets?

25. For what purpose is an integral assessment of the stability of the financial condition?

26. What determines the credit relationship between banks and organizations?

SH Literature

1. Abryutina M.S., Granee A.V. Analysis of the financial and economic activity of the enterprise. Moscow: Delo i Service, 1998.

2. Analysis of economic activity in the industry / Ed. IN AND. Strazhev. Minsk: graduate School, 2000.

3. Artemenko V.G., Bellendir M.V. Financial analysis: Proc. allowance. M.: DIS, 1997.

4. Balabanov I.T. Financial analysis and planning of an economic entity. 2nd ed. M.: Finance and statistics, 2002.

5. Bernstein L.A. Analysis of financial statements: Theory, practice and interpretation: Per. from English. M.: Finance and statistics, 1996.

6. Blank I.A. Financial management: Proc. well. Kiev: Nika-Center Elga, 1999.

7.Brigham Yu., Gapensky L. Financial management: TRANS. from English / Ed. V.V. Kovalev. SPb., 1997.

8. Bykadorov V.L., Alekseev P.D. Financial and economic state of the enterprise: Practical. allowance. M.: PRIOR, 2002.

9. Dontsova L.V., Nikiforova N.A. Annual and quarterly financial statements: Educational method, compilation guide. Moscow: Delo i Service, 1998.

10. Dontsova L.V., Nikiforova N.A. Comprehensive analysis of financial statements. Moscow: Business and Service, 2001.

11. Ermolovich L.L. Analysis of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise. Minsk: Ed. BSEU, 2001.

12. Efimova O.V. The financial analysis. M.: Accounting, 2002.

13. Karlin T.R. Analysis financial statements(based on GAAP): Tutorial. M.: INFRA-M, 1998.

14. Kovalev V.V. The financial analysis. M.: Finance and statistics, 1996.

15. Kovalev V.V., Volkova O.N. Analysis of the economic activity of the enterprise. M.: Prospekt, 2002.

16. Kravchenko L.I. Analysis of economic activity in trade. Minsk: Higher School, 2000.

17. Kreinina M.N. Financial management. Moscow: Delo i Service, 1998.

18. Lyubushin N.P., Leshcheva V.B., Dyakova V.G. Analysis of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise: Proc. allowance / Ed. N.P. Lyubushin. M.: UNITI-DANA, 2001.

19. Rodionova M.V., Fedotova M.A. Financial stability of the enterprise in the conditions of inflation. M.: Prospect, 1995.

20. Savitskaya G.V. Analysis of the economic activity of the enterprise. Minsk: LLC "New Knowledge", 2002.

21. Selezneva N.N., Ionova A.F. The financial analysis. M.: UNITI, 2001.

22. Sheremet A.D., Saifulin R.S. Enterprise finance. M.: INFRA-M, 1999.

23. Sheremet A.D., Saifulin R.S., Negashev E.V. Methods of financial analysis. M.: INFRA-M, 2002.

24. Richard J. Audit and analysis of economic activity of the enterprise. M.: Audit, UNITI, 1997.

25. Financial management: Theory and practice: Textbook / Ed. E.S. Stoyanova. M.: Prospect, 1999.

26.Altman El. Financial Ratios, Discriminat Analysis and the Prediction of Corporate Bankruptcy // Journal of Financt. Sept. 1968. P. 589-609.

5.1. Formation of a non-linear diagnostic normative dynamic model of the financial condition of an enterprise

As noted above, financial condition is a multidimensional quantity. Its definition is a complex concept. Conducting financial diagnostics and analysis should be based on a comprehensive diagnostic model that provides a comprehensive review of the financial condition and financial performance of the enterprise. Therefore, when building a comprehensive diagnostic model of the financial condition, it is necessary to use coefficients from all the selected classes. It should be noted here that the financial analysis is not limited to the so-called external analysis and is based both on public financial statements and on intra-economic accounting. Therefore, the diagnostic model formed on the basis of financial and operational coefficients, if necessary, can be supplemented with other coefficients.

The development and justification of many financial indicators make it possible to use a coefficient approach, the essence of which is as follows, when constructing a diagnostic normative dynamic model of financial condition (DNDMFS). The coefficient is built as a fraction (ratio). If the most favorable trend in the change of the coefficient is known - growth, then the indicator in the numerator should grow faster than the indicator in the denominator. If the most favorable trend is down, then obviously the denominator should rise faster than the numerator. For example, the return on assets is known as the ratio of profit to the value of assets. The most favorable trend of this indicator is known - growth, which implies that profit should grow faster than the value of assets.

The financial ratios considered in the fourth topic set not only the absolute ratios between the indicators that form them, but also characterize a positive or negative trend in the functioning of the enterprise (see Tables 4.1-4.8). This provides a basis for the normative ranking of the selected indicators. The general ordering of the initial indicators in the diagnostic model of the financial condition ensures the interconnection of various analytical coefficients.

The best dynamic financial condition of the enterprise corresponds to the normative (reference) order of measures for the movement of indicators that reflect the financial potential and financial performance of the enterprise. Such a reference order of indicators is a diagnostic normative dynamic model of the distribution and use of the enterprise's financial resources, which can serve as a starting point in assessing the actual dynamic financial condition of the enterprise.

To form DNDMFS, financial ratios are analyzed, formed as ratios two indicators. For example, the coefficient of return of all assets or resource return:

Koa = V / Bl.

From the standpoint of the efficiency of the enterprise, an increase in the return on assets is more preferable than its fall. In order for the return on assets to grow, it is necessary that the growth of proceeds from the sale of products outstrip the growth of the property of the enterprise, i.e. it is necessary that:

T(B) > T(Bl),

where T(B) is the rate (index) of revenue growth;

T(Bl) is the growth rate (index) of the balance sheet currency.

And vice versa, the characteristic of the coefficient growth as a negative trend sets the normative ratio between the indicators, in which the indicator in the denominator grows faster than the indicator in the numerator. For example, the ratio of tangible current assets and their total amount:

Kmob \u003d MObAp / OA.

A decrease in the share of tangible current assets in the total volume of current assets, ceteris paribus, is recognized as a positive moment. Thus, the ratio of tangible current assets and their total amount sets the following standard ratio of growth rates of indicators:

T(MObUp)< Т(ОбА) .

A visual representation of the normative pair ratios of indicators given by the coefficients is given by the graph of preferences.

Consider the construction of a preference graph on simple example. Let's build a preference graph based on four coefficients: Kp, Koos, Kfr, Koboa, whose growth is considered as a positive trend.

The growth of the coefficient Kp = P / V corresponds to the following ratio of the growth rates of indicators: T(P) > T(V). Similarly to the growth of the coefficient Koos = B / OS corresponds to T (B) > T (OS); growth Kfr = P / OS corresponds to T(P) > T(OS); growth Koboa = B / ObA corresponds to T(B) > T(ObA).

Graph G, built on the basis of these relationships, is shown in Figure 5.1. The construction of the closure of the graph gives additional arcs. Figure 5.2 shows the closure of the graph G ’, obtained from the graph G on the basis of the transitivity principle, when T(Pr) > T(TpP) and T(TpP) > T(ObA) follows T(Pr) > T(ObA).

Rice. 5.1. Graph G of preferences for indicators in terms of growth rates, given by the coefficients Kp, Koos, Kfr, Koboa

Rice. 5.2. Graph G' closure

An increase in the number of analyzed coefficients increases the number of indicators under consideration and, as a result, makes the figure very opaque. A more convenient form of representation of normative ratios of indicators is a preference matrix. The number of rows and columns of the matrix is ​​given by the number of selected indicators.

The preference matrix is ​​defined as follows. Each element of the matrix is ​​located at the intersection of a certain row and a certain column, which correspond to certain indicators. If, in accordance with some financial and operational coefficient, the indicator in the row should grow faster than the indicator in the column, then a unit is placed at the intersection of the row and column. If, in accordance with the coefficient, the indicator in the row should grow more slowly than the indicator in the column, then the corresponding element of the matrix is ​​“-1”.

The preference graph formed on the basis of the coefficients taken into consideration can be “enriched” with arcs based on the principle of transitivity. Table 5.1 presents a preference matrix formed on the basis of the 4 financial and operational ratios discussed above. The ratio obtained on the basis of the principle of transitivity is highlighted in the table.

Table 5.1

Matrix of normative preferences of indicators by growth rates

Indicators
Profit (P)
Revenue (V)
Fixed assets (OS)
Current assets (ObA)

Formally, the matrix E normative ratios of indicators in terms of growth rates can be described as follows:

e ij is an element of the preference matrix located at the intersection i-th line and j-th column:

The matrix formed in this way (Table 5.1), when using all the most important coefficients, is an operational diagnostic normative dynamic model of the financial condition of the enterprise - DNDMFS.

5.2. Integral estimates of the financial condition of the enterprise

The normative model formed on the basis of a systematic analysis of financial statements (DNDMFS) is a diagnostic model for comprehensive control, evaluation and analysis of the financial condition of an enterprise. The role of an integral assessment is an assessment of the proximity of the actual and specified in the DNDMFS ordering of indicators. The indicators in DNDMFS are ordered based on the requirements for increasing liquidity, solvency, reducing financial dependence, accelerating the turnover of funds, etc., therefore, the integral assessment of the fulfillment of all these requirements is essentially comprehensive assessment the financial condition of the enterprise, which can be called financial stability (in a broad sense).

Financial stability in this view is a characteristic obtained as a result of a simultaneous and coordinated assessment of a set of financial and operational ratios. Integral assessment of financial stability ( At), is calculated as an estimate of the closeness of the actual and normative orders of indicators established in the DNDMFS. The algorithm for calculating the assessment of financial stability (if the normative model is non-linear) is shown in fig. 5.3. The closer the score At to one, the greater the proportion of normative relationships between indicators is implemented in the real financial (economic) activities of the enterprise.

	Reference ratio matrix
	Growth rates (indices) of indicators
	Actual Ratio Matrix
	Match Matrix
	Integral assessment of financial stability
	Matrix of variability
	Integral assessment of financial state volatility
	Integral assessment of financial stability

Rice. 5.3. The algorithm for calculating integral estimates of stability, volatility and stability of the financial condition of an enterprise:

i, j	- numbers of indicators (indicators in DNDMFS are numbered in random order)
n	– number of indicators in DNDMFS
P i b, P i o	– absolute values i-th indicator in the base and reporting periods, respectively
T(P i)	- growth rate i-th indicator in the reporting period
eij	- element of the matrix of reference ratios between the growth rates of indicators
f ij	- element of the matrix of actual ratios between the growth rates of indicators
b ij (b ij o , b ij b)	- an element of the matrix of coincidences of the actual and reference ratios of the growth rates of indicators (the same in the reporting and base periods, respectively)
At	– assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise
dij	- elements of the matrix of variability of the dynamics of indicators
AND	- assessment of the variability of the mode of operation of the enterprise
cm	– assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise

One important fact should be remembered. Among the indicators of DNDMFS there are final indicators characterizing the volume of sales, profit, etc. for each analyzed period (flow indicators). At the same time, the balance indicators are of a one-time nature, i.e., they are calculated at the beginning and end of each analyzed period (stock indicators). To ensure comparability of the results of calculations, it is necessary to average the values ​​of the indicators of the balance sheet items:

,

where P i— the average value of the indicator for i-th period;

P i n, P i k- the value of the indicator at the beginning and end i th period, respectively.

The assessment of the "trajectory" characterizes changes in the financial condition of the enterprise and therefore is interpreted as an assessment of the volatility of the financial condition of the enterprise. Estimated variability ( AND) is calculated based on the construction of the matrix of variability of the dynamics of indicators D= {dij} nXn, which reflects the direction of changes in the ratios of growth rates of indicators that form DNDMFS during the transition from the base period to the reporting one (see Fig. 5.3).

The improving financial condition of the enterprise, provided that all the ratios performed in the previous period are fulfilled in this period, corresponds to AND= 1. Lowest estimate AND= 1 is obtained in the case when all changes in the structure of the movement of indicators are negative character(reduce the stability score). Grade AND= 0 is obtained if the number of inversions (permutations) of indicators that improve the financial condition coincides with the number of inversions that worsen it, or if the dynamic financial condition of the enterprise remains unchanged.

Estimates of stability and variability are measures that are relatively independent of each other. Stability characterizes the financial dynamic state of the enterprise in one period, volatility evaluates the transition from one state to another. Unity of two estimates At and AND generates the third - a generalized assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise St. Stability is a characteristic of stability over a longer period of time. The stability score coincides with the sustainability score if the volatility score is equal to 1. When the volatility score decreases to -1, the stability score decreases to 0. Thus, the financial stability score is the company's sustainability score adjusted for the volatility of its financial condition.

Express diagnostics begins with an analysis of general trends and a comparison of integral indicators. Recall that the stability and stability estimates range from 0 to 1, and the variability estimate ranges from -1 to 1. Therefore, for the convenience of comparisons (especially on the graph), normalized variability estimates are used:

where: AND— assessment of variability (-1≤ AND≤1);

I N— normalized estimate of variability (0≤ I N≤1).

The stated approach to assessing the financial condition is distinguished by consistency, complexity, correctness of comparisons, simplicity, adaptability, etc.

5.3. Factor analysis of growth and the value of the integral assessment of financial stability using a non-linear DNDMFS

The diagnostic normative dynamic model of the system analysis of the financial condition of an enterprise - DNDMFS - is non-linear. The influence of each factor on the increase in the sustainability score (which is an effective indicator) is determined by transforming the formula for calculating this increase:

.

It follows that the influence of an individual i-th indicator for the growth of sustainability assessment is determined by the formula:

.

In this case, as in the case of the linear model, complete factor decomposition of the increase in the effective indicator of financial stability:

,

where Δ At- increase in the assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise;

Δ At (P i ) - increase in the assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise, caused by the dynamics of the ratios of growth rates i-th indicator with others;

n - the number of indicators in DNDMFS;

i,j- numbers of indicators (indicators are numbered in the same way as in DNDMFS);

b ij 0 , b ij b - elements of the matrix of coincidences of the actual and reference ratios of the growth rates of indicators in the reporting and base periods, respectively;

eij - element of the matrix of reference ratios between the growth rates of indicators.

From the solution of the main problem of factor analysis, the solutions of two other problems follow, which are no different from the case of a linear diagnostic model. Firstly, it is determined by how many percent in relation to the baseline the assessment of stability has changed under the influence of dynamics i-th indicator:

.

Secondly, the proportion of the increase (decrease) in the stability assessment due to the dynamics i-th indicator:

.

To identify a decrease in the sustainability assessment under the influence of the dynamics of a particular indicator, it is necessary to form a matrix of violations V \u003d (vij) nxn, which is constructed in the same way as in the case of a linear model.

Decreased sustainability score under the influence of a separate k-th indicator is calculated as follows:

,

where At- assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise;

i,j, k- numbers of indicators in DNDMFS;

n- the number of indicators in DNDMFS;

P k- an indicator that occupies in DNDMFS k-th place (having k-th number);

Y * (P k ) — decrease in the assessment of stability under the influence k-th indicator;

eij- element of the matrix of reference ratios between the growth rates of indicators;

vij- an element of the matrix of violations (discrepancies between the actual and reference ratios of the growth rates of indicators).

As a result, both in the linear and non-linear cases, we obtain a complete factorial decomposition of the financial stability assessment with an independent consideration of the factor indicators:

.

For greater clarity and ease of use, the share of the influence of each indicator on the reduction in the sustainability score from the ideal is calculated:

.

Factor analysis allows you to streamline the indicators in terms of what you need to pay attention to in the first place in order to take measures to improve the financial and economic stability of the enterprise. Wherein:

• coefficient a shows the impact of indicators on the increase in the assessment of sustainability in the transition from the base to the reporting period;
• coefficient b — impact on the actual direction of change in the assessment of sustainability in the transition from the base to the reporting period;
• coefficient d shows the impact on the decrease in the stability score from the ideal value in the period under consideration.

5.4. Recognition of problems in the process of diagnosing the financial condition of the enterprise

Diagnosis is first and foremost the identification of problems. A formal sign of the appearance or existence of a problem is the inversion of indicators in the actual ordering, the presence of which means the presence of an unfavorable trend in the change in the corresponding financial and operational coefficient included in the diagnostic normative model.

Accepted and implemented financial, investment and other business decisions are reflected in the dynamics of certain economic indicators, including those included in the DNDMFS. The dynamics of the same indicator, depending on the indicators with which it is inverted in the actual ordering relative to the normative one, gives rise to various problems. Thus, the dynamics of the indicator "Proceeds from the sale of products" when compared with other indicators may indicate:

• on the decrease in the profitability of products - when lagging behind the growth of profits;
• on the decline in labor productivity - when lagging behind the growth of the number;
• about slowing down the turnover of costs - when lagging behind the growth of costs;
• on the slowdown in the turnover of own working capital - when lagging behind the growth of own working capital;
• about the slowdown in the turnover of non-current assets - when lagging behind the growth of non-current assets;
• on a decrease in capital productivity - when lagging behind the growth of fixed assets, etc.

In this regard, the identification of reserves for the growth of financial stability, volatility and stability, in addition to determining the main indicators-factors, must be supplemented with a description of their inversions, which are formal signs of the problems they generate. The inversion of indicators in the actual ordering means non-fulfillment or violation of a certain requirement for the financial condition of the enterprise, laid down in the DNDMFS.

The matrix of violations (inversions) serves as a means of identifying problems. First of all, those unfulfilled normative ratios that were carried out in previous periods are identified and analyzed, since it is here that the reserves for increasing the financial stability of the enterprise are hidden. The basis for identifying such relationships is the variability matrix D: matrix element dij= -1 indicates that i-th and j-th indicators in the base period were in the reference ratio in terms of their growth rates, and in the reporting period they were inverted.

Special consideration and analysis should be given to "old" problems, which are evidenced by the matrices of violations built over the past few periods, and the "total" matrix of violations.

In addition, it is necessary to analyze the ratios of those indicators and the problems corresponding to them, for which there has been a tendency to improve the situation (reference ratios are performed in the last two periods), but in the past there have been frequent violations.

Express diagnostics is supplemented by the calculation of the necessary financial and operational coefficients and, above all, those for which permissible limits of values ​​\u200b\u200bare established empirically or theoretically.

A more detailed analysis can be carried out using the traditional factorial decomposition methods described above.

Using the method of express analysis, financial managers can determine which indicators or their ratios have the greatest impact on the general indicators of the financial condition of the enterprise, and will be able to focus on solving problems that have already arisen and preventing new ones. Here it is important to establish how and to what extent it is possible to influence the existing situation in order to change it. At the same time, based on the fact that financial strategy and tactics are not the sum of isolated decisions, it is necessary that each financial decision be an integral part of a well-thought-out and accepted strategy.

Changes in the estimates of financial stability and stability can be achieved not only by real changes in the financial and economic activities of the enterprise, but also by the choice of accounting and balance sheet policies, the choice of the way to reflect the changes occurring at the enterprise in economic indicators.

DNDMFS makes it possible to justify and evaluate options for business decisions in terms of how they will affect the financial condition by calculating planned (forecast) estimates of financial stability, volatility and stability.

conclusions

To form a diagnostic normative dynamic model of the financial condition (DNDMFS), financial ratios are analyzed, formed as the ratio of two indicators. Recommended dynamics financial ratio sets the ratio of the indicators that form it in terms of growth rates. From pairwise orderings of indicators, a common ordering is formed, which acts as a DNDMFS.

Integral assessment of financial stability ( At), is calculated as an estimate of the closeness of the actual and normative orders of indicators established in the DNDMFS. In addition to stability, the generated model makes it possible to calculate estimates of volatility and financial stability, as well as conduct factor analysis and identify problems.

Questions for self-examination

1. What is the essence of the coefficient approach to the formation of diagnostic normative dynamic models?
2. What coefficients can be used in the formation of DNDMFS?
3. What is a preference graph?
4. How is a preference graph formed?
5. What is the principle of transitivity as applied to the formation of DNDMFS?
6. What is a preference matrix?
7. How are preference matrix and preference graph related?
8. How is the element of the preference matrix determined?
9. What is an integral assessment of financial stability?
10. What is the meaning of a stability score?
11. How is the financial stability score interpreted?
12. In what range do estimates of financial stability, volatility and stability change?
13. How are the growth rates of indicators-flow and indicators-stock calculated?
14. What is the task of factor analysis of the growth of the integral assessment of financial stability?
15. What is the task of factor analysis of the value of the integral assessment of financial stability?
16. What is the violation matrix for?
17. What information does the summary matrix of violations provide?

Literature

1. Information and analytical support entrepreneurial activity/ Pogostinskaya N. N., Pogostinsky Yu. A., Zhambekova R. L., Atskanov R. R. - Nalchik: Elbrus, 1997. - 176 p.
2. Pogostinskaya N. N., Pogostinskiy Yu. A. System analysis financial statements - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of Mikhailov V.A., 1999. - 96 p.

Presentations

Title of the presentation	annotation

Executed for the purpose information to one indicator of a set of indicators characterizing financial stability. The analysis methods include a different number of indicators (from 6 to 9). There are 6 of them in this technique:

1. Absolute liquidity ratio

2. Critical liquidity ratio

3. Current liquidity ratio

4. Coefficient of autonomy (financial independence)

5. The coefficient of security of current assets with own sources of working capital

6. The coefficient of provision of reserves and costs with own sources of fixed assets

The essence of the technique (see calculations in the table)

§ calculation of the values ​​of indicators included in the methodology;

§ accrual of a certain number of points for reaching certain values;

§ calculation of the total score and assignment of the given enterprise to a certain class.

Characteristics of classes:

1 class. Organizations with absolute financial solvency and stability. Their financial position allows you to be sure of the timely fulfillment of obligations in accordance with the contract.

Grade 2 Organizations with a normal financial condition. Their indicators are close to optimal, but for some, a lag or deviation from the standard is allowed. These are organizations that demonstrate some level of risk in fulfilling financial obligations.

Grade 3 Organizations whose financial condition is estimated as average. They show weakness in financial performance and creditworthiness. In relations with such organizations, the threat of loss of funds is unlikely, but the full fulfillment of obligations is doubtful.

4th grade. Organizations with unstable financial condition. There is a certain financial risk associated with them. These are organizations that can lose all funds, even after taking measures to improve their business.

Grade 5 Organizations with a financial crisis, practically insolvent and financially unstable; high-risk organizations.

6th grade. Extra-curricular: "The dregs of society."

INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT OF THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OF THE ENTERPRISE
No. p / p	Financial condition indicators	Class boundaries according to criteria	Indicators
1 class	Grade 2	3rd grade	4th grade	5th grade	Extracurricular	Last year	Reporting year
	Absolute liquidity ratio	0.5 and above	0,4	0,3	0,2	0,1	<0,1	0,351	0,169
20 points	16 points	12 points	8 points	4 points	0 points
	Critical liquidity ratio	1,5	1,4	1,3	1,2-1,1		<1	1,841	1,289
18 points	15 points	12 points	9-6 points.	3 points	0 points
	Current liquidity ratio	2 and above	1,9-1,7	1,6-1,4	1,3-1,1		<1	3,388	2,223
16.5 points	15-12 points	10,5-7,5	6-3 points	1.5 points	0 points
						16,5	16,5
	Coefficient of autonomy (financial independence)	0.6 and above	0,59-0,54	0,53-0,48	0,47-0,41	0,4	<0,4	0,867	0,813
17 points	12.2 points	11,4-7,4	1.8 points	1 point	0 points
	The coefficient of security of current assets with own sources	0.5 and above	0,4	0,3	0,2	0,1	<0,1	0,682	0,519
15 points	12 points	9 points	6 points	3 points	0 points
	The ratio of reserves and costs to be covered by own sources of OBS	1 and above	0,9	0,8	0,7-0,6	0,5	<0,5	1,495	1,235
13.5 points	11 points	8.5 points	6-3.5 points.	1 point	0 points
						13,5	13,5
	Minimum class break values		85.2 and 66	63.4 and 56.5	41.6 and 28.3			-	-
	Total points