Perform Horizontal And Vertical Analysis
Help Questions
CPA Business Analysis and Reporting (BAR) › Perform Horizontal And Vertical Analysis
An issuer manufacturing company reports the following income statement amounts for the year ended December 31 (in $000). In 20X4: Revenue $120,000; Cost of sales $78,000; Research and development $6,000; Selling, general, and administrative expenses $18,000. In 20X5: Revenue $150,000; Cost of sales $105,000; Research and development $6,000; Selling, general, and administrative expenses $19,500. Based on vertical analysis of the income statement (each line item as a percentage of revenue), how does the cost structure change from 20X4 to 20X5?
Cost of sales decreased as a percentage of revenue, indicating improved gross margin.
Revenue increased by 25% based on vertical analysis, indicating higher profitability.
Selling, general, and administrative expenses increased as a percentage of revenue, indicating reduced operating leverage.
Cost of sales increased as a percentage of revenue, indicating deteriorating gross margin.
Explanation
This question tests vertical analysis, which expresses each income statement item as a percentage of revenue to evaluate cost structure changes. Key data points include cost of sales at 65% of revenue in 20X4 ($78,000 / $120,000) increasing to 70% in 20X5 ($105,000 / $150,000), indicating a higher proportion of revenue consumed by costs. This aligns with vertical analysis by revealing deteriorating gross margins, a critical insight for assessing profitability trends. Choice A is incorrect as cost of sales increased, not decreased, as a percentage; choice B is wrong because SG&A decreased from 15% to 13%; choice D misapplies vertical analysis by confusing it with horizontal percentage change. A decision rule is to compare percentages year-over-year in vertical analysis to detect shifts in cost efficiency. Always integrate vertical with horizontal analysis for a comprehensive view of financial health.
A nonissuer manufacturing company reports the following balance sheet amounts (in $000) at December 31: Total debt (short-term plus long-term) 20X4 $25,000 and 20X5 $32,500; Total assets 20X4 $70,000 and 20X5 $75,000. Using horizontal analysis of total debt, what trend is indicated from 20X4 to 20X5?
Total debt is 43.3% of sales in 20X5 based on vertical analysis, indicating improved profitability.
Total debt increased by 7.1% because total assets increased by $5,000.
Total debt decreased by $7,500, indicating reduced leverage.
Total debt increased by $7,500, indicating increased leverage.
Explanation
This question tests horizontal analysis of total debt to assess leverage trends. Key data points are total debt increasing from $25,000 in 20X4 to $32,500 in 20X5, a $7,500 rise indicating increased leverage. This aligns with horizontal analysis by tracking absolute and percentage changes in financing. Choice A is incorrect as it states a decrease; choice C miscalculates the percentage as 30%, not 7.1%; choice D inappropriately mixes vertical analysis with sales. A decision rule is to calculate changes as (current - prior) for trend detection. Integrate with ratios like debt-to-assets for comprehensive leverage analysis.
A nonissuer wholesaler provides the following balance sheet data (in $000) at December 31: Current assets 20X4 $18,000 and 20X5 $20,000; Current liabilities 20X4 $12,000 and 20X5 $16,000; Total liabilities 20X4 $20,000 and 20X5 $26,000. Using horizontal analysis and the current ratio, what does the analysis suggest about the company’s short-term financial health from 20X4 to 20X5?
Profitability deteriorated because total liabilities increased, reducing gross margin.
Liquidity improved because the current ratio increased from 1.50 to 1.25.
Liquidity improved because current assets increased by $2,000 regardless of the change in current liabilities.
Liquidity deteriorated because the current ratio declined from 1.50 to 1.25.
Explanation
This question tests horizontal analysis combined with the current ratio to evaluate short-term financial health trends. Key data points show the current ratio declining from 1.50 ($18,000 / $12,000) in 20X4 to 1.25 ($20,000 / $16,000) in 20X5, indicating deteriorating liquidity. This aligns with analysis techniques by using ratios to interpret horizontal changes in assets and liabilities. Choice A is incorrect as it states an improvement despite the decline; choice C confuses liquidity with profitability; choice D ignores the larger increase in liabilities. A decision rule is to compute ratios like current ratio alongside horizontal changes for liquidity assessment. Monitor trends where liability growth outpaces assets to anticipate cash flow issues.
A nonissuer retailer reports the following balance sheet amounts (in $000) at December 31: Inventory 20X4 $14,000 and 20X5 $10,500; Total assets 20X4 $70,000 and 20X5 $75,000. Using horizontal analysis of inventory, what trend is indicated from 20X4 to 20X5?
Inventory is 14.0% of sales in 20X5 based on vertical analysis, indicating improved profitability.
Inventory decreased by 7.0% because total assets increased by $5,000.
Inventory increased by $3,500, indicating potential overstocking.
Inventory decreased by $3,500, indicating a reduction in inventory levels.
Explanation
This question tests horizontal analysis of inventory to identify trends in asset management. Key data points are inventory decreasing from $14,000 in 20X4 to $10,500 in 20X5, a $3,500 reduction indicating lower levels. This aligns with horizontal analysis by tracking changes for efficiency insights. Choice A is incorrect as it states an increase; choice C miscalculates percentage as -25%; choice D mixes vertical with sales. A decision rule is (current - prior) calculations. Integrate with turnover ratios for context.
An issuer pharmaceutical company reports the following income statement amounts (in $000) for the years ended December 31: Revenue 20X4 $800,000 and 20X5 $920,000; Research and development expense 20X4 $120,000 and 20X5 $165,600. Based on comparative analysis of operating expenses as a percentage of sales, which conclusion is most appropriate?
Research and development increased from 15.0% to 18.0% of revenue, indicating higher investment intensity relative to sales.
Research and development increased by 3.0% based on horizontal analysis, indicating stable expense control.
Research and development is a liquidity measure, and the increase indicates a higher current ratio.
Research and development decreased from 18.0% to 15.0% of revenue, indicating improved gross margin.
Explanation
This question tests comparative vertical analysis of R&D expense as a percentage of revenue. Key data points show R&D rising from 15% ($120,000 / $800,000) to 18% ($165,600 / $920,000) in 20X5, indicating higher intensity. This aligns with analysis by assessing investment relative to sales. Choice B reverses the trend; choice C uses horizontal incorrectly; choice D misinterprets as liquidity. A decision rule is to percentage expenses to revenue. Evaluate for innovation strategy impacts.
A nonissuer manufacturing company reports the following income statement amounts (in $000). 20X4: Net sales $100,000; Depreciation expense $4,000; Rent expense $6,000. 20X5: Net sales $95,000; Depreciation expense $4,200; Rent expense $6,000. Based on vertical analysis (expenses as a percentage of sales), which statement best describes the change in cost structure?
Sales increased by 5.3% based on vertical analysis, indicating improved profitability.
Rent decreased from 6.3% to 6.0% of sales because depreciation increased.
Depreciation increased from 4.0% to 4.4% of sales, while rent increased from 6.0% to 6.3% of sales.
Depreciation decreased from 4.4% to 4.0% of sales because sales declined.
Explanation
This question tests vertical analysis of expenses as percentages of sales to describe cost changes. Key data points show depreciation rising from 4% ($4,000 / $100,000) to 4.4% ($4,200 / $95,000), and rent from 6% to 6.3% ($6,000 / $95,000). This aligns with vertical analysis by normalizing for sales decline impacts. Choice B reverses depreciation; choice C reverses rent; choice D misuses vertical for sales. A transferable framework is expense-to-sales percentages. Use for detecting cost stickiness in downturns.
An issuer media company reports the following balance sheet amounts (in $000) at December 31: Total liabilities 20X4 $180,000 and 20X5 $210,000; Total equity 20X4 $220,000 and 20X5 $230,000. Using horizontal analysis and the debt-to-equity ratio, what does the analysis suggest about leverage from 20X4 to 20X5?
Leverage increased because debt-to-equity rose from 0.82 to 0.91.
Leverage was unchanged because both liabilities and equity increased.
Liquidity improved because debt-to-equity increased, indicating higher current ratio.
Leverage decreased because debt-to-equity rose from 0.82 to 0.91.
Explanation
This question tests horizontal analysis combined with the debt-to-equity ratio to evaluate leverage trends. Key data points show debt-to-equity rising from 0.82 ($180,000 / $220,000) to 0.91 ($210,000 / $230,000), indicating increased leverage. This aligns with techniques by using ratios to interpret changes. Choice B is incorrect as higher ratio means increased leverage; choice C confuses with liquidity; choice D ignores the ratio increase. A decision rule is to compute ratios year-over-year. Monitor for risk when leverage rises.
A nonissuer transportation company provides the following balance sheet amounts (in $000) at December 31: Total assets 20X4 $60,000 and 20X5 $66,000; Inventory 20X4 $6,000 and 20X5 $9,900; Accounts payable 20X4 $7,500 and 20X5 $7,260. Based on vertical analysis of the balance sheet, which metric is most affected by the change in asset structure?
Total assets decreased by 10.0% based on vertical analysis, indicating contraction.
Accounts payable increased from 12.5% to 15.0% of total assets, indicating higher profitability.
Inventory decreased by $3,900 based on horizontal analysis, indicating improved turnover.
Inventory increased from 10.0% to 15.0% of total assets, indicating a larger portion of assets tied up in inventory.
Explanation
This question tests vertical analysis on the balance sheet to assess asset structure changes. Key data points show inventory rising from 10% ($6,000 / $60,000) to 15% ($9,900 / $66,000) in 20X5, indicating more assets in inventory. This aligns with vertical analysis by revealing potential efficiency issues. Choice B is incorrect as payables are liabilities, not assets, and decreased; choice C uses horizontal incorrectly; choice D misapplies vertical to totals. A decision rule is to percentage assets to totals. Examine increases for turnover implications.
An issuer electronics company reports the following income statement data (in $000): Net sales 20X4 $250,000 and 20X5 $275,000; Cost of goods sold 20X4 $175,000 and 20X5 $198,000. Using horizontal analysis of net sales, what trend is indicated by the year-over-year comparison?
Net sales increased by 10%, indicating steady growth.
Net sales decreased by 10%, indicating contraction.
Net sales represent 10% of cost of goods sold in 20X5 based on vertical analysis.
Net sales increased by 25%, indicating rapid growth.
Explanation
This question tests horizontal analysis of net sales to determine growth trends. Key data points are net sales of $250,000 in 20X4 and $275,000 in 20X5, a 10% increase calculated as ($275,000 - $250,000) / $250,000. This aligns with horizontal analysis by measuring revenue expansion. Choice B is incorrect as it's 10%, not 25%; choice C states a decrease; choice D misapplies vertical to costs. A transferable framework is prior-period base calculations. Benchmark against peers for growth evaluation.
A nonissuer hospitality company reports the following income statement amounts (in $000). 20X4: Revenue $90,000; Payroll and benefits $36,000; Occupancy costs $18,000. 20X5: Revenue $100,000; Payroll and benefits $43,000; Occupancy costs $19,000. Based on vertical analysis, how does the interpretation of cost structure change from 20X4 to 20X5?
Revenue increased by 11.1% based on vertical analysis, indicating improved liquidity.
Occupancy costs increased from 20.0% to 25.0% of revenue, indicating substantial fixed cost pressure.
Payroll and benefits decreased from 43.0% to 40.0% of revenue due to revenue growth.
Payroll and benefits increased from 40.0% to 43.0% of revenue, indicating rising labor cost intensity.
Explanation
This question tests vertical analysis to interpret cost structure changes as percentages of revenue. Key data points show payroll and benefits rising from 40% ($36,000 / $90,000) to 43% ($43,000 / $100,000) in 20X5, indicating rising intensity. This aligns with vertical analysis by highlighting labor cost pressures in hospitality. Choice B is incorrect as occupancy decreased from 20% to 19%; choice C reverses the trend; choice D misuses vertical for growth. A decision rule is to normalize to revenue for comparisons. Focus on controlling costs with increasing percentages.