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
General Dynamics Corp. pages available for free this week:
- Balance Sheet: Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
- Analysis of Liquidity Ratios
- Present Value of Free Cash Flow to Equity (FCFE)
- Selected Financial Data since 2005
- Net Profit Margin since 2005
- Price to Earnings (P/E) since 2005
- Price to Book Value (P/BV) since 2005
- Price to Sales (P/S) since 2005
- Analysis of Debt
- Aggregate Accruals
The data is hidden behind: . Unhide it.
Get full access to the entire website from $10.42/mo, or
get 1-month access to General Dynamics Corp. for $22.49.
This is a one-time payment. There is no automatic renewal.
We accept:
Economic Profit
General Dynamics Corp., economic profit calculation
US$ in millions
| 12 months ended: | Dec 31, 2019 | Dec 31, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT)1 | ||||||
| Cost of capital2 | ||||||
| Invested capital3 | ||||||
| Economic profit4 | ||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 NOPAT. See details »
2 Cost of capital. See details »
3 Invested capital. See details »
4 2019 Calculation
Economic profit = NOPAT – Cost of capital × Invested capital
= – × =
The financial data reveals several notable trends over the period from 2015 to 2019. The net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT) exhibits a generally positive trajectory, rising from 3,237 million USD in 2015 to 4,114 million USD in 2019. Despite a slight dip in 2017, the overall increase in NOPAT indicates improved operating profitability.
The cost of capital shows minor fluctuations, starting at 14.89% in 2015, peaking slightly at 15.17% in 2017, and then declining to 13.45% by 2019. This decrease in the cost of capital in the latter years could suggest a more favorable financing environment or improved risk profile for the company.
Invested capital demonstrates a marked increase over the five-year period. Beginning at 18,175 million USD in 2015, it grows modestly through 2017 and then sharply rises to 29,939 million USD in 2018, continuing up to 31,608 million USD in 2019. This expansion in invested capital indicates significant investment or asset accumulation during the latter years.
Economic profit, which reflects the value created beyond the cost of capital, initially rises from 531 million USD in 2015 to 615 million USD in 2016 but declines thereafter, turning negative starting in 2018 with -290 million USD and slightly improving to -136 million USD in 2019. The negative economic profit in the final two years suggests that the company was not generating sufficient returns to cover its cost of capital despite rising NOPAT levels and capital investments.
- Summary of Key Trends
-
- NOPAT
- General upward trend with an increase of approximately 27% from 2015 to 2019.
- Cost of Capital
- Relatively stable with a mild decline post-2017, potentially indicative of reduced financing costs or risk.
- Invested Capital
- Substantial growth particularly from 2017 to 2018, possibly reflecting strategic investment activities.
- Economic Profit
- Initial improvement followed by negative values, highlighting challenges in achieving returns above the cost of capital in recent years.
Overall, the data depicts a company experiencing growth in operating profits and capital investment but facing difficulties in translating these into positive economic profit in the later part of the period. This may warrant further investigation into the efficiency of capital deployment and the sustainability of operating profit growth relative to the cost of capital.
Net Operating Profit after Taxes (NOPAT)
General Dynamics Corp., NOPAT calculation
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 Elimination of deferred tax expense. See details »
2 Addition of increase (decrease) in product warranty liabilities.
3 Addition of increase (decrease) in equity equivalents to net earnings.
4 2019 Calculation
Interest expense on capitalized operating leases = Operating lease liability × Discount rate
= × =
5 2019 Calculation
Tax benefit of interest expense = Adjusted interest expense × Statutory income tax rate
= × 21.00% =
6 Addition of after taxes interest expense to net earnings.
7 2019 Calculation
Tax expense (benefit) of investment income = Investment income, before tax × Statutory income tax rate
= × 21.00% =
8 Elimination of after taxes investment income.
9 Elimination of discontinued operations.
- Net Earnings
- Net earnings remained relatively stable from 2015 to 2017, showing a slight decrease from 2,965 million USD in 2015 to 2,912 million USD in 2017. However, from 2017 onwards, a notable upward trend is observed with earnings increasing to 3,345 million USD in 2018 and further to 3,484 million USD in 2019. This indicates a period of renewed profitability growth in the last two years under review.
- Net Operating Profit After Taxes (NOPAT)
- NOPAT experienced consistent growth over the entire period. Starting at 3,237 million USD in 2015, it increased to 3,563 million USD in 2016. Despite a slight decrease in 2017 to 3,393 million USD, the overall trend resumed upward momentum, reaching 3,683 million USD in 2018 and then significantly climbing to 4,114 million USD in 2019. This illustrates improving operational efficiency and profitability after taxes over the five-year span.
Cash Operating Taxes
General Dynamics Corp., cash operating taxes calculation
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
The provision for income taxes, net, exhibited a generally stable trend between 2015 and 2017, with values of approximately 1137 million, 1169 million, and 1165 million US dollars, respectively. However, there was a notable decline starting in 2018, with the figure dropping significantly to 727 million and further slightly decreasing to 718 million US dollars in 2019. This downward shift after 2017 suggests a reduction in the overall tax burden or possible changes in tax strategies or profitability.
Cash operating taxes showed a downward trajectory over the five-year period. Starting from 1007 million US dollars in 2015, cash operating taxes decreased to 833 million in 2016, and then continued to decline slightly to 811 million in 2017. In 2018, the amount remained relatively stable at 814 million US dollars but then decreased again to 732 million in 2019. This gradual reduction aligns with the trend observed in the provision for income taxes, although the decline in cash taxes began earlier and was more gradual compared to the sharper decrease seen in the provision figures after 2017.
Overall, both tax-related metrics demonstrate a significant reduction in the company’s income tax liabilities from 2017 onwards, with cash taxes showing a steady decline throughout the entire period. This pattern may reflect changes in taxable income, effective tax rates, tax planning measures, or adjustments in accounting for tax provisions.
Invested Capital
General Dynamics Corp., invested capital calculation (financing approach)
US$ in millions
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 Addition of capitalized operating leases.
2 Elimination of deferred taxes from assets and liabilities. See details »
3 Addition of product warranty liabilities.
4 Addition of equity equivalents to shareholders’ equity.
5 Removal of accumulated other comprehensive income.
6 Subtraction of construction in process.
The analysis of the financial data over the five-year period reveals several noteworthy trends in the company's debt levels, equity base, and invested capital.
- Total Reported Debt & Leases
- The total reported debt and leases exhibited a generally increasing trend from 2015 to 2017, rising from $4,345 million to $5,188 million. A significant jump occurred between 2017 and 2018, with debt surging dramatically to $13,882 million, followed by a slight decrease in 2019 to $13,433 million. This suggests a substantial increase in leverage starting in 2018, which may reflect a strategic decision to finance growth, acquisitions, or other investments during this time.
- Shareholders’ Equity
- Shareholders’ equity steadily increased over the analyzed periods, moving from $10,738 million in 2015 to $13,577 million in 2019. The growth was relatively consistent, indicating ongoing accumulation of retained earnings and/or capital contributions. The equity growth rate appears moderate and stable compared to the more volatile changes observed in total debt.
- Invested Capital
- Invested capital increased from $18,175 million in 2015 to $19,772 million by 2017, which is a moderate growth. However, a sharp rise occurred between 2017 and 2018, coinciding with the surge in reported debt and leases, with invested capital reaching $29,939 million in 2018 and further increasing to $31,608 million in 2019. This suggests significant investment or expansion activities starting in 2018, funded in part by increased debt levels.
Overall, the data indicate a period of relative stability from 2015 through 2017, followed by a substantial increase in leverage and total invested capital beginning in 2018. The company’s equity base grew steadily throughout, providing a solid foundation despite the sharp increase in debt. This pattern may reflect a strategic shift toward accelerated growth or capital-intensive initiatives in the latter years of the period analyzed.
Cost of Capital
General Dynamics Corp., cost of capital calculations
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Short- and long-term debt principal3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 21.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 21.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Short- and long-term debt principal. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Short- and long-term debt principal3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 21.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 21.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Short- and long-term debt principal. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Short- and long-term debt principal3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Short- and long-term debt principal. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Short- and long-term debt principal3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Short- and long-term debt principal. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
| Capital (fair value)1 | Weights | Cost of capital | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity2 | ÷ | = | × | = | |||||||||
| Short- and long-term debt principal3 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Operating lease liability4 | ÷ | = | × | × (1 – 35.00%) | = | ||||||||
| Total: | |||||||||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 US$ in millions
2 Equity. See details »
3 Short- and long-term debt principal. See details »
4 Operating lease liability. See details »
Economic Spread Ratio
General Dynamics Corp., economic spread ratio calculation, comparison to benchmarks
| Dec 31, 2019 | Dec 31, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Economic profit1 | ||||||
| Invested capital2 | ||||||
| Performance Ratio | ||||||
| Economic spread ratio3 | ||||||
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Economic Spread Ratio, Competitors4 | ||||||
| Boeing Co. | ||||||
| Caterpillar Inc. | ||||||
| Eaton Corp. plc | ||||||
| GE Aerospace | ||||||
| Honeywell International Inc. | ||||||
| Lockheed Martin Corp. | ||||||
| RTX Corp. | ||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 Economic profit. See details »
2 Invested capital. See details »
3 2019 Calculation
Economic spread ratio = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Invested capital
= 100 × ÷ =
4 Click competitor name to see calculations.
- Economic Profit Trend
- The economic profit exhibited a positive trend from 2015 to 2016, increasing from 531 million US dollars to 615 million US dollars. However, a significant decline was observed starting in 2017, dropping to 394 million US dollars and turning negative in the subsequent years. By 2018, economic profit had fallen to -290 million US dollars and remained negative at -136 million US dollars in 2019.
- Invested Capital Evolution
- Invested capital showed a steady upward trajectory throughout the period under review. Beginning at 18,175 million US dollars in 2015, it increased each year to reach 19,539 million US dollars in 2016, and 19,772 million US dollars in 2017. The growth accelerated in 2018 and 2019, with the invested capital rising substantially to 29,939 million US dollars and 31,608 million US dollars, respectively.
- Economic Spread Ratio Development
- The economic spread ratio started at 2.92% in 2015 and improved slightly to 3.15% in 2016. Afterward, it declined sharply to 1.99% in 2017. This decline became more pronounced in 2018 when the ratio turned negative, reaching -0.97%, and improved somewhat in 2019 to -0.43%, but remained below zero, indicating deteriorating spread performance.
- Overall Insights
- Despite the consistent increase in invested capital, economic profit demonstrated a weakening trend, culminating in negative profitability in the last two years examined. The deterioration in the economic spread ratio aligns with the downturn in economic profit, suggesting increased costs, lower returns, or both relative to the capital invested. The divergence between invested capital growth and economic profit decline highlights potential issues in efficiently generating returns on capital during this period.
Economic Profit Margin
General Dynamics Corp., economic profit margin calculation, comparison to benchmarks
| Dec 31, 2019 | Dec 31, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Economic profit1 | ||||||
| Revenue | ||||||
| Performance Ratio | ||||||
| Economic profit margin2 | ||||||
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Economic Profit Margin, Competitors3 | ||||||
| Boeing Co. | ||||||
| Caterpillar Inc. | ||||||
| Eaton Corp. plc | ||||||
| GE Aerospace | ||||||
| Honeywell International Inc. | ||||||
| Lockheed Martin Corp. | ||||||
| RTX Corp. | ||||||
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).
1 Economic profit. See details »
2 2019 Calculation
Economic profit margin = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Revenue
= 100 × ÷ =
3 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of the annual financial data reveals several important trends in the company’s financial performance over the five-year period.
- Economic Profit
- The economic profit exhibited an initial increase from 531 million US dollars in 2015 to 615 million US dollars in 2016, indicating improved value creation during this period. However, it subsequently declined sharply to 394 million in 2017, followed by a significant drop into negative territory in 2018 and 2019, reaching -290 million and -136 million US dollars respectively. This shift from positive to negative economic profit reflects a downturn in the company’s ability to generate excess returns above its cost of capital during the latter years.
- Revenue
- Revenue showed a relatively stable trend between 2015 and 2017, slightly decreasing from 31,469 million US dollars in 2015 to 30,973 million in 2017. Starting in 2018, revenue experienced a notable increase, climbing to 36,193 million and further to 39,350 million US dollars in 2019. Despite the revenue growth in the final two years, this did not translate into positive economic profit, suggesting cost pressures or diminishing returns on sales.
- Economic Profit Margin
- The economic profit margin, which reflects economic profit as a percentage of revenue, followed a pattern consistent with the absolute economic profit figures. It increased from 1.69% in 2015 to 1.96% in 2016, then dropped to 1.27% in 2017, before turning negative in 2018 (-0.80%) and 2019 (-0.35%). This decline indicates a contraction in the company’s profitability relative to its revenue, culminating in negative margin performance during the last two periods.
In summary, while revenue experienced growth particularly in 2018 and 2019, both economic profit and economic profit margin deteriorated substantially after 2016, turning negative by 2018. This divergence suggests that despite increased sales, the company faced challenges in cost management or achieving sufficient returns, resulting in diminished economic value generation in the most recent years analyzed.