Economic Value Added (EVA)
EVA is registered trademark of Stern Stewart.
Economic value added or economic profit is the difference between revenues and costs,where costs include not only expenses, but also cost of capital.
Paying user area
Try for free
Kraft Foods Group Inc. pages available for free this week:
- Balance Sheet: Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
- Analysis of Profitability Ratios
- Enterprise Value to EBITDA (EV/EBITDA)
- Enterprise Value to FCFF (EV/FCFF)
- Price to FCFE (P/FCFE)
- Selected Financial Data since 2012
- Net Profit Margin since 2012
- Debt to Equity since 2012
- Price to Operating Profit (P/OP) since 2012
- Price to Book Value (P/BV) since 2012
The data is hidden behind: . Unhide it.
Get full access to the entire website from $10.42/mo, or
get 1-month access to Kraft Foods Group Inc. for $22.49.
This is a one-time payment. There is no automatic renewal.
We accept:
Economic Profit
Kraft Foods Group Inc., economic profit calculation
US$ in millions
| 12 months ended: | Dec 27, 2014 | Dec 28, 2013 | Dec 29, 2012 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT)1 | ||||
| Cost of capital2 | ||||
| Invested capital3 | ||||
| Economic profit4 | ||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 NOPAT. See details »
2 Cost of capital. See details »
3 Invested capital. See details »
4 2014 Calculation
Economic profit = NOPAT – Cost of capital × Invested capital
= – × =
- Net Operating Profit After Taxes (NOPAT)
- There was a significant increase in NOPAT from 2,340 million US dollars in 2012 to 3,734 million in 2013, followed by a sharp decline to 989 million in 2014. This indicates a strong performance in 2013 but a notable drop in profitability the subsequent year.
- Cost of Capital
- The cost of capital showed a gradual increase over the three-year period, rising from 12.33% in 2012 to 12.67% in 2013, and further to 12.95% in 2014. This upward trend suggests increased financing costs or risk associated with the company's capital.
- Invested Capital
- Invested capital grew from 13,807 million US dollars in 2012 to 16,041 million in 2013, reflecting an expansion in the company's invested resources. However, in 2014, invested capital decreased to 14,787 million, indicating a reduction in the capital base or asset divestiture.
- Economic Profit
- Economic profit experienced a strong positive value of 638 million US dollars in 2012, which further increased substantially to 1,702 million in 2013. In 2014, it swung to a negative economic profit of -926 million, highlighting a loss in value creation that year despite the invested capital.
- Overall Insights
- The data reveals a peak in financial performance and value creation in 2013, which was accompanied by increased invested capital and higher NOPAT. The decline in 2014 across NOPAT, invested capital, and economic profit, alongside a rising cost of capital, suggests challenges in maintaining profitability and capital efficiency in that year.
Net Operating Profit after Taxes (NOPAT)
Kraft Foods Group Inc., NOPAT calculation
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 Elimination of deferred tax expense. See details »
2 Addition of increase (decrease) in allowances related to accounts receivable.
3 Addition of increase (decrease) in restructuring costs liability.
4 Addition of increase (decrease) in equity equivalents to net earnings.
5 2014 Calculation
Interest expense on capitalized operating leases = Operating lease liability × Discount rate
= × =
6 2014 Calculation
Tax benefit of interest and other expense, net = Adjusted interest and other expense, net × Statutory income tax rate
= × 35.00% =
7 Addition of after taxes interest expense to net earnings.
The financial data reveals notable fluctuations in both net earnings and net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT) over the three-year period under consideration.
- Net Earnings
- Net earnings increased significantly from 1,642 million US dollars in 2012 to 2,715 million US dollars in 2013. However, in 2014, net earnings declined sharply to 1,043 million US dollars, representing a substantial decrease relative to the prior year and even falling below the 2012 level.
- Net Operating Profit After Taxes (NOPAT)
- Similar to net earnings, NOPAT demonstrated strong growth from 2,340 million US dollars in 2012 to 3,734 million US dollars in 2013. Yet, there was a pronounced decline in 2014, with NOPAT dropping to 989 million US dollars, marking a significant reduction compared to both preceding years.
Overall, the data suggests that although the company experienced robust profitability improvements in 2013, this positive trend was not sustained, with a marked downturn occurring in 2014. Both profitability indicators reflect this pattern, highlighting sensitivity to potentially adverse operational or market conditions during the latter year.
Cash Operating Taxes
Kraft Foods Group Inc., cash operating taxes calculation
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
The analysis of the provided annual financial data reveals notable fluctuations in the tax-related expenses over the three-year period ending December 27, 2014.
- Provision for Income Taxes
- There is a significant fluctuation observed in the provision for income taxes. In 2012, the provision was reported at 811 million US dollars, which increased substantially to 1,375 million US dollars in 2013, representing a considerable rise. However, in 2014, this figure sharply declined to 363 million US dollars, indicating a substantial reduction from the previous year. This large variance may reflect changes in pre-tax income, tax policies, or adjustments related to prior periods.
- Cash Operating Taxes
- The cash operating taxes also show an upward trend throughout the examined period. Starting at 437 million US dollars in 2012, the amount nearly doubled to 849 million US dollars in 2013 and saw a further increase to 899 million US dollars in 2014. The consistent increase may indicate higher taxable income or changes in tax payment practices.
Overall, while cash operating taxes steadily increased each year, the provision for income taxes displayed considerable volatility, peaking in 2013 before dropping sharply the following year. This divergence between the provision and cash taxes could denote timing differences in tax recognition or other accounting factors affecting recorded tax expense versus actual cash payments.
Invested Capital
Kraft Foods Group Inc., invested capital calculation (financing approach)
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 Addition of capitalized operating leases.
2 Elimination of deferred taxes from assets and liabilities. See details »
3 Addition of allowance for doubtful accounts receivable.
4 Addition of restructuring costs liability.
5 Addition of equity equivalents to equity.
6 Removal of accumulated other comprehensive income.
7 Subtraction of construction in progress.
- Total Reported Debt & Leases
- The total reported debt and leases remained relatively stable over the three-year period, with a slight increase from 10,353 million USD in 2012 to 10,402 million USD in 2013. It then remained almost constant at 10,401 million USD in 2014, indicating a stable capital structure in terms of debt obligations.
- Equity
- Equity experienced a notable increase from 3,572 million USD in 2012 to 5,187 million USD in 2013, representing a significant growth. However, this was followed by a decrease to 4,365 million USD in 2014. This fluctuation suggests some variability in shareholder value or retained earnings within this timeframe.
- Invested Capital
- Invested capital showed an upward trend from 13,807 million USD in 2012 to 16,041 million USD in 2013, before declining to 14,787 million USD in 2014. This pattern aligns with the changes in both equity and debt, reflecting adjustments in the company’s total funding and asset base.
- Overall Analysis
- The financial data reveals that while debt levels were largely maintained, equity and invested capital exhibited growth followed by contraction over the three years. The rise in equity and invested capital in 2013 may reflect increased investment or retained earnings that year, but the subsequent decline in 2014 indicates a pullback or redistribution. Stability in debt suggests a consistent leverage approach, but the variations in equity and invested capital warrant further investigation to understand the underlying causes, such as potential asset disposals, dividend payments, or changes in profitability.
Cost of Capital
Kraft Foods Group Inc., cost of capital calculations
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Debt3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Debt. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Debt3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Debt. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Debt3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Debt. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
Economic Spread Ratio
Kraft Foods Group Inc., economic spread ratio calculation, comparison to benchmarks
| Dec 27, 2014 | Dec 28, 2013 | Dec 29, 2012 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||
| Economic profit1 | ||||
| Invested capital2 | ||||
| Performance Ratio | ||||
| Economic spread ratio3 | ||||
| Benchmarks | ||||
| Economic Spread Ratio, Competitors4 | ||||
| lululemon athletica inc. | ||||
| Nike Inc. | ||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 Economic profit. See details »
2 Invested capital. See details »
3 2014 Calculation
Economic spread ratio = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Invested capital
= 100 × ÷ =
4 Click competitor name to see calculations.
- Economic Profit
- The economic profit experienced a substantial increase from 638 million USD in 2012 to 1,702 million USD in 2013, indicating improved profitability during this period. However, in 2014, the economic profit turned negative, with a loss of 926 million USD, signaling a significant decline and potential operational challenges.
- Invested Capital
- The invested capital showed an upward trend from 13,807 million USD in 2012 to 16,041 million USD in 2013, reflecting increased investment or asset accumulation. In 2014, however, it decreased to 14,787 million USD, suggesting a reduction in invested resources or possible divestments.
- Economic Spread Ratio
- The economic spread ratio improved markedly from 4.62% in 2012 to 10.61% in 2013, highlighting enhanced returns relative to the cost of capital. Nonetheless, this ratio dropped sharply to -6.26% in 2014, indicating that the company’s returns fell below its cost of capital, which corresponds with the observed negative economic profit in that year.
- Overall Trend Analysis
- The data reveal a positive performance evolution between 2012 and 2013, characterized by increased economic profit and economic spread alongside growth in invested capital. This positive momentum was reversed in 2014, as evidenced by a decline in invested capital and a significant downturn in both economic profit and economic spread ratio, suggesting deteriorating profitability and operational efficiency.
Economic Profit Margin
Kraft Foods Group Inc., economic profit margin calculation, comparison to benchmarks
| Dec 27, 2014 | Dec 28, 2013 | Dec 29, 2012 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||
| Economic profit1 | ||||
| Net revenues | ||||
| Performance Ratio | ||||
| Economic profit margin2 | ||||
| Benchmarks | ||||
| Economic Profit Margin, Competitors3 | ||||
| lululemon athletica inc. | ||||
| Nike Inc. | ||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-27), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-28), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-29).
1 Economic profit. See details »
2 2014 Calculation
Economic profit margin = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Net revenues
= 100 × ÷ =
3 Click competitor name to see calculations.
- Economic Profit
- The economic profit exhibited significant volatility over the three-year period. Initially, the company reported a positive economic profit of 638 million US dollars in 2012, which increased substantially to 1,702 million US dollars in 2013. However, in 2014, the economic profit sharply declined to a negative value of -926 million US dollars, indicating a reversal from profitability to a loss in economic value creation.
- Net Revenues
- Net revenues remained relatively stable across the three years, with minor fluctuations. The figures were 18,339 million US dollars in 2012, slightly decreasing to 18,218 million US dollars in 2013, and then marginally declining again to 18,205 million US dollars in 2014. This consistency suggests that revenue streams were maintained without significant growth or decline during this period.
- Economic Profit Margin
- The economic profit margin paralleled the trend observed in economic profit values. It increased from 3.48% in 2012 to 9.34% in 2013, indicating enhanced efficiency and profitability relative to revenues. However, in 2014, the margin declined markedly to -5.09%, reflecting the negative economic profit and a deterioration in value generation relative to net revenues.
- Overall Analysis
- The data reveals that while net revenues remained stable, the company's ability to generate economic profit was highly inconsistent. The strong improvement in economic profit and margins in 2013 suggests effective operational or strategic performance that year. Conversely, the substantial decline into negative territory in 2014 points to possible challenges such as increased costs, reduced operational efficiency, or strategic setbacks that outweighed stable revenue generation. This pattern underscores the importance of factors beyond sales performance in influencing economic profit outcomes.