Assessment Task 2 Individual Assignment Sample

1: Introduction

Access Free Samples Prepared by our Subject Matter Experts, known for offering the Best Online Assignment Help Services in Australia

Important aspects associated with financial makeup and composition of the selected organisation Treasury Wines Estate (TWE) will be primarily covered in this report. The fundamental objectives associated mainly include reformatting of income statement and balance sheet and contemplating a financial analysis in brief where calculation and discussion of ratios shall be subsequently carried out. Additional areas of emphasis on this report will be offered towards computation of forecasting and presenting results along with discussion for forecasted values obtained. Valuation shall be another important area of concern in this report which will be predominantly carried out through three important models of residual income, residual operating income and cash flow model. Pessimistic and optimistic computations along with reasons will be additionally discussed by carrying out sensitivity analysis and important insights towards potential opportunities and challenges shall be alternatively covered in this report.

2: Reformatting

[Refer to Appendix 1 and 2]

3: Financial Analysis

3.1: Calculation of ratios

Ratio Name	Formula	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023
Operating Ratios
Profit Margin (PM)	PM = NOPAT / Sales Revenue	16.25%	11.41%	11.23%	12.37%	12.27%
Asset Turnover (ATO)	ATO = Sales / AvgNOA	0.49	0.50	0.48	0.44
0.49	0.50	0.48	0.44
Return on Net Operating Assets (RNOA)	RNOA = PM * ATO	5.58%	5.67%	5.92%	5.41%
Financing Ratios
Financial Leverage (FLEV)	FLEV = AvgNFO/AvgOE	51.40%	48.05%	43.38%	47.10%
Net Borrowing Cost (NBC)	NBC = NFEat / AvgNFO	3.23%	2.98%	3.12%	2.82%
Spread	Spread = RNOA - NBC	2.34%	2.69%	2.80%	2.59%
Return on Equity (DuPont Analysis)
Return on Equity (ROE)	Net Profit / Avg Owners Equity	6.78%	6.96%	7.13%	6.63%
Return on Equity (ROE)	PM*ATO + FLEV*Spread	6.78%	6.96%	7.13%	6.63%
Return on Equity (ROE)	RNOA + FLEV*Spread	6.78%	6.96%	7.13%	6.63%
Breakdown of Asset Turnover Ratios (the same for Profit Margin)
Asset Turnover (ATO)	ATO = Sales / AvgNOA	0.49	0.50	0.48	0.44
1 / Asset Turnover (ATO)	AvgNOA / Sales	2.05	1.98	2.09	2.27
Cash	0.16	0.17	0.17	0.20
Receivables	0.23	0.22	0.23	0.24
Inventories	0.38	0.35	0.35	0.39
Current Tax Assets	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
Assets Held for Sale	0.03	0.04	0.03	0.01
Other Current Assets	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.01
Inventories	0.39	0.39	0.42	0.45
PPE	0.52	0.51	0.56	0.62
Right-of-use assets	0.20	0.18	0.17	0.17
Agricultural Assets	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.02
Intangible Assets	0.49	0.46	0.50	0.57
Deferred Tax Assets	0.07	0.07	0.07	0.07
Other Non-Current Assets	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.03
Check	0.00	2.05	1.98	2.09	2.26
Check to Original ATO	0.49	0.50	0.48	0.44
Alternative Asset Turnover Ratios
Net Working Capital Turnover Ratio	Sales / Average Working Capital	2.04	2.09	2.13	1.96
Receivables Turnover Ratio	Sales / Average Accounts Receivable	4.41	4.57	4.27	4.25
Average days to collect receivables	365 / Receivable Turnover Ratio	82.78	79.88	85.47	85.94
Inventory Turnover Ratio	COGS / Average Inventory	1.57	1.79	1.67	1.46
Average days to sell Inventory	365 / Inventory Turnover Ratio	231.91	204.27	219.17	250.21
Payables Turnover Ratio	Purchases / Average Accounts Payable. (Purchases = COGS + Ending Inventory - Beginning Inventory)	2.29	2.14	2.20	2.00
Average days to pay payables	365 / Payables Turnover Ratio	159.31	170.70	165.82	182.60
PPE Turnover	Sales / AveragePPE	1.94	1.97	1.78	1.61
Solvency Ratios
Liabilities to Equity Ratio	Total Liabilities / Total Equity	82%	85%	75%	76%	83%
Interest Coverage Ratio	(Net Profit + Interest Expense + Tax Expense) / Interest Expense	5.72	3.06	3.87	4.22	3.64
Interest Coverage Ratio (Cash Flows)	(CFO + Interest Expense + Tax Expense) / Interest Expense	8.34	6.47	8.88	10.41	5.88
Interest Coverage Ratio (Cash Flows)	(CFO + Interest Paid + Tax Paid) / Interest Paid	8.34	6.47	8.88	10.41	5.88

Table 1: Ratio Calculations

3.2: Discussion on ratios

3.2.1: DuPont Analysis and Return on Equity

Figure 1: Return on Equity and DuPont Analysis

The above figure of return on equity and DuPont analysis predominantly indicates a decreasing figure and pattern established for 2023 in comparison to 2022. This is numerically represented as 6.63% and 7.13% respectively for 2023 and 2022 and the numerical indicators identified for 2021, 2020 and 2019 are calculated as 6.96%, 6.78% and 11.22%. As per opinions and illustrations of Mudzakar (2021), return on equity is further identified as the proportion between net profit and equity valuation of an organisation accomplished during a particular accounting year.

The return on equity is considered to be an integral component of the profitability ratio makeup for Treasury Wine estates (TWE) to ensure better sustainability as well as competitive prospects in the beverage market. Decreasing propositions associated with return on equity might hamper TWE with respect to facilitating prosperous business continuity opportunities that could implicate dynamic positioning in the near and distant future. The return on equity for 2023 is also believed to be lower due to the company bearing higher operating costs to sustain operational continuity.

3.2.2: Return on Net Operating Assets

Figure 2: Return on Net Operating Assets

As per the above graphical and tabulated demonstration of return on net operating assets, it can be observed that numerical expressions detected for 2023 and 2022 are calculated as 5.41% and 5.92%. Subsequently the numerical expressions obtained for 2021, 2020 and 2019 are calculated as 5.67%, 5.58% and 8.62% respectively. This further demonstrates a marginally decreasing performance trend being established for TWE in 2023 as compared to 2022. The main causes of changes in figures of return on net operating assets include higher operational costs incurred in 2023 leading to lowering of ratios.

Additional factors associated with lowering of ratios also include economic, industry and business factors where bulk acquisition of raw materials have been contemplated to pace up manufacturing. The lowering of return on operating assets is considered to be a significantly impactful preposition for TWE which can lead to low business sustainability prospects in future. Sellhorn and Stier (2019), critically illustrated that low return ratios also indicate improper planning and higher traces of market competition applicable for an organisation which can wipe out business longevity in the near and distant future.

3.2.3: Profit Margin

Figure 3: Profit Margin

According to the above graphical and tabulated demonstration of profit margin calculations, it can be observed that numerical expressions for 2023 and 2022 have been calculated as 12.27% and 12.37% respectively. Subsequent numerical expressions identified for 2021, 2020 and 2019 are considered as 11.23%, 11.41% and 16.25% respectively. Lowering of profit margin is mainly caused due to high composition of operating costs leading to reduction in profitability and revenue scalability opportunities for TWE. Additional economic, market, industry and business factors also include the minimised scope of optimisation causing lowering of numerical performances in current year as compared to previous year.

The identified trend of profit margin is further considered to be regressive and decreasing which can implicate business dynamics and perpetuity prospects for TWE. As per critical views and opinions of Nariswari and Nugraha (2020), lower profit margin ratios are perhaps the most significant disadvantage an organisation can possess which can also lead to lower future prospects of stakeholder harmony and association. The observed trend of profit margin is also considered to be highly impacted after 2019 for TWE where potential cause is identified due to rising cases of the covid-19 pandemic.

3.2.4: Asset Turnover Ratio

Figure 4: Asset Turnover Ratio

The above demonstrated calculations and graph for asset turnover ratio includes numerical expressions of 0.44 and 0.48 times achieved in 2023 and 2022 for TWE. Subsequently, numerical expressions for 2021, 2020 and 2019 are further calculated as 0.50, 0.49 and 0.53 times respectively. The major assets responsible for lowering of performance in 2023 are associated with higher inventory valuation and increasing cost burdens associated with operational and manufacturing concerns. The higher valuation of intangible assets is also considered to be an additional cause leading to the lower numerical expressions obtained for asset turnover ratio in 2023.

According to the above graphical demonstration it is precisely determined that the identified trend of performance for TWE is considered to be regressive and diminishing. Additional reasons also dictate lower sales value as another important reason due to which the current year performance has dipped comparatively to the previous year performance administered. As critically stated, and illustrated by Kurniawan (2021), lower prospects of assets turnover ratio are likely to affect the turnover parameters of financial conduct for an organisation where optimum asset utilisation is jeopardised. Moreover, the scope and opportunities to generate bulk revenue scalability is also impacted causing distorted sustainability for TWE in the foreseeable future.

3.2.5: Financial Leverage

Figure 5: Financial Leverage

According to the above graphical demonstration and tabulated calculations, financial leverage for 2023 and 2022 have been calculated as 47.10% and 43.38% respectively. Additional figures of financial leverage obtained for 2021, 2020 and 2019 have been calculated as 48.05%, 51.40% and 49.28% respectively. According to Mallinguh et al. (2020), financial leverage is considered to be the proportion between net financial obligations and equity valuation obtained for a company during a particular accounting year. Major reasons associated with increasing values and percentiles for financial leverage in 2023 are predominantly related with higher valuation of financial obligations caused mainly due to higher proportion of current and non-current liabilities.

Additional factors also include company performance of TWE in 2023 which is perhaps considered to be an adverse one mainly due to low scope of revenues and income generated in the current year. The identified trend of financial leverage in 2023 is considered to be a significantly increasing one when compared to the performance of 2022. Wu et al. (2020), stated and narrated that increasing financial leverage values for an organisation might cause overleveraging which can lead to higher financial obligations causing distorted stakeholder relations in future.

3.2.6: Net Borrowing Cost

Figure 6: Net Borrowing Cost

According to the above tabulated and graphical demonstration of net borrowing cost, it can be identified that numerical indicators for 2023 and 2022 are 2.82% and 3.12% respectively. Subsequent numerical indicators identified for 2021, 2020 and 2019 are calculated as 2.98%, 3.23% and 3.34% respectively. Parent causes associated with reduction in net banking cost for 2023 are associated with lowering of debt values in the current year for TWE. Additional reasons associated with lower net borrowing cost also include restructuring of the liabilities section for an organisation causing low finance and interest costs payable. According to Tka?evs and Vilerts (2019), net borrowing cost is considered as the proportion of net financial expenses after tax and average not financial obligations.

The associated and identified trend of performance established above is considered to be a significantly decreasing one in 2023 as compared to 2022. As per explanations and views of Akram and Das (2020), significant lowering of net borrowing costs can be considered as a favourable proposition since better operational planning has been facilitated to pay off debenture holders simultaneously. This also encourages an organisation to raise more funds through debt sourcing when business expansion and growth propositions are contemplated.

4: Forecasting

4.1: Assumptions

The following assumptions are being proposed for identified factors of sales growth, asset turnover and profit margin respectively. Additional importance has been offered towards considering assumptions for net dividend payout ratio. cost of debt and cost of equity respectively.

4.1.1: Sales Growth

Sales growth is assumed to be 1.5% and is predominantly speculated when compared to the sales growth percentage of 2023 to 2022 which is calculated as - 1.72%. The sales growth percentage speculation is offered in terms of a favourable growth opportunity that TWE can acquire and is also assumed to remain constant for the three year forecasting period and the long-term forecasting period.

4.1.2: Asset Turnover

The asset turnover projection is speculated to be 0.8 times for the forecasting period and is also considered to remain uniform throughout. Rationale offered for considering the assumed value of asset turnover is predominantly based on the current asset turnover value for TWE calculated as 0.44 times in 2023. A marginal growth in asset turnover is also speculated from the current year performance and hence this figure is being considered for the forecasting calculations.

4.1.3: Profit Margin

The assumed profit margin is speculated to be 14% and is also projected to remain constant throughout the forecasting tenure. Fundamental rationale associated with selecting a 14% projected profit margin is determined based on keeping a future favourable projection considering the current year performance of 12.27% in 2023. The additional reason associated with speculating a 14% profit margin is also based on the fact that this rate is mostly identified as the industry standard or benchmark to evaluate comparative performances.

4.1.4: Net Dividend Payout Ratio

The net dividend payout ratio is assumed to be 10% and is predominantly projected based on keeping a higher dividend proportion available to equity as well as preference shareholders of TWE. The projected percentile value of net dividend payout ratio is also considered to remain static and uniform throughout the forecasting assessment period.

4.1.5: Cost of Debt

Cost of debt is assumed to be 3.5% and the rationale associated with selecting this rate is predominantly based on determining the gearing ratio. The gearing ratio is additionally identified as the proportion of debt with respect to capital employed which is achieved by adding debt and equity (Erol and Tyvimaa, 2020).

4.1.6: Cost of Equity

Assumed figure and percentage value for cost of equity is considered as 4.50% and is obtained by evaluating the expected rate of return using the CAPM method. The formula applicable for CAPM method is considered to be the sum of risk free rate with the product value of beta and difference between market risk premium and risk free rate (Anderson, 2019).

4.2: Forecasted Calculations

[Refer to Appendix 3]

4.3: Discussion on Results achieved

Discussion on results achieved for forecasting will be determined on the basis of the following parameters applicable to TWE.

4.3.1: Sales Revenues

The forecasted sales revenue for 2024, 2025 and 2026 as well as long-term forecast is calculated as $ 2525.62, 2563.51, $ 2601.96 and $ 2,640.99. The increasing trend of sales revenue forecasted during the forecasting period is deemed to be a suitable and favourable indicator for TWE to ensure better operational conduct and strategies. Whitfield et al. (2023), illustrated and explained that higher proportion of sales revenues generated by an organisation also encourages substantial growth and perpetuity in the associated industry to develop competitive metrics. Moreover, higher sales revenues also encourage identification of alternative product lines and services to maximise scalability opportunities from continued business operations.

4.3.2: Net Operating Assets

The forecasted net operating assets are being computed as $ 3,157.03, $ 3,204.39, $ 3,252.45 and $ 3,301.24. The forecasted figures of net operating assets are considered to increase at a steady rate and allows TWE to generate a better operational and asset efficiency in the future. As Chen et al. (2020), expressed and idealised that higher figures of net operating assets are also deemed a beneficial feature allowing an organisation to ensure better prospects of financial planning and decision making. 

4.3.3: Net Payment to Debt Holders

The forecasted net payment to debt holders includes numerical expressions of $ 5,149.95, $ 4,888.44, $ 5,783.09 and $ 5,153.47. The net payment to dividend holders is considered to observe a decreasing pattern thereby minimising interest payment on long-term debts and borrowings. As per opinions and illustrations of Comerton?Forde et al. (2022), the decreasing value of net payment to debt holders is also considered to be an important and essential parameter allowing organisations to restructure their debt and borrowings proportion. 

4.3.4: Net Financial Obligations

The forecasted values of net financial obligations include calculated expressions of $ -3,134.85, $ -8,148.68, $ -14,257.72 and $ - 19,981.50. Net financial obligation and their forecasted values are further considered to decrease significantly in the forecasted duration which considers the fact that more borrowings and debt funding is to be procured by TWE. As per statements and illustrations of Larrimore et al. (2021), the high debt procurement by an organisation could lead to overleveraging thereby resulting in potential challenges and difficulty to pay back funds acquired.

4.3.5: Comprehensive Income

The values of forecasting applicable for comprehensive income are calculated as $ 276.08, $ 484.29, $ 690.22 and $ 940.05. The comprehensive income trend identified for the forecasted period is considered to be a marginally increasing one allowing ample opportunities for TWE to maximise profitability proportion. According to Huang et al. (2020), a higher proportion of comprehensive income is identified as a favourable prospect for an organisation allowing better scope to incorporate operational growth and efficiency in future.

4.3.6: Equity

Equity forecasted values during the three year and long-term forecasting period includes numeric expressions of $ 4,119.62, $ 4,237.40, $ 4,244.99 and $ 4,499.17. The forecasted equity valuation is further identified to generate a marginally increasing pattern for the forecasted period which is deemed to be a relatively healthier prospect for TWE. The higher equity valuation available for an organisation is a healthy proposition to facilitate a healthy relationship between investors and shareholders.

5: Valuation

The computation of valuations will be mainly facilitated through consideration of three models including residual income model, residual operating income model and cash flow model.

5.1: Calculations on Valuations

[Refer to Appendix 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8]

5.2: Discussion on Results

5.2.1: Residual Income Model

The residual income model calculated for TWE includes the current share price being considered as $ 13.20 and total number of outstanding shares being calculated as 721848 million. The residual income calculated for the forecasted period of 2024, 2025, 2026 and 2027 is $ 230, $ -25.35, $ 77.79, $ 302.40 respectively. The terminal value for 2028 is subsequently calculated as $ 3,532.60 and the present value has been calculated by considering the cost of capital value of 4.50%. Present value of residual income includes figures of $ 220.09, $ -23.21, $ 68.17 and $ 253.58 respectively. The Terminal value of the residual income model is further calculated as $ 235,438.67 and the present value of the residual income terminal value is calculated as $ 197,467.50.

The resulting total value of equity is further considered to be $ 236, 002.30 while price per share has been calculated as $ 0.327. Recommendation offered for an investor is mostly considered to be related with facilitating selling of shares since price per share is lower than current share price. Yeh (2023), the higher current share price is predominantly considered to be a trace of overvaluation of intrinsic value for an organisation which could potentially lead to long-term losses on investments.

5.2.2: Residual Operating Income Model

The Terminal value of residual operating income model for TWE is calculated as $ 3,202.20, while residual operating income for 2024, 2025, 2026 and 2027 is calculated as $ 107.77, $ 97.15, $ 222.21 and $ 225.54. The Terminal value of residual operating income model and present value have been simultaneously calculated as $ 213,480.10 and $ 179, 016.16. The available figures of current share price accompanied with the number of shares outstanding include numerical indicators of $ 13.20 per share and 721848 million. The current price per share that has been calculated includes a numerical expression of $ 0.296 and is mostly considered to be overvalued. Hence the recommendation offered to an investor with regards to facilitating investments is considered to be related with ensuring selling of shares. The rationale for selling shares during an overvalued stock performance is predominantly based on the fact that a company might be vulnerable with financial adversities in future causing disrupted investment prospects (Kusumanisita and Minanti, 2021).

5.2.3: Free Cash Flow Model

The free cash flow model includes a terminal value for 2028 as $ 2924.41 while free cash flow for 2024, 2025, 2026 and 2027 has been calculated as $ 4,823.33, $ 5.206.08, $ 4,923.11 and $ 2,380.87 respectively. The terminal value of free cash flow accompanied with present value has been further calculated as $ 388,851.03 and 326,0.75.44. The price per share is further calculated as $ 0.56279 and is predominantly considered to be overvalued with respect to the identified current share price of $ 13.20 as on January 2023. Therefore, the investment recommendation offered to an investor is considered to be related with selling of shares. This is fundamentally justified on the basis of higher firm value which might cause disputed financial credibility for an investor (Wahlen et al. 2022). The computation of residual value based on all three models demonstrated above might project conflicted outcomes since methodical application is considered to be different and is predominantly based on forecasted values considered as per assumptions.

6: Sensitivity Analysis

6.1: Assumptions

The primary assumptions associated under sensitivity analysis include consideration to optimistic and pessimistic outcomes. The optimistic outcomes are assumed to consider changes in values by 5% and 10% respectively and pessimistic outcomes are assumed to include changes in values by -5% and -10%. The determination of optimistic and pessimistic values shall be discovered on the basis of how these figures deviate from original values which are considered as 0%. Collective terminology applied to detect changes in optimistic and pessimistic values is considered as assumed case changes.

6.2: Calculations and Discussions 

ROI	ROI
Assumed Case Changes	PM	$ 189.13	Assumed Case Changes	ATO	$ 189.13
-10.00%	12.60%	$ 189.13	-10.00%	72.00%	$ 189.13
-5.00%	13.30%	$ 189.13	-5.00%	76.00%	$ 189.13
0%	14.00%	$ 189.13	0%	80.00%	$ 189.13
5.00%	14.70%	$ 189.13	5.00%	84.00%	$ 189.13
10.00%	15.40%	$ 189.13	10.00%	88.00%	$ 189.13
ROI	ROI
Assumed Case Changes	Sales Growth	$ 189.13	Assumed Case Changes	DPR	$ 189.13
-10.00%	1.35%	$ 189.13	-10.00%	9.00%	$ 189.13
-5.00%	1.43%	$ 189.13	-5.00%	9.50%	$ 189.13
0%	1.50%	$ 189.13	0%	10.00%	$ 189.13
5.00%	1.58%	$ 189.13	5.00%	10.50%	$ 189.13
10.00%	1.65%	$ 189.13	10.00%	11.00%	$ 189.13
ROI	ROI
Assumed Case Changes	COD	$ 189.13	Assumed Case Changes	COE	$ 189.13
-10.00%	3.21%	$ 189.13	-10.00%	4.05%	$ 189.13
-5.00%	3.56%	$ 189.13	-5.00%	4.28%	$ 189.13
0%	3.75%	$ 189.13	0%	4.50%	$ 189.13
5.00%	3.94%	$ 189.13	5.00%	4.73%	$ 189.13
10.00%	4.13%	$ 189.13	10.00%	4.95%	$ 189.13

Table 2: Sensitivity Analysis

The above sensitivity analysis table primarily considers changes in residual operating income when profit margin is changed. Pessimistic forecasted profit margin is considered as 12.60% and 13.30%, while optimistic profit margin is considered as 14.70% and 15.40% respectively. The above table indicates no sensitivity of profit margin on residual operating income which indicates that an inverse relationship exists between the two factors. Inverse relationship for sensitivity analysis also establishes the fact that changes in the outcome variable are perhaps prone to fluctuations caused due to other organisational or financial factors (Pinto et al. 2019). A Similar pattern can be established for Asset turnover, sales growth, dividend payout ratio, cost of debt and cost of equity where residual operating income is perhaps not sensitive to both factors and demonstrates uniform numerical figures. Therefore, it can be established that residual operating income is predominantly fluctuated through discounting factors and present value calculations where relevance and significance of the sensitive factors is relatively absent.

6.3: Potential opportunities and challenges for the company

6.3.1: Opportunities

Opportunities available for TWE to improve the current value of the firm mainly include the availability of ensuring more financing options which are predominantly facilitated by equity consideration. The availability of a higher equity consideration also encourages more investor influx to ensure that business sustainability and growth can be achieved in the near foreseeable future (Wu et al. 2020). Moreover, it also encourages TWE to maximise sales bundling avenues to capitalise scalability opportunities in future and maintain a healthy financial position to demonstrate credible capital market indices.

6.3.2 : Challenges

The major challenges associated with TWE to maintain and improve the current valuation of the firm includes potential lack of investments due to over valuation and overleveraging. Both these factors are considerably important indicators that might implicate lower sustainability and low influence on the residual operating income considering nullified impacts of sales growth, cost of equity and cost of debt and other respective factors.

References

• Akram, T. and Das, A., 2020. AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT BONDS’NOMINAL YIELDS: A KEYNESIAN PERSPECTIVE. Annals of Financial Economics, 15(01), p.2050003.
• Anderson, K., 2019. The Australian wine industry. The Palgrave Handbook of Wine Industry Economics, pp.131-154.
• Chen, X., Hellmann, A. and Mithani, S.R., 2020. The effect of fair value adjustments on dividend policy under mandatory international financial reporting standards adoption: Australian evidence. Abacus, 56(3), pp.436-453.
• Comerton?Forde, C., De New, J., Salamanca, N., Ribar, D.C., Nicastro, A. and Ross, J., 2022. Measuring financial wellbeing with self?reported and bank record data. Economic Record, 98(321), pp.133-151.
• Erol, I. and Tyvimaa, T., 2020. Explaining the premium to NAV in publicly traded Australian REITs, 2008–2018. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 38(1), pp.4-30.
• Huang, P., Lu, Y. and Wee, M., 2020. Corporate governance analysts and firm value: Australian evidence. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 63, p.101430.
• Kurniawan, A., 2021. Analysis of the effect of return on asset, debt to equity ratio, and total asset turnover on share return. Journal of Industrial Engineering & Management Research, 2(1), pp.64-72.
• Kusumanisita, A.I. and Minanti, F.H., 2021. Stock Valuation Analysis of Dividend Discount Model, Free Cash Flow to Equity and Walter Model in Investment Decision. Agregat: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 5(1), pp.78-96.
• Larrimore, J., Burkhauser, R.V., Auten, G. and Armour, P., 2021. Recent trends in US income distributions in tax record data using more comprehensive measures of income including real accrued capital gains. Journal of Political Economy, 129(5), pp.1319-1360.
• Mallinguh, E., Wasike, C. and Zoltan, Z., 2020. The business sector, firm age, and performance: The mediating role of foreign ownership and financial leverage. International Journal of Financial Studies, 8(4), p.79.
• Mudzakar, M.K., 2021. The Effect Of Return On Asset, Return On Equity, Earning Per Share, And Price Earning Ratio Toward Stock Return (Empirical Study Of Transportation). Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(8), pp.387-392.
• Nariswari, T.N. and Nugraha, N.M., 2020. Profit growth: impact of net profit margin, gross profit margin and total assests turnover. International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies (2147-4486), 9(4), pp.87-96.
• Pinto, J.E., Robinson, T.R. and Stowe, J.D., 2019. Equity valuation: A survey of professional practice. Review of financial economics, 37(2), pp.219-233.
• Sellhorn, T. and Stier, C., 2019. Fair value measurement for long-lived operating assets: Research evidence. European Accounting Review, 28(3), pp.573-603.
• Syafrizal, A., Ilham, R.N. and Muchtar, D., 2023. Effect Of Capital Adequacy Ratio, Non Performing Financing, Financing To Deposit Ratio, Operating Expenses And Operational Income On Profitability At PT. Bank Aceh Syariah. Journal of Accounting Research, Utility Finance and Digital Assets, 1(4), pp.312-322.
• Tka?evs, O. and Vilerts, K., 2019. The impact of government borrowing costs on fiscal discipline. Kyklos, 72(3), pp.446-471.
• Wahlen, J.M., Baginski, S.P. and Bradshaw, M., 2022. Financial reporting, financial statement analysis and valuation. Cengage learning.
• Whitfield, R., Juffermans, L., Noordzy, G. and Dean, P., 2023. The Wild Dog Estate, Australia: a case study in maximizing boutique winery profitability and business resilience. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, pp.1-18.
• Wu, J., Zhang, J., Zhang, S. and Zou, L., 2020. The economic policy uncertainty and firm investment in Australia. Applied Economics, 52(31), pp.3354-3378.
• Yeh, I.C., 2023. Comparisons of residual income model and growth value model. Applied Economics, pp.1-19.