Activity ratios measure how efficiently a company performs day-to-day tasks, such us the collection of receivables and management of inventory.
Short-term Activity Ratios (Summary)
Turnover Ratios
Average No. Days
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
The analysis of operating activity ratios between 2010 and 2014 reveals a period of fluctuating efficiency in asset management, characterized by a gradual decline in working capital productivity and a strategic shift in the timing of supplier payments.
- Inventory Management
- A general decline in inventory turnover is observed, decreasing from 3.15 in 2010 to 2.85 in 2014. This trend corresponds with an increase in the average inventory processing period, which rose from 116 days to a peak of 133 days in 2012 before moderating to 128 days by the end of the period. This indicates a slower movement of goods through the operating cycle.
- Receivables Management
- Receivables turnover remained relatively stable throughout the five-year period, fluctuating between 7.02 and 7.79. The average receivable collection period showed minimal variance, maintaining a tight range between 47 and 52 days. The most efficient collection occurred in 2014, with the period dropping to 47 days, suggesting consistent credit control policies.
- Payables Management
- Payables turnover experienced a downward trend, moving from 3.24 in 2010 to 2.93 in 2014. Consequently, the average payables payment period expanded from 112 days to 125 days, with a peak of 130 days in 2013. This trend suggests an increased reliance on supplier financing to support operations.
- Operating and Cash Conversion Cycles
- The operating cycle lengthened from 165 days in 2010 to a peak of 183 days in 2013, before contracting to 175 days in 2014. Despite this expansion, the cash conversion cycle remained controlled, ending at 50 days in 2014, which is lower than the 53 days recorded in 2010. The stabilization of the cash conversion cycle was primarily achieved by extending the payment period to suppliers, which offset the slower inventory turnover.
- Working Capital Efficiency
- A consistent downward trend is evident in the working capital turnover ratio, which fell from 1.95 in 2010 to 1.34 in 2014. This steady decline indicates a reduction in the efficiency with which working capital is utilized to generate revenue, suggesting that the growth in working capital assets has outpaced the growth in sales.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Inventory Turnover
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands) | ||||||
| Cost of sales, excludes amortization of intangible assets | 842,400) | 795,800) | 775,500) | 748,700) | 722,000) | |
| Inventories | 296,000) | 285,300) | 282,900) | 249,700) | 229,400) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Inventory turnover1 | 2.85 | 2.79 | 2.74 | 3.00 | 3.15 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Inventory Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Inventory turnover = Cost of sales, excludes amortization of intangible assets ÷ Inventories
= 842,400 ÷ 296,000 = 2.85
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
An analysis of the operating activity ratios between 2010 and 2014 reveals a period of expansion in both cost of sales and inventory holdings, accompanied by a fluctuating trend in inventory efficiency. While the cost of sales exhibited consistent year-over-year growth, the rate of inventory accumulation initially outpaced sales growth, leading to a temporary decrease in the turnover ratio before a gradual recovery began in 2013.
- Cost of Sales Trends
- A steady upward trajectory is observed in the cost of sales, excluding amortization of intangible assets. The value increased from 722,000 thousand US dollars in 2010 to 842,400 thousand US dollars by 2014. This consistent growth indicates an increase in the volume of goods sold or an increase in the cost of producing those goods over the five-year period.
- Inventory Level Analysis
- Inventories grew from 229,400 thousand US dollars in 2010 to 296,000 thousand US dollars in 2014. The most significant expansion occurred between 2011 and 2012, where inventories rose from 249,700 thousand to 282,900 thousand US dollars, representing a notable increase in capital tied up in stock.
- Inventory Turnover Performance
- The inventory turnover ratio experienced a decline in the first half of the period, falling from 3.15 in 2010 to a low of 2.74 in 2012. This downward trend suggests that inventory was being managed less efficiently or that stock was accumulating faster than it could be sold. However, a positive reversal is noted starting in 2013, with the ratio improving to 2.79 and further increasing to 2.85 by 2014, indicating a trend toward improved inventory management and faster stock clearance.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Receivables Turnover
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands) | ||||||
| Product net sales | 7,126,100) | 6,197,500) | 5,708,800) | 5,347,100) | 4,819,600) | |
| Trade receivables, net | 914,500) | 883,300) | 764,200) | 730,600) | 647,300) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Receivables turnover1 | 7.79 | 7.02 | 7.47 | 7.32 | 7.45 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Receivables Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Receivables turnover = Product net sales ÷ Trade receivables, net
= 7,126,100 ÷ 914,500 = 7.79
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
Between 2010 and 2014, there was a consistent upward trajectory in both product net sales and trade receivables. The relationship between these two variables remained relatively stable, as evidenced by the receivables turnover ratio, which indicates a disciplined approach to credit management during this period.
- Product Net Sales Growth
- Net sales exhibited an uninterrupted annual increase, rising from 4,819,600 thousand US dollars in 2010 to 7,126,100 thousand US dollars in 2014. This represents a cumulative growth of approximately 47.8% over the five-year period, reflecting a steady expansion of market activity.
- Trade Receivables Expansion
- Net trade receivables followed a similar growth pattern, increasing from 647,300 thousand US dollars in 2010 to 914,500 thousand US dollars in 2014. The growth in the receivables balance closely mirrors the increase in net sales, suggesting that the rise in outstanding credit is a direct result of increased sales volume rather than a decline in collection efficiency.
- Receivables Turnover Performance
- The receivables turnover ratio remained stable, fluctuating within a narrow range between 7.02 and 7.79. While a slight dip to 7.02 was observed in 2013, the ratio recovered to a five-year peak of 7.79 in 2014. This stability indicates that the average time taken to collect payments remained consistent, confirming the effectiveness of the internal credit and collection policies.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Payables Turnover
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands) | ||||||
| Cost of sales, excludes amortization of intangible assets | 842,400) | 795,800) | 775,500) | 748,700) | 722,000) | |
| Accounts payable | 287,400) | 283,200) | 233,100) | 200,400) | 222,500) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Payables turnover1 | 2.93 | 2.81 | 3.33 | 3.74 | 3.24 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Payables Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Payables turnover = Cost of sales, excludes amortization of intangible assets ÷ Accounts payable
= 842,400 ÷ 287,400 = 2.93
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
An analysis of the operating activity from 2010 to 2014 reveals a steady increase in cost of sales alongside fluctuations in the management of accounts payable, resulting in a variable payables turnover ratio.
- Cost of Sales Trends
- Cost of sales, excluding amortization of intangible assets, demonstrated consistent year-over-year growth throughout the period. The figure rose from US$ 722 million in 2010 to US$ 842.4 million in 2014, indicating a continuous expansion in the scale of operational production expenses.
- Accounts Payable Dynamics
- Accounts payable experienced a slight contraction in 2011, decreasing to US$ 200.4 million, before entering a phase of sustained increase. Between 2011 and 2014, obligations to suppliers grew by approximately 43%, reaching US$ 287.4 million by the end of the period.
- Payables Turnover Interpretation
- The payables turnover ratio reached a peak of 3.74 in 2011, representing the most rapid turnover of supplier obligations during the five-year window. Following this peak, a downward trend occurred, with the ratio declining to 2.81 by 2013. This contraction suggests a lengthening of the payment cycle, as the growth in accounts payable outpaced the growth in the cost of sales. A slight recovery to 2.93 was noted in 2014, though the ratio remained lower than the levels observed between 2010 and 2012.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Working Capital Turnover
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands) | ||||||
| Current assets | 6,871,200) | 5,319,700) | 4,458,800) | 4,048,300) | 3,993,700) | |
| Less: Current liabilities | 1,557,300) | 1,244,300) | 1,095,200) | 955,000) | 1,528,400) | |
| Working capital | 5,313,900) | 4,075,400) | 3,363,600) | 3,093,300) | 2,465,300) | |
| Product net sales | 7,126,100) | 6,197,500) | 5,708,800) | 5,347,100) | 4,819,600) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Working capital turnover1 | 1.34 | 1.52 | 1.70 | 1.73 | 1.95 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Working Capital Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Working capital turnover = Product net sales ÷ Working capital
= 7,126,100 ÷ 5,313,900 = 1.34
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis reveals a divergent trend between revenue growth and the accumulation of working capital from 2010 to 2014. While product net sales exhibited consistent growth, the working capital requirements expanded at a significantly faster rate, resulting in a sustained decline in the efficiency of short-term asset utilization to generate revenue.
- Working Capital Expansion
- Working capital increased monotonically from 2,465,300 thousand USD in 2010 to 5,313,900 thousand USD in 2014. This represents a growth of approximately 115% over the five-year period, indicating a substantial expansion in net short-term assets.
- Revenue Growth Patterns
- Product net sales grew steadily from 4,819,600 thousand USD in 2010 to 7,126,100 thousand USD in 2014. While the growth trajectory was positive and consistent, the rate of increase in sales was outperformed by the rate of increase in working capital.
- Working Capital Turnover Trend
- The working capital turnover ratio experienced a continuous downward trend, falling from 1.95 in 2010 to 1.34 in 2014. This decline signifies that the company became less efficient at utilizing its operating liquidity to drive sales, as each unit of working capital generated progressively lower sales volumes each year.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Inventory Processing Period
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Inventory turnover | 2.85 | 2.79 | 2.74 | 3.00 | 3.15 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period1 | 128 | 131 | 133 | 122 | 116 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Inventory Processing Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Average inventory processing period = 365 ÷ Inventory turnover
= 365 ÷ 2.85 = 128
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of operating activity ratios from 2010 to 2014 reveals a cyclical trend in inventory management efficiency, characterized by an initial decline in performance followed by a period of gradual stabilization and improvement.
- Inventory Turnover
- A downward trend is observed between 2010 and 2012, during which the turnover ratio decreased from 3.15 to 2.74. This contraction indicates a reduction in the frequency with which inventory was replaced. Following this low point, a gradual recovery occurred, with the ratio rising to 2.79 in 2013 and reaching 2.85 by the end of 2014, suggesting an improvement in the velocity of stock movement.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- The duration required to process inventory mirrored the turnover trends, showing a steady increase from 116 days in 2010 to a peak of 133 days in 2012. This expansion reflects a slowing of the operating cycle. A subsequent reversal is noted from 2013 onward, with the period contracting to 131 days and further decreasing to 128 days by 2014, indicating a moderate increase in operational efficiency.
The inverse correlation between the turnover ratio and the processing period confirms a consistent pattern of inventory behavior. While efficiency reached its lowest point in 2012, the subsequent two years demonstrate a positive trajectory toward restoring shorter processing cycles and higher turnover rates.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Receivable Collection Period
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Receivables turnover | 7.79 | 7.02 | 7.47 | 7.32 | 7.45 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average receivable collection period1 | 47 | 52 | 49 | 50 | 49 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Receivable Collection Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Average receivable collection period = 365 ÷ Receivables turnover
= 365 ÷ 7.79 = 47
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The management of accounts receivable between 2010 and 2014 demonstrates a high degree of stability with a notable increase in operational efficiency by the end of the analyzed period.
- Receivables Turnover
- The turnover ratio remained relatively consistent, fluctuating within a narrow range. After starting at 7.45 in 2010, the ratio experienced a slight dip to 7.02 by 2013. This trend reversed in 2014, with the ratio ascending to its five-year peak of 7.79, indicating an acceleration in the conversion of receivables into cash.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The collection cycle exhibited an inverse relationship with the turnover ratio, varying between 47 and 52 days. A gradual increase in the collection period was observed through 2013, where it reached a maximum of 52 days. This was followed by a significant reduction in 2014, resulting in a period of 47 days, which represents the most efficient collection performance in the observed timeframe.
The overall trend indicates that while there was a period of slight deceleration in collection efficiency peaking in 2013, the subsequent recovery in 2014 resulted in the shortest collection cycle and the highest turnover rate of the period, suggesting improved credit management or more stringent collection policies.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Operating Cycle
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period | 128 | 131 | 133 | 122 | 116 | |
| Average receivable collection period | 47 | 52 | 49 | 50 | 49 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Operating cycle1 | 175 | 183 | 182 | 172 | 165 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Operating Cycle, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Operating cycle = Average inventory processing period + Average receivable collection period
= 128 + 47 = 175
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The operating cycle exhibits a period of expansion between 2010 and 2013, followed by a moderate contraction in 2014. The overall duration of the cycle is predominantly influenced by fluctuations in inventory management rather than credit collection efficiency.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- A gradual increase in the time required to process inventory is observed from 2010 to 2012, rising from 116 days to a peak of 133 days. This suggests a slowing of inventory turnover during this interval. Following this peak, a downward trend emerges, with the period decreasing to 128 days by the end of 2014, indicating a partial recovery in inventory management efficiency.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The collection period remains relatively stable over the five-year period, with minimal variance between a high of 52 days in 2013 and a low of 47 days in 2014. This consistency reflects a steady credit policy and consistent payment patterns from customers.
- Operating Cycle
- The total operating cycle rose from 165 days in 2010 to a peak of 183 days in 2013. The subsequent reduction to 175 days in 2014 correlates with the improvements observed in both inventory processing and receivable collection. The high degree of correlation between the operating cycle and the inventory processing period confirms that inventory residence time is the primary driver of the company's short-term operating activity.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Payables Payment Period
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Payables turnover | 2.93 | 2.81 | 3.33 | 3.74 | 3.24 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average payables payment period1 | 125 | 130 | 110 | 98 | 112 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Payables Payment Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Average payables payment period = 365 ÷ Payables turnover
= 365 ÷ 2.93 = 125
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of accounts payable activity between 2010 and 2014 reveals a period of volatility followed by a general extension of the payment cycle. The relationship between the turnover ratio and the payment period demonstrates an inverse correlation, as expected in financial reporting.
- Payables Turnover Ratio
- The turnover ratio experienced an initial increase from 3.24 in 2010 to a peak of 3.74 in 2011. This peak was followed by a consistent downward trend, reaching a five-year low of 2.81 in 2013. A slight recovery was noted in 2014, with the ratio moving up to 2.93.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- The payment period decreased from 112 days in 2010 to 98 days in 2011, representing the fastest settlement of obligations within the period. Subsequently, a trend of lengthening payment durations emerged, with the period expanding to 110 days in 2012 and peaking at 130 days in 2013. By 2014, the period contracted slightly to 125 days.
The observed increase in the average payables payment period from 2011 to 2013 suggests a strategic shift toward utilizing vendor credit to preserve liquidity. While the payment cycle shortened slightly in 2014, the overall trend indicates that the company significantly extended its payment terms compared to the 2010 and 2011 levels.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Cash Conversion Cycle
| Dec 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Dec 31, 2011 | Dec 31, 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period | 128 | 131 | 133 | 122 | 116 | |
| Average receivable collection period | 47 | 52 | 49 | 50 | 49 | |
| Average payables payment period | 125 | 130 | 110 | 98 | 112 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Cash conversion cycle1 | 50 | 53 | 72 | 74 | 53 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Cash Conversion Cycle, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2011-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2010-12-31).
1 2014 Calculation
Cash conversion cycle = Average inventory processing period + Average receivable collection period – Average payables payment period
= 128 + 47 – 125 = 50
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The cash conversion cycle exhibits a non-linear trend over the five-year period, characterized by a significant expansion in the middle years followed by a return to baseline efficiency levels by 2014.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- An upward trend is observed from 2010 to 2012, with the processing period increasing from 116 to 133 days. This indicates a deceleration in inventory turnover during this window. A slight contraction followed in 2013 and 2014, ending at 128 days, though the period remained elevated compared to the 2010 baseline.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- Collection efficiency remained remarkably stable throughout the analyzed period. The duration fluctuated minimally between 47 and 52 days, suggesting a consistent approach to credit management and customer collections. The most efficient collection period was recorded in 2014 at 47 days.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- The payment period for payables showed significant volatility. After a decline to 98 days in 2011, there was a substantial increase peaking at 130 days in 2013. This trend suggests a strategic extension of supplier payment terms to preserve internal liquidity.
- Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC)
- The CCC peaked in 2011 at 74 days, resulting from the combined effect of increasing inventory processing times and a reduction in the payables payment period. Subsequently, the cycle contracted, reaching its lowest point of 50 days by 2014. This recovery was primarily driven by the extended payables payment period, which effectively neutralized the impact of slower inventory turnover.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?