International Conference on Applied Economics – ICOAE 2009
213
Financial analysis techniques employed in agriculture
92
Luminiţa Horhotă
Abstract
The use of financial ratios and margins in assessing, benchmarking and monitoring farm performance has become more common over the
past few years. This has complemented producers' efforts to define the economics of producing farm commodities, tying economic
performance at the enterprise level to financial performance at the farm level. The purpose of this paper is to provide definitions and
interpretations of the more common financial ratios and techniques employed in agriculture. Break-even analysis can be also very helpful in
the evaluation of a new venture.. Many new enterprises and products actually operate at a loss (at a point below break-even) in the early
stages of development.
JEL codes: G210, Q120, Q140
Key Words: break-even analysis, financial ratios, financial statement
1. A practical approach
1.1. Financial Ratios
As all production, operating and financial decisions are eventually reflected in the financial statements. Analyzing
financial statements can reveal some useful insights into the strengths and weaknesses of an operation. Comparing an
individual's ratio values to a group is just one step in the financial analysis process.
There are two main levels that ratio analysis can be carried out. The first level, and the most useful application of
ratio analysis, is to compare the ratios to a farm's past performance. Carried out over a period of time, this will produce a
trend. This process can be referred to as a trend analysis. The direction of the trend is often more important than the value
itself. For example, a low return on assets may be acceptable if the direction is steadily increasing. The second level at which
ratio analysis can be carried out is at the industry level. The purpose of this is to compare the farm's performance to other
similar operations. This can be referred to as comparative analysis. The most obvious application is to compare the value of
ratios against others in the industry. This must always be done with caution as the degree of accuracy in the collection of
accounting data is often questionable. Use the information as clues to performance and not as an unquestioned judgement on
an operation. The user should try to avoid labeling a value as good or bad. A ratio value must be viewed in the context of
many ratios and the overall operating strategy.
Another useful application of comparative analysis is to supplement it with trend analysis. Some of the variability
in the values of a farm's ratios could be due to a larger industry wide trend. For instance, a drop in return on assets is
obviously an undesirable event. However, if the industry as a whole has experienced a reduction, then the drop for an
individual farm must be considered in this context. That is, part of the downturn may be explained by general economic or
weather related factors that are out of the control of the manager to some degree.
1.1.1 Interpreting the Ratios
There are a few general comments to keep in mind when interpreting the value for a ratio: Foremost, a ratio is
nothing more than one number divided by another, so there is nothing inherently revealing about the value of one, or even
several, ratios. Ratio analysis is nothing more than a tool to help understand the business. Be careful when assigning a
judgement to a value as being too high, too low or just right. This will depend upon the circumstances of the operation and
the overall strategy of the farm. Moreover, a value must be viewed within the context of the other ratio values. There are
many inherent measurement problems. There are compelling arguments for the use of both cost and market values.
Standard methods in the literature use the term Gross Revenue in many of the ratio calculations. The WFDB / Profit
program employs the Value of Production (VOP) concept. Revenues are adjusted for values of purchases and inventory
change during the fiscal / calendar year to define the value of commodities produced. VOP has been substituted for Gross
Revenue in the definitions. Use of VOP may cause comparability problems with performance measures generated under
different definitions.
The ratios are grouped into five areas: liquidity, solvency, profitability, financial efficiency and debt coverage.
92
Lecturer PhD, Romanian American University, [email protected]
International Conference on Applied Ecomonics – ICOAE 2009
214
- Liquidity Measures - Ratios in this category are designed to measure a firm's ability to pay its obligations.
(3) Current Ratio = Total Current Farm Assets/Total Current Farm Liabilities
.The current ratio gives an indication of a farm's ability to meet its cash obligations coming due within the next
year. A value below one could indicate a developing cash flow problem. Having a very high value may not be
desirable either. It may indicate that too high a level of assets are tied up in conservative investments that have
lower rates of return. The valuation problems are not as significant given the liquid nature of the assets. However,
the time of the measure is important as the time of year may have an influence on inventory amounts and values.
(4) Working Capital = Total Current Farm Assets - Total Current Farm Liabilities
.
Working capital and current ratio have similar issues. A positive value is desirable, but too large a value
may indicate too many "lazy" assets are being held. This ratio enables an assessment of adequacy of working
capital relative to business expenses. Care should be taken in adjusting for large inventories and/or valuation issues.
- Solvency Measures - Ratios in this category are designed to measure the long-run solvency of a farm. They are
concerned with the levels of equity and debt in the farm.
(5) Debt/Asset (D/A) Ratio= Total Farm Liabilities/Total Farm Assets
This ratio represents the level of debt to assets for a farm. This type of ratio is often referred to as a leverage ratio.
It is a good indicator of the level of financial risk associated with the farm. The D/A ratio can be difficult to
interpret. There is nothing inherently wrong with a high debt, provided the operation is very efficient and can
service the debt. Also, young farmers who start out will tend to be highly leveraged and are just as likely to support
their operation with off farm income. These producers may have efficient operations with a high return on assets. It
is just that by the time they make their interest and principal payments, there may be little income left to provide for
living expenses. A high D/A ratio is not necessarily bad in this situation.
Having a D/A ratio of zero is not necessarily a desirable goal either. Financial theory dictates that we should be
earning a higher return on our equity than our debt. The theory goes that as debt payments get first claim on profits,
and equity is a residual return, equity needs a higher return to compensate for this risk. Assuming that the operation
is efficient and has a high return on assets, then it is desirable to assume an acceptable level of debt in order to
"lever up" return on equity. However, one thing is clear; a high D/A level involves a higher degree of financial risk.
Furthermore, it is clear that higher debt levels will require a higher return on assets to service the debt.
6) Equity / Asset Ratio = Total Farm Equity/Total Farm Assets
.
This ratio is a variant of the D/A ratio. Caution is advised in using this ratio in that it is extremely
sensitive to low equity levels and/or situations where large amounts of leased assets are employed.
(7) Debt / Equity Ratio = Total Farm Liabilities/Total Farm Equity
.This is also a variant of the D/A ratio and subject to the same cautions as with the equity/asset ratio.
(8) Debt Payout = Total Liabilities/Net Farm Income
.
This ratio represents the number of years it would take to reduce the debt level to zero if all of the income of a farm
could be directed towards principal reduction. It relates the level of debt to the ability of the farm to generate
income to repay the debt. Many of the same issues that relate to the debt to asset ratio also apply to debt payout.
The real strength in the debt payout ratio is in trend analysis. If the trend is upward, this implies that the debt load is
increasing at a greater rate than farm income. This trend can not be sustained over the long run and is a warning
signal of future financial stress. The comparative analysis is useful here in that it can help to determine if the farm's
trend is due to individual farm factors or is caused by general economic or weather factors.
- Profitability Measures - Ratios in this category are designed to measure a firm's ability to generate profit.
(9) Value of Production (VOP) = Farm Cash Receipts + (Change in Value of Product Inventory + Change in Value
of Accounts Receivable) - Livestock Purchases;
.
This amount represents the accrued value of commodities produced during the fiscal (or calendar) year.
(10) Net Farm Income (NFI) = Value of Production - Direct Costs - Capital Costs
.
This is not a ratio by definition, but it is included as it represents the bottom line for farms and a starting point for
analysis. The problem with net farm income is that it does not relate the income to the size of the investment. This
is the advantage of using return on assets as a measure of profitability.
(11) Gross Margin = NFI - Depreciation
International Conference on Applied Economics – ICOAE 2009
.This margin represents the excess of revenue over the cost of goods sold. Gross margin indicates funds available to
cover unallocated fixed costs, returns to unpaid operator & family labour, and returns to owner's / share holder's
equity.
(12) Cash Operating Margin=(VOP - Production Inventory Change - Accounts Receivable Change) - - (Direct
Costs - Supplies Inventory Change - Accounts Payable (Change) - (Capital Costs - Depreciation)
.The Cash Operating Margin essentially "un-accrues" the farm income statement. It represents the cash available to
cover principal payments; net cash capital acquisitions; and family living withdrawals.
(13) Return on Farm Assets =(NFI + Interest Expense - Unpaid Operator & Family Labour/Total Farm Assets =
Return to Assets/Total Farm Assets; This ratio represents the total income generated from the farm divided by the
total assets employed to generate this income. Unpaid family labour is subtracted as it represents a non-cash
expense. This adjustment helps to compare farms which pay family wages to those that do not. Before undertaking
comparisons in this group, consider as to whether assets are valued at cost or at market. With market valuation, the
confidence in the value will depend upon the accuracy of the appraisal of the property. Allow for a certain amount
of "slack" in comparisons to account for this. A strength of ROA is in that it does not differentiate on how the
operation is financed as interest payments are included in income.
(14) Return on Farm Equity = (NFI - Unpaid Operator & Family Labour)/Total Farm Equity = Return to Farm
Equity/Total Farm Equity
This ratio represents the income generated from the owner's investment in the farm business. As is the case for
return on assets the estimate of market values will have a large impact on the value. In fact, the effect will be even
more exaggerated for return on equity than for return on assets. The return on equity should be higher than the
return on assets over the long-run. This assumes that the manager is using debt leverage for an advantage. There is
a trade-off here between a high return on equity and high risk as the two are positively correlated.
(15) Operating Profit Margin Ratio =(NFI + Interest Expense - Unpaid Operator & Family Labour/VOP = Return
to Farm Equity/Value of Production
.This ratio measures the portion of each dollar of revenue that trickles down to the income statement to profits. A
low profit margin can be compensated for with a higher asset turnover. Thus this ratio must be viewed in the
context of the capital turnover. Highly capitalized operations tend to have a higher profit margin combined with a
low capital turnover.
(16) Net Farm Income less Net Government Transfers = NFI - (Government Program Receipts - Government
Program Premiums)
This ratio is a measure of a farm's dependence on government transfers for income. As the level of government
support continues to drop, this ratio will become less significant.
- Financial Efficiency Measures - Ratios in this category are designed to measure a firm's ability to generate
revenues and control costs.
(17) Capital (Asset) Turnover Ratio = Value of Production/Total Farm Assets
.This ratio is a measure of capital intensity. A lower value is acceptable if it represents a capital intensive operation
with a higher profit margin. If a lower value is combined with a low profit margin, it signifies an inefficient
operation. As is the case with return on assets, the valuation of the assets will have a large impact on the value. As
market values are used, the value for capital turnover will be lower than if cost was used. Beware of this fact if
comparing against capital turnover values based on cost.
(18) Operating Expense Ratio (excludes depreciation and interest) = Operating Expenses (excluding interest and
depreciation)/VOP
.This ratio represents the percentage of operating expense that will consume every 1 EUR of revenue. A useful way
to view the ratio is that the residual represents the amount of money left on a dollar of revenue that remains to:
- service debt (both interest and principal)
- provide for reinvestment in capital assets such as machinery, equipment and buildings
- provide for family living withdrawals.
For example, a 75% ratio would indicate that there is 25 cents from every euro of revenue generated left to cover debt
servicing, reinvestment, and withdrawals.
In general, the lower the OER, the better. This will result in more cash from every euro of revenue generated left to cover
debt servicing, reinvestment, and withdrawals. However, it should also be recognized that farms that have low debt levels can
get by with a higher OER. Their mix of debt servicing, reinvestment, and family withdrawals can lean more heavily towards
withdrawals without sacrificing debt servicing or reinvestment. Conversely, farms that are highly leveraged will require a
lower OER to be able to service the debt and maintain an adequate level of investment. This states an obvious truth, to take
on more debt requires greater efficiency the operation.
215
International Conference on Applied Ecomonics – ICOAE 2009
216
Another major consideration in the analysis relates to the operating strategy of the farm. If the farm has a low costof-production strategy, or if the farm does not require high levels of reinvestment to maintain the productivity of the farm,
then that farm can operate at a higher level of OER and still be as profitable as other operations.
(19) Depreciation Expense Ratio = Depreciation Expense/Value of Production
.This is likely the weakest ratio relative to the Production Economics' WFDB / Profit program methodology due to
the programs method of calculating depreciation. Depreciation is based on an imputed cost based on market values.
Ideally, depreciation expense should be based on the original cost of the assets and reflect the actual use of the
asset. If the appropriate cost base were available, a properly calculated depreciation expense ratio provides an
important measure of the capital costs incurred by a farm.
(20) Interest Expense Ratio = Interest Expense/Value of Production
.This ratio relates the interest expense to a farm's ability to generale income. This is a particularly useful ratio as it
can be measure accurately. This is a ratio where the trend is vitally important. A trend upward will lead to eventual
financial stress.
- Debt Coverage - Ratios in this category are designed to measure a firm's ability to generate funds to meet debt
obligations.
(21) Interest Coverage Ratio =(Net Farm Income + Interest Expense)/Interest Expense
.This ratio is similar to the interest expense ratio, but it relates interest expense to earnings before interest. It
provides a truer picture of debt servicing ability than the interest expense ratio as it accounts for expenses. The
tradeoff is in the reliability. Net farm income includes non-cash expenses, such as depreciation, that are estimated.
(22) Term Debt Coverage Ratio =(NFI + Depreciation - Unpaid Operator & Family Labour + Term Interest)/
Scheduled Annual Term Interest & Principal Payments
.This is another variation on the interest coverage ratio. The earnings are adjusted to account for cash flow by
adding back in depreciation and subtracting out unpaid labour (which is used as a proxy for family withdrawals).
Principal payments are included with the interest payments to get a clearer picture of cash flow obligations of debt.
The weakness of this ration is the estimate of unpaid labour and reduces the reliability of the values. A variation of
this may be calculated to incorporate non-farm income and capital leases. This may be particularly significant in
showing the potential reliance on income from not-farm sources in retiring debt.
(23) Debt Payment / Income Ratio= Scheduled Annual Term Interest & Principal Payments (NFI + Depreciation +
Interest on Term Debt)
.The debt payment / income ration measures the ability of a business to service debt over the term of the loan. Once
again, this ratio can provide an indication of the reliance on income from non-farm sources in retiring debt.
1.2. Break-even analysis
One of the most common tools used in evaluating the economic feasibility of a new enterprise or product is the
break-even analysis. In most instances, success takes time Knowing the price or volume necessary to break-even is critical to
evaluating the time-frame in which losses are permissible. The break-even is also an excellent benchmark by which a
company‘s short-term goals can be measured/tracked. Break-even analysis mandates that costs be analyzed. It also keeps a
focus on the connection between production and marketing.
The break-even point is the point at which revenue is exactly equal to costs. At this point, no profit is made and no
losses are incurred. The break-even point can be expressed in terms of unit sales or dollar sales. That is, the break-even units
indicate the level of sales that are required to cover costs. Sales above that number result in profit and sales below that
number result in a loss. The break-even sales indicates the dollars of gross sales required to break-even.
It is important to realize that a company will not necessarily produce a product just because it is expected to
breakeven. Many times, a certain level of profitability or return on investment is desired. If this objective cannot be reached,
which may mean selling a substantial number of units above break-even, the product may not be produced. However, the
break-even is an excellent tool to help quantify the level of production needed for a new business or a new product.
Break-even analysis is based on two types of costs: fixed costs and variable costs. Fixed costs are overhead-type
expenses that are constant and do not change as the level of output changes. Variable expenses are not constant and do
change with the level of output. Because of this, variable expenses are often stated on a per unit basis.
Once the break-even point is met, assuming no change in selling price, fixed and variable cost, a profit in the
amount of the difference in the selling price and the variable costs will be recognized. One important aspect of break-even
analysis is that it is normally not this simple. In many instances, the selling price, fixed costs or variable costs will not remain
constant resulting in a change in the break-even.. And these changes will change the break-even. So, a break-even cannot be
calculated only once. It should be calculated on a regular basis to reflect changes in costs and prices and in order to maintain
profitability or make adjustments in the product line.
International Conference on Applied Economics – ICOAE 2009
There are three basic pieces of information needed to evaluate a break-even point:
- Average Per Unit Sales Price
- Average Per Unit Variable Cost
- Average Annual Fixed Costs
The basic equation for determining the break-even units is:
(1) Average Annual Fixed Cost ’(Average Per Unit Sales Price - Average Per Unit Variable Cost)
The basic equation for determining the break-even sales:
(2) Annual Fixed Cost ’ 1 - (Average Per Unit Variable Cost ’ Average Per Unit Sales Price)
Break-even analysis can be very helpful in the evaluation of a new venture. In most instances, success takes time.
Many new enterprises and products actually operate at a loss (at a point below break-even) in the early stages of
development. Knowing the price or volume necessary to break-even is critical to evaluating the time-frame in which losses
are permissible. The break-even is also an excellent benchmark by which a company‘s short-term goals can be
measured/tracked. Break-even analysis mandates that costs be analyzed. It also keeps a focus on the connection between
production and marketing.
Example:
A local livestock producer utilizes compost waste to develop an organic fertilizer product. The fertilizer is prepared
for retail sale in 50 pound bags. The retail sales price is 5.00 EUR per bag. The average variable cost per bag is 2.80 EUR
and average annual fixed costs are 60,000EUR.
These three pieces of information are:
Average Per Unit Sales Price = 5.00 EUR per bag
Average Per Unit Variable Cost = 2.80 EUR per bag
Average Annual Fixed Costs = 60,000 EUR
The above assumption can be utilized to calculate the number of bags that must be sold in order to break-even as well as the
total dollar of sales needed to break-even. Using the formulas explained earlier, the following calculations can be made:
Break-Even Units: 60,000.00 EUR ’ (5.00 EUR - 2.80 EUR) = 27,273 bags
Break-Even Sales: 60,000.00 EUR ’ 1 - (2.80 EUR ’ 5.00 EUR) = 136,365 EUR
Therefore, no profits are made from the sale of this product until more than 27,273 bags are sold or more than
136,365 EUR in gross sales is generated.
1.2.1 Break-even analysis limitations
- First, break-even analysis requires estimated projections of expected sales, fixed costs, variable costs, and any
costs that have both fixed and variable characteristics. You must not be lulled into a false sense of security
regarding your mathematically sound results which are, after all, based upon projections.
- Second, break-even analysis is useful only over a limited range of sales volume extending not too far from the
expected level of sales. Moving much beyond that range will require additional capital expenditures for more floor
space, more machinery, or more sales people, which will distort the estimates of fixed and variable costs.
- Third, it is generally accepted in basic financial theory that the appropriate way to make investment or capital
decisions is to consider the "discounted value of the cash flows" of a proposed project. Such an analysis focuses on
the time value of money to better describe the "true" value of an investment.
- Finally, break-even analysis assumes that the cost-revenue relationship is linear. This may or may not be the case
for any particular business. For example, many businesses experience a reduction in fixed and variable costs per
unit as the overall scale of the business increases. This is referred to as economies of scale. Most very small
businesses do not experience significant economies of scale.
2. Conclusions
Financial ratios can be useful in managing the farm business by providing a check on the performance of assets and
a warning as to potential areas or risk. Combining these ratios with an economic analysis of production costs and returns
should provide farm managers with an excellent basis for decision making. As with many other tools, however, these ratios
and margins do not guarantee success, but use of them will certainly improve the probability of success.
Despite its limitations, break-even analysis is a very useful tool with which to approach a variety of decision
problems. Such questions as the costs of expansion, evaluation of sales or profit performance, estimation of the impact of
217
218
International Conference on Applied Ecomonics – ICOAE 2009
various expenses on profit, setting prices, and financial analysis in general are appropriately addressed using break-even
analysis. Is only one of the many tools available to the decision-maker. It is best used in conjunction with other financial
analysis techniques or as a screening device to determine whether more study is needed. In any case, familiarity with breakeven analysis is essential for any business owner. Break-even analysis does not focus on the time value of money. Nor does it
focus on opportunity costs. Opportunity costs relate to the best alternative use of your money. There are always alternative
uses for funds that may be more profitable than the project or expansion under consideration. Break-even analysis views
every project in isolation.
References
1. Allen, Franklin, and Douglas Gale, 2000, "Financial Contagion" Journal of Political Economy 108(1), pp.1-33
2. Batagelj, Vladimir, and Andrej Mrvar, 2006, Program for Analysis and Visualization of Large Networks – Reference
Manual: List of commands with short explanation
3. Bisignano, Joseph R., William C. Hunter, and George G. Kaufman, 2000, Global Financial Crises: Lessons From Recent
Events, Kluwer Academic Publishers
4. Clark, Alastair, 2007, Analytical Models of Financial Stability (Remarks delivered at the Cass Business School)
5. de Nooy, Wouter, Andrej Mrvar, and Vladimir Batagelj, 2005, Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek, Structural
Analysis in the Social Sciences 27, Cambridge University Press
6. Glick, Reuven, Ramon Moreno, and Mark M. Spiegel, 2001, Financial Crises in Emerging Markets, Cambridge
University Press
7. Jackson, Matthew O., 2006, "The Economics of Social Networks" in Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory
and Applications, Ninth World Congress (Econometric Society Monographs), Cambridge University Press
9. Soramaki, Kimmon, Morten L. Bech, Jeffrey Arnold, Robert J. Glass, and Walter E. Beyeler, 2006, "The Topology of
agriculture Payment Flows" Federal Staff Report No.243
10. Summers, Lawrence H., 2000, "International Financial Crises: Causes, Prevention, and Cures" American Economic
Review Vol.90, No.2, Papers and Proceedings pp.1-16