Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 62
Performance Analysis of Top Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide with reference to Oil
Prices
Indrani Hazarika
Business Faculty, Higher Colleges of Technology; Dubai Women’s Campus, UAE
[email protected]
Abstract
Oil and gas industries is one of the largest industries worldwide and is involved in the exploration,
extraction, refining, transport and marketing of oil and gas products. The present study has been
undertaken to analyze the profitability, liquidity, financial health and efficiency of top five oil and
gas companies worldwide based on revenue, net income and market value as per the values stated
in the 2014 Financial Times, Global 500 list and principal operations with reference to crude oil
prices from 2007 to 2014. Simple linear regression analysis has been employed to determine the
statistical significance and degree of dependence between fluctuating crude oil prices and financial
performance indicators. The present study revealed that fluctuating oil prices do not significantly
impact the profitability, liquidity, efficiency and financial health of top oil and gas companies.
Keywords: Market Value, Efficiency, Liquidity, Profitability and Fluctuating
Introduction:
Oil and gas industries is one of the largest industries worldwide and is involved in the exploration,
extraction, refining, transport and marketing of oil and gas products. Many industries are heavily
dependent on oil and gas products in the form of energy, fuel or raw materials for chemical
products. The present study has been undertaken to analyze the financial performance of top five
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 63
oil and gas companies based on revenue, net income and market value as per the values stated in
the 2014 Financial Times, Global 500 list and principal operations with reference to crude oil
prices from 2007 to 2014. (Refer Fig1, 2, 3 and 4). Like prices of other commodities the crude oil
price experiences wide fluctuations in times of shortage or oversupply. The history of oil prices
(Fig 5) dates back to 152 years of economic and political events that shaped the price, wars,
economy, domestic policy, OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) and price
controls.
Fig.1 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Revenue
Revenue in billions in US Dollars
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
476.9
468
400.7 390.2
373
235.9 211.8
171.6 159.8
158
Source: Statista: 2015
Fig.2 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Net Income
Net Income in billions in US Dollar
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
35.5
32.6
24.8
21.4
21.4
17.3
16.6
11.6
10.9
10
Source: Statista: 2015
Fig.3 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Market Value
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 64
Market Value in billions in US Dollar
422.1
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
239
227
220.9
156
147.8
96.7
91.3
91.2
90
Source: Statista: 2015
Fig.4 2013 Principal operations of the major oil companies (1,000 b/d)
1000 billion barrel per day
13,239
15,000
10,000
6,170
5,413
4,303
5,000
4,161
0
Exxon
Mobil,USA
Royal Dutch, Total SA, France Chevron,USA
Shell, UK
British
Petroleum
Source: OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin 2014
Fig.5 2014 Trend of Crude Oil Price from 1970 to 2014
US Crude Oil First Purchase Price (Dollars Per Barrel)
2014
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Source: US Energy Information Administration
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 65
1. Literature Review
Strong (1991) considers the world major oil companies and analyses the ability of oil equities
portfolios to hedge oil price risk and constructs portfolios aimed at maximizing sensitivity to oil
price changes and at diversifying away other risk. Huang et.al (1996) states that at the micro level,
changes in the price of oil, a key factor in the production process, affect financial performance or
cash flows of firms, in turn influencing firms' dividend payments, retained earnings, and equity
prices. Sadorsky (1999) documents the fact that if the volatility of either demand shocks or supply
shocks increases, this will yield higher volatility in both aggregate stock market returns and oil
prices. Aleisa et al. (2003) also examines the equity returns of firms operating in oil exploration,
refinery and marketing. Giovannini, Grasso, Lanza and Manera (2004) investigates the
correlations of volatilities in the stock price returns and their determinants for the most important
integrated oil companies, namely Bp (BP), Chevron-Texaco (CVX), Eni (ENI), Exxon-Mobil
(XOM), Royal Dutch (RD) and Total-Fina Elf (TFE). They measure the actual co-risk in stock
returns and their determinants “within” and “between” the different oil companies. Hammoudeh
et al. (2004) use univariate and multivariate GARCH to examine volatility persistence in the crude
oil market and its effect on the equity return volatility of the S&P oil sector indices. Lanza et al.
(2004) investigates the correlations of volatilities in the stock price returns and their determinants
for the most important integrated oil companies. Boyer and Filion (2007) analyze the factors that
explain the Canadian oil and gas company stock returns. Kilian and Park (2009) examines the
different shocks' impact on the U.S. stock market. Elyasini, Mansur, Odusami (2011) examine the
impact of changes in the oil returns and oil return volatility on excess stock returns and return
volatilities of thirteen U.S. industries using the GARCH (1,1) technique. They find strong evidence
in support of the view that oil price fluctuations constitute a systematic asset price risk at the
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 66
industry level as nine of the thirteen sectors analyzed includes oil related industry (Oil Extraction
and Petroleum Refinery) which shows statistically significant relationships between oil-futures
return distribution and industry excess return. Ready (2013) develops a novel method for
classifying oil price changes as supply or demand driven and documents several new facts about
the relation between oil prices and stock returns.
2. Research Objective: The present study is undertaken to analyze the financial performance in
terms of profitability, efficiency, liquidity and financial health of top five oil and gas companies
worldwide based on revenues, net income, market value and principal operations with reference
to crude oil prices.
3. Financial Performance Indicators: The following ratios have been analyzed with
reference to the top oil and gas companies worldwide from 2007 to 2014. (Refer Table I)
3.1 Profitability Ratios- A class of financial metrics that are used to assess a business's ability to
generate earnings as compared to its expenses and other relevant costs incurred during a specific
period of time.
3.1.1 Return on Assets (ROA) - ROA gives an idea as to how efficient management is at
using its assets to generate earning (Ref Fig 6 and Appendix I)
3.1.2 Return on Equity (ROE) - ROE measures a corporation's profitability by revealing how
much profit a company generates with the money shareholders have invested (Ref Fig 7 and
Appendix II)
3.1.3 Return on Capital (ROC): ROC measures the return that an investment generates for
capital contributors, i.e. bondholders and stockholders. (Ref Appendix III)
3.2 Efficiency Ratio: Efficiency Ratios are used to analyze how well a company uses its assets
and liabilities internally.
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 67
3.2.1 Asset Turnover Ratio (ATR): The Asset Turnover ratio is an indicator of the efficiency
with which a company is deploying its assets and a higher ratio is recommended (Refer Appendix
IV).
3.2.2 Inventory Turnover Ratios (ITR): The inventory turnover ratio is a common measure of
the firm’s operational efficiency in the management of its asset. (Refer Appendix V).
3.2.3 Receivables Turnover Ratios (RTR): Accounts receivable turnover ratio is an efficiency
measurement that helps management analyze its receivable. A low turnover ratio represents an
opportunity to collect excessively old accounts receivable that are unnecessarily tying up
working capital. (Refer Appendix VI).
3.3 Liquidity Ratio (LR): Liquidity ratios are the ratios that measure the ability of a company to
meet its short term debt obligations.
3.3.1 Current Ratio (CER): The current ratio is a liquidity and efficiency ratio that measures a
firm's ability to pay off its short-term liabilities with its current assets. A current ratio between 1
and 1.5 is considered standard. (Refer Appendix VII).
3.4. Debt Equity Ratio (DER): The debt-to-equity ratio is a financial ratio indicating the relative
proportion of shareholders' equity and debt used to finance a company's assets. A ratio of 0.3 or
lower is considered healthy by many analysts. (Refer Appendix VIII)
3.5 First purchase price: The price for domestic crude oil reported by the company that owns
the crude oil the first time it is removed from the lease boundary
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 68
Table 1
Ranking based on Financial Performance Indicators
Ranks
ROA
ROE
ROC
ATR
CER
DER
I
Exxon
Exxon
Exxon
Sinopec
Gazprom
BP
Mobil
Mobil
Mobil
Chevron
Chevron
Chevron
Exxon
Chevron
Petro China
II
Mobil
III
Gazprom
RDS
RDS
RDS
BP
Gazprom
IV
Petro
Gazprom
Gazprom
BP
RDS
RDS
BP
Petro
Chevron
Exxon
Chevron
China
RDS
V
China
VI
BP
VII
Sinopec
Petro
China
Sinopec
BP
Sinopec
Mobil
Petro
China
Gazprom
Petro
China
Sinopec
Exxon Mobil
Sinopec
Fig.6 Average Return on Assets of Top Oil and Gas Companies
Average ROA in Percentage
15.00%
10.00%
10.98%
10.06%
5.75%
12.74%
8.18%
7.30%
5.00%
0.81%
0.00%
British
Chevron
Petroleum
Gazprom
Royal
Dutch
Sinopec
Exxon
Mobil
Petro China
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 69
Fig.7 Average Return on Equity of Top Oil and Gas Companies
25.88%
30.00%
20.00%
19.70%
14.59%
15.13%
15.44%
10.00%
13.83%
2.04%
0.00%
British
Petroleum
Chevron
Gazprom
Royal
Dutch
Sinopec
Exxon
Mobil
Petro China
4. Research Methodology:
The study is based on the financial performance of top 5 oil and gas companies worldwide based
on revenue, net income and market value with reference to profitability, efficiency, financial
health and liquidity from 2007 to 2014 considering global crisis and post global crisis period.
The present study also analyses the impact of U.S. crude oil First Purchase Price (Dollars per
Barrel) on performance indicators.
4.1 Research Questions: The research question addressed in the present study is whether
fluctuating oil prices impact the profitability, efficiency, liquidity and financial health of top oil
and gas companies’ worldwide.
4.2 Sample Design: For the present study financial data of the top oil and gas companies
worldwide namely British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Gazprom,
Sinopec and Petro China has been collected from the company websites, annual reports and
Morning Star, Inc (http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios). The crude oil price has been
collected from the Independent Data Analysis of U.S. Energy Information Administration.
4.3. Data Analysis: The financial data of the oil and gas companies has been analyzed with the
help of Data Analysis in Excel using Significance F and R square in simple regression analysis
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 70
where the independent variable is the crude oil price and financial performance indicators are
dependent variables. The following model is repeatedly used for the study to establish the relation
between the dependent variables and single independent variable for five observations in the oil
and gas companies. Equation: 𝑌 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑋1 + µ where β0 is the intercept and independent
variable X is the crude oil price and dependent variable Y represents the financial indicators: ATR,
ITR, RTR, DER and ROA and µ represent the estimated standard deviation of the error term µ.
5. Findings: The correlation coefficient as shown in Table II between the independent variable
crude oil and dependent variables for oil and gas companies’ worldwide are all less than 0.5 except
for the efficiency ratios in British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell, Gazprom, Petro China and
Sinopec.
5.1. Regression Output:
The regression results in Table III shows that R Squared is less than 0.2 (95% Confidence Level)
for all dependent variables except for the efficiency ratios of British Petroleum, Royal Dutch
Shell, Petro China and Sinopec where the value of p is equal or less than 0.05 which is statistically
significant. Around 60 % changes in the efficiency ratios of these companies are brought by the
independent variable.
Existing literature on oil price shocks and returns states that there is no evidence of the oil price
risk in the U.S. and Japan, Hamao (1988). Huang et al. (1996) find evidence that oil futures returns
positively lead individual oil company and petroleum industry stock returns. Giovannini,, Grasso,
Lanza and Manera (2004) found that the correlation of shocks to the volatilities in STOCK
equations are the highest for British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Total Fina and Royal
Dutch Shell. Boyer and Fillion (2007) states that stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 71
are sensitive to five market based and fundamental factors and one of the market based factors is
the oil prices. Overall they find that Canadian oil and gas company stock returns are positively
associated with the appreciation of crude oil and natural gas prices.
Conclusion:
The present study analyzed the financial data with reference to profitability, liquidity, financial
health and efficiency of top oil and gas worldwide companies based on market value, net income
and revenue. Existing literature on oil and gas companies find that stock prices are positively
associated with the appreciation of crude oil prices. But in the present study it is revealed that
fluctuating oil prices do not significantly impact the profitability, liquidity, efficiency and
financial health of top oil and gas companies.
Table 1I
Correlation Coefficient between crude oil price and Financial Performance Indicators
Name of
ROA
ROE
ROC
ATO
ITO
ART
CR
DER
0.06
0.10
0.07
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.3
0.4
Chevron
0.4
0.3
0.2
-0.02
0.17
0.5
0.18
-0.02
Gazprom
0.01
-0.05
0.02
0.6
NA
0.05
0.4
-0.7
Royal Dutch
0.01
-0.05
-0.05
0.6
0.8
0.5
-0.2
-0.17
Sinopec
-0.4
-0.4
-0.4
0.7
0.7
0.6
-0.3
0.3
Exxon Mobil
0.17
0.2
0.16
0.07
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-0.3
Petro China
-0.4
-0.4
-0.4
0.8
0.8
-0.3
-0.4
0.3
Company
British
Petroleum
Shell
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 72
Table III
Regression Results between crude oil price and Financial Performance Indicator
Oil
Company
BP
Chevron
Gazprom
Royal
Dutch
Shell
Sinopec
Exxon
Mobil
Petro
China
ATR
R2
0.6
0.04
0.33
0.60
ITR
RTR
DER
ROA
p
0.03
0.63
0.17
0.03
R2
0.5
0.2
NA
0.65
p
0.05
0.2
NA
0.02
R2
0.4
0.27
0.01
0.53
P
0.08
0.2
0.8
0.06
R2
0.03
0.03
0.4
0.4
p
0.6
0.68
0.1
0.12
R2
0.06
0.36
0.002
0.23
p
0.5
0.15
0.9
0.2
0.3 0.13
0.07 0.5
0.56
0.3
0.04
0.16
0.32
0.08
0.18
0.5
0.15
0.18
0.3
0.3
0.17
0.25
0.3
0.2
0.70 0.01
0.63
0.03
0.004 0.8
0.03
0.7
0.06
0.5
References:
Aleisa, E., Dibooglu, S., & Hammoudeh, S. (2003). Relationships among U.S. oil prices and oil
industry equity indices. International Review of Economics and Finance, 15, 1-29.
Boyer, M., & Filion, D. (2007). Common and fundamental factors in stock returns of Canadian
oil and gas companies. Energy Economics, 428- 453.
Giovannini, M., Grasso, M., Lanza, A., & Manera, M. (April 2004). Conditional Correlation in
the Returns on Oil Companies Stock Prices and their Determinants. International Energy
Markets.
Hamao, Y. (1988). An empirical examination of the arbitrage pricing theory using Japanese
Data. Japan and the World Economy, 1, 3-56.
Hammoudeh, S., Dibooglu, S., & Aleisa, E. (2004). Relationships among US oil prices and oil
industry equity indices. International Review of Economics and Finance, 13, 427 - 453.
Huang, R., Masulis, R., & Stoll, H. (1996). Energy shocks and financial markets. Journal of
Futures Market, 16, 1-27.
Kilian, L., & Park, C. (2009). The impact of oil prices shocks and the US stock market. 50(4),
1267- 1287.
Lanza, A., Manera, M., Grasso, M., & Giovannini, M. (2004). Long run models of oil stock
prices. Environmental Modelling and Software , forthcoming.
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 73
Sadorsky, P. (1999). Oil prices shocks and the stock market activity. Energy Economics, 21, 449469.
Sadorsky, P. (2001). Risk factors in stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies. Energy
Economics, 23, 17-28.
Strong, J. (1991). Using oil share portfolios to hedge oil price risk. Quarterly Review of
Economics and Business, 31, 48-63.
Appendixes:
Appendix 1
Return on Assets of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Royal
Exxon
Petro
Year
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch
Sinopec
Mobil
China
5.71%
17.61%
15.09%
2007
9.19% 13.28%
10.30%
12.41%
2008
9.11% 15.44%
10.64%
9.52% -21.74%
19.24%
10.15%
2009
7.14%
6.44%
10.04%
4.36%
5.54%
8.36%
7.82%
9.48%
2010
-1.46% 10.89%
11.01%
6.55%
11.37%
9.01%
2011
9.09% 13.64%
12.98%
9.26%
3.23%
12.96%
7.44%
-4.55%
2012
3.90% 11.83%
10.30%
7.54%
13.50%
5.64%
2013
7.74%
8.88%
8.93%
4.56%
5.62%
9.57%
5.75%
2014
Average
1.28%
5.75%
7.40%
10.98%
6.29%
10.06%
4.19%
7.30%
3.20%
0.81%
9.34%
12.74%
4.57%
8.18%
Appendix II
Return on Equity of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Royal
Exxon
Petro
YEAR
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch
Sinopec Mobil
China
27.28%
8.26%
34.47%
22.08%
2007
23.39%
25.60%
15.39%
2008
22.88%
29.23%
17.37%
20.92% -36.54%
38.53%
15.01%
2009
17.19%
11.74%
15.70%
9.49%
11.16%
17.25%
12.62%
2010
2011
-3.78%
24.90%
19.31%
23.75%
16.73%
19.06%
14.15%
19.47%
23.67%
27.26%
15.68%
13.70%
14.86%
8.88%
17.02%
5.39%
-9%
12.17%
2012
2013
10.08%
18.93%
20.30%
15%
14.92%
12.86%
28.03%
19.17%
11.16%
11.18%
2014
Average
3.14%
14.59%
12.65%
19.70%
9.03%
15.13%
8.45%
15.44%
7.84%
2.04%
18.67%
25.88%
9.20%
13.83%
Appendix III
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 74
Return on Capital of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Royal
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch
2007
18.50%
23.05%
13.22%
24.05%
2008
17.76%
26.61%
13.78%
18.53%
2009
13.29%
10.61%
13%
7.98%
11.46%
2010
-2.11%
17.40%
13.76%
2011
17.93%
21.68%
16.09%
16.01%
12.72%
2012
7.61%
18.68%
12.83%
2013
14.90%
13.46%
11.16%
7.46%
YEAR
2014
Average
2.76%
11.33%
10.92%
17.88%
11.14%
13.12%
7.36%
13.2%
Petro
Sinopec Exxon
Mobil
China
7.40%
32.24% 20.30%
-23.73%
35.99% 13.56%
7.92%
16.19% 10.52%
13.17%
21.72% 12.29%
4.89%
24.74% 11.07%
-4.86%
25.84%
9.10%
8.83%
5.49%
2.39%
17.42%
16.34%
23.81%
9.40%
5.99%
11.53%
Appendix IV
Asset Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Royal
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch
2007
1.27
1.57
0.38
1.41
2008
1.58
1.76
0.47
1.66
2009
1.05
1.05
0.39
0.99
1.23
2010
1.19
1.17
0.41
2011
1.37
1.29
0.46
1.45
1.37
2012
1.31
1.09
0.41
2013
1.31
0.94
0.41
1.28
YEAR
2014
Average
1.22
1.28
0.82
1.21
0.4
0.41
1.21
1.33
Sinopec
1.9
2.15
1.8
2.47
3.02
2.6
2.89
1.87
2.33
Exxon
Petro
Mobil
China
1.75
0.87
2.03
0.95
1.35
0.77
1.43
0.94
1.54
1.12
1.45
1.07
1.29
1
1.18
0.91
1.50
0.95
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 75
Appendix V
Inventory Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Royal
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch
10.91
2007
10
30.42
2008
13.7
31.79
15.64
2009
9.68
18.98
9.77
10.84
2010
11.5
24.62
2011
11.94
27.17
13.60
13.25
2012
12.22
24.09
3.56
2013
11.41
21.51
2.9
12.55
YEAR
2014
Average
12.99
11.68
18.58
24.64
2.59
3.01
14.38
12.62
Petro
Sinopec Exxon
Mobil
China
11.26
21.36
4.76
14.15
25.41
6.28
7.91
16.02
4.79
11.97
19.06
6.37
16.07
21.91
7.74
12.21
11.48
14.78
12.47
20.54
18.56
16.26
19.89
7.12
6.64
7.6
6.41
Appendix VI
Receivable Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Petroleum Chevron
2007
8.63
11.02
2008
12.52
14.26
2009
9.09
10.23
2010
2011
9.16
9.65
10.66
11.92
2012
2013
11.17
12.04
11.31
10.74
Royal
Exxon
Petro
Dutch
Sinopec Mobil
China
9.71
30.68
13.15
62.11
8.44
9.37
7.37
52.77
17.31
60.09
7.6
4.03
97.16
13.4
44.76
9.06
5.84 187.08
12.79
39.72
9.89
6.48 912.76
13.72
40.55
8
8.05 809.74
14.39
37.12
7.47
11.59 874.49
16.12
35.15
2014
Average
10.12
10.29
11.05
11.39
4.18
8
YEAR
Gazprom
8.84
7.74
22.15
373.35
8.5
13.67
24.15
42.9
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 76
Appendix VII:
Current Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
2007
2008
2009
British
Petroleum
1.02
0.95
1.14
Chevron
1.17
1.14
1.42
2010
2011
1.17
1.16
1.68
1.58
1.85
1.71
2012
2013
1.43
1.33
1.63
1.52
1.62
2.06
2014
Average
1.37
1.19
1.32
1.43
2.24
1.76
YEAR
Gazprom
1.44
1.63
1.61
Royal
Dutch
1.22
1.1
1.08
0.49
Exxon
Mobil
1.47
1.47
Petro
China
1.17
0.85
1.14
1.12
0.63
0.81
1.06
0.94
0.76
0.67
1.17
1.18
0.79
0.68
0.94
1.01
0.68
0.72
1.11
1.16
1.15
0.8
0.6
0.73
0.83
0.82
1.06
0.67
0.76
0.78
Sinopec
Appendix VIII
Debt Equity Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British
Petroleum Chevron
2007
0.17
0.08
2008
0.19
0.07
2009
0.25
0.11
YEAR
Royal
Dutch
0.1
0.25
0.11
0.2
0.22
0.23
Gazprom
2010
2011
0.32
0.32
0.11
0.08
0.18
0.16
2012
2013
0.33
0.32
0.09
0.13
0.14
0.16
2014
Average
0.41
0.28
0.16
0.10
0.21
0.19
0.23
0.18
0.16
0.2
0.22
0.17
Exxon
Petro
Mobil
China
0.03
0.06
0.06
0.03
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.06
0.15
Sinopec
0.01
0.01
0.08
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.08
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.07
0.06
0.2
0.19
0.29
0.27
0.45
0.2
Biography and Author Information
Name:
Dr. Indrani Hazarika
Email:
[email protected]
Educational Background

Doctor of Philosophy: Obtained Ph.D in the area of taxation from Gauhati University, Guwahati,
India in 2003.
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 77
Thesis titled “An analytical study on the flexibility of Indian Tax Structure with special reference to
Direct Tax

Master Degree: Discipline Commerce with specialization in Finance, Accountancy and Taxation
from Gauhati University, Guwahati in 1996.

Major Field of Study:- Accounting and Finance
Professional Qualification

Qualified as a Chartered Accountant from “ The Institute of Chartered Accountants of
India” in 2006

Obtained the IFRS Certification from ICAI in 2013.

Presently undergoing SAP Certification
She is currently working as a BUSINESS FACULTY at Higher Colleges of Technology
(HCT), Dubai Women’s Campus and she is also the Chair of Accounting Curriculum
Committee at HCT. Prior to joining at HCT she was the MANAGER Training and
Research in Dubai Gold and Commodities Exchange. Before relocating to Dubai she
served as a FACULTY of MBA, BBA & Commerce in JVIMS, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India
from 1999 to 2006 and was also a visiting faculty at All India Management Association
(AIMA), Jamnagar Centre. Prior to joining Gauhati Commerce College as a LECTURER
she was a Research Scholar in Gauhati University, to carry out her research work and
received UGC grant for doing research. Few of her publications include [1] “Performance
Metrics versus Wealth Metrics of Dubai Telecommunication Sector” at 23rd IBIMA
Conference-Vision 2020: Sustainable Growth, Economic Development, and Global
Competitiveness ISBN- 978-0-9860419-2-1, May 2014, [2] “Can the Method of Levy,
Assessment and Collection of Tax Deter Tax Evasion?” Shadow 2009 / The Shadow economy, Tax
Evasion and Social Norms
International Conference | July 23–26, 2009 | University of Muenster,
Germany | Conference Proceedings’, [3] “Corporate Social Responsibility: - An inevitable
tool for business sustainability and growth” “Business Assam” Quarterly Journal of Assam
Chambers of Commerce (India) April 2013. Her current and previous research interests
include Oil Prices causes and effects on Airline Industry and Oil Companies, IFRS, Audit
Reengineering, Profitability Analysis of Banks, Revenue Recognition Principles with
Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 78
reference to Real Estate Companies, Fair Value Accounting, Tax Evasion, Financial
Reporting, Earnings Quality, Cost Control and Cost Reduction, EVA and MVA.
CA, Dr. Indrani Hazarika is a member of the following
[1] Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Dubai Chapter
[2] Member of the review committee of IBIMA (International Business Information Management
Association)
[3] Member of the review committee of the Asia Pacific Studies Journal
Award Distinction and Fellowships

Awarded Gold Medal for securing 1st position in the University in Master Degree in
Commerce

Awarded Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) by University Grants Commission
(Supreme body for management of Indian Universities) on the basis of National Eligibility
Test for carrying out Research Work and Lectureship