- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by .
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Interactive BPP books for September 2026 exams, recommended by OpenTuition.
Get discount code >>
Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA FR Exams › performance analysis
Profitability
At first sight it appears that Victular would see a much greater return on its investment if it acquired Merlot
rather than Grappa. A closer analysis of the figures suggests that this may not be the case.
Merlot has an ROCE over 40% higher than Grappa’s and an ROE more than double Grappa’s ROE. However,
the difference is due more to the lower level of equity in Merlot than to the superiority of its profit. Merlot’s
equity (2,800) is only half that of Grappa (5,500). This reduces the denominator for ROCE and doubles the
ROE.
Merlot ROCE = 1,990 / (2,800 +6,700) = 20.9%
Grappa ROCE = 1,260 / (5,500 + 3,000 ) = 14.8%
Difference of S.H.E = 5,500(Grappa) – 2,800 (Merlot)= 2,700, (almost double of Merlot)
but total difference in capital employed which is S.H.E + non-current liabilities= 1,000 only.
Merlot capital employed = (2,800 + 6,700) = 9,500
Grappa capital employed = (5,500 + 3,000) = 8,500
so the increase in S.H.E in Grappa is not the main cause for its ROCE to decline, because the increase in S.H.E is balanced with the decrease in long term liabilities, so total denominator of Grappa is not higher than Merlot’s.,
What do you want me to do with this?
Mike! Why in the answer they mention the difference is due to s.h.e increase !! Why they didnt mention it is due to long term liabilities decrease !
Well, I suppose it’s a combination of the two.
Where there IS a difference is in ROE where Merlot comes in at 71% compared with just 23% for Grappa but I don’t understand the logic of the printed solution
Sorry
