盈利能力分析外文翻譯(共10頁(yè))

1、精選優(yōu)質(zhì)文檔-傾情為你奉上在斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞的上市公司的盈利能力分析阿努拉·德索伊薩阿努拉·曼納烏阿尼爾·川科庫(kù)瑞澳大利亞伍倫貢大學(xué)摘要：本文采用在斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞在2006年至2008年期間161上市制造業(yè)公司的經(jīng)驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù)，并比較了這些公司對(duì)兩種常用的財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)指標(biāo)的表現(xiàn)：資產(chǎn)（ROA）和凈資產(chǎn)收益率回報(bào)（ROE）。結(jié)果表明，在此期間，斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)在更有利可圖的ROA，但在利潤(rùn)較低的ROE方面均大大高于他們?cè)隈R來(lái)西亞的同行。它還確定股票投資的相對(duì)較弱的地位，斯里蘭卡公司的制造業(yè)和屬性這許多因素，其中包括：有相對(duì)不佳的股票市場(chǎng)，高利率和過(guò)度恐懼高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的投資。公

2、司的盈利能力和資產(chǎn)行業(yè)分析也可以觀察到類似的趨勢(shì)。關(guān)鍵詞：盈利能力分析，上市，制造，企業(yè)，斯里蘭卡，斯里蘭卡，馬來(lái)西亞，經(jīng)驗(yàn)，調(diào)查簡(jiǎn)介斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞有許多共同點(diǎn)在五十年以前。這兩個(gè)國(guó)家是英國(guó)殖民地，并脫離英國(guó)獨(dú)立9年分開 - 在1957年斯里蘭卡在1948年和馬來(lái)西亞。這兩個(gè)國(guó)家開始了獨(dú)立后的時(shí)期，資源，雄厚的英國(guó)的法律和政治制度，以及類似的教育系統(tǒng)的豐富多樣。1960年，馬來(lái)西亞有一個(gè)國(guó)民總收入（GNI）每280美元的人均和斯里蘭卡在1960年的每152美元的人均國(guó)民總收入。“由于1970年，斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞也有類似的生活標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”（莎莉，2009年，P1）。經(jīng)過(guò)五十年的獨(dú)立性，馬來(lái)西亞現(xiàn)

3、在遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)領(lǐng)先于斯里蘭卡的許多方面，包括經(jīng)濟(jì)和工業(yè)發(fā)展。今天，“馬來(lái)西亞被廣泛接受為一個(gè)大發(fā)展的成功故事在發(fā)展中世界。盡管有1997-1998年金融危機(jī)期間的大規(guī)模經(jīng)濟(jì)收縮經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富，馬來(lái)西亞的經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)一直貫穿獨(dú)立后期間令人印象深刻。持續(xù)高增長(zhǎng)（平均近6年息百分之過(guò)去四十年），一直伴隨著生活水平的提高與收入的相對(duì)平等分配“（Athukorala，2005年，第19頁(yè)）。數(shù)據(jù)和理論：本研究的數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)自統(tǒng)計(jì)局范戴克的OSIRIS數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)，提供財(cái)政和其他相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)超過(guò)34000在130個(gè)國(guó)家的上市公司獲得。由于在這項(xiàng)研究中用來(lái)測(cè)量在斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞上市公司的盈利能力數(shù)據(jù)的主要來(lái)源是出版公司賬戶，本次研究的結(jié)果

4、應(yīng)謹(jǐn)慎對(duì)待。被公賬戶披露的數(shù)據(jù)通常與繼承一定的局限性，尤其是用于比較的公司在不同國(guó)家的表現(xiàn)。其中一個(gè)主要的限制是，在公司帳目確定的利潤(rùn)是在此基礎(chǔ)上可能會(huì)有所不同，從公司到公司的公司會(huì)計(jì)實(shí)務(wù)。例如，如折舊的量和庫(kù)存價(jià)值物品受到任意估值一個(gè)相當(dāng)寬的范圍內(nèi)。此外，特別是在固定資產(chǎn)，基于歷史成本會(huì)計(jì)的概念數(shù)字可能并不代表通貨膨脹期間實(shí)際值。在該公司賬目計(jì)算的利潤(rùn)也受到企業(yè)和稅務(wù)法規(guī)也不同國(guó)家之間變化的影響。在跨國(guó)公司的情況下，利潤(rùn)的計(jì)算可能會(huì)容易通過(guò)實(shí)踐各種操作，如轉(zhuǎn)讓定價(jià)（Robbins和Stobaugh，1974年）。雖然符合國(guó)際財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告準(zhǔn)則（IFRS） - 這是使用超過(guò)100個(gè)國(guó)家，包括斯里蘭卡

5、和馬來(lái)西亞 - 方便可比性，還存在會(huì)計(jì)實(shí)務(wù)一些不同之處，這使得它難以評(píng)估和比較一個(gè)企業(yè)的盈利能力現(xiàn)實(shí)的態(tài)度，尤其是當(dāng)這些企業(yè)都來(lái)自不同的國(guó)家。公司樣本：這項(xiàng)研究的樣本公司制造的科倫坡股票上市公司交易所（CSE）及馬來(lái)西亞交易所（MYX），只從公司選擇了與完整的財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)為三年，從2006年至2008年的OSIRIS數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的篩選過(guò)程，然后將其應(yīng)用于企業(yè)符合上述標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。首先，樣本中所有剩余的公司進(jìn)行分類的全球行業(yè)分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（GICS）代碼作為識(shí)別他們的GICS代碼，以消除非制造業(yè)公司。其次，由于本研究的主要目的是考察制造業(yè)兩國(guó)企業(yè)的盈利能力，它被認(rèn)為是適當(dāng)?shù)?，以消除企業(yè)與負(fù)的平均ROA為近三年來(lái)，由于樣

6、品中有這樣的公司扭曲的結(jié)果該分析。這個(gè)篩選過(guò)程留下62制造企業(yè)斯里蘭卡樣本。第三，這些62家公司的GICS代碼，然后用剩下的馬來(lái)西亞公司樣本中匹配，消除了馬來(lái)西亞公司不匹配的公司GICS代碼斯里蘭卡樣本。這種匹配過(guò)程中離開，99家馬來(lái)西亞公司，然后將其選定為馬來(lái)西亞公司的樣本。經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力：斯里蘭卡vs馬來(lái)西亞雙方斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞位于亞洲其中擁有世界人口的60。這兩個(gè)地區(qū)，東亞，其中馬來(lái)西亞位于和南亞，其中斯里蘭卡所在，也是占世界人口的30。然而，相較于一些亞洲國(guó)家，如中國(guó)和印度具有巨大的人口，這兩個(gè)國(guó)家的人口，斯里蘭卡（20億美元）和馬來(lái)西亞（27億美元）是比較小的，因?yàn)樗麄冋剂瞬坏?總亞裔人

7、口。下面的表2提供了有關(guān)這兩個(gè)國(guó)家在過(guò)去50年的經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)一些有用的信息。表2在斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞人口與發(fā)展的一些指標(biāo)19602007斯里蘭卡馬來(lái)西亞%斯里蘭卡馬來(lái)西亞%人口總計(jì)（百萬(wàn)）108.1818120.026.6133人均GNI（美元）15228018415406540425GDP（十億美元）1.52.315332.4186.7577GDP增長(zhǎng)（每年%）4.66.51416.86.393農(nóng)業(yè)增長(zhǎng)（GDP%）3236113121083工業(yè)增長(zhǎng)（GDP%）2018903048160服務(wù)業(yè)增長(zhǎng)（GDP%）484696584272表2清楚地表明，在此期間一九六零年至2007年對(duì)一些重要的經(jīng)濟(jì)指標(biāo)

8、，兩國(guó)之間的差距已經(jīng)拉大。如人均國(guó)民總收入-widely作為一個(gè)國(guó)家的經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)的一個(gè)基本指標(biāo) - 斯里蘭卡遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)落后于馬來(lái)西亞，2007年與1540美元其國(guó)民總收入的人均收入相比，馬來(lái)西亞6540美元。 1960年馬來(lái)西亞的人均國(guó)民總收入收入僅為1.84倍斯里蘭卡的人均國(guó)民總收入的收入，但到2007年這一差距擴(kuò)大到4.25倍斯里蘭卡的人均國(guó)民總收入的收入。類似的情況是觀察兩國(guó)的GDP。 1960年，為23十億馬來(lái)西亞的GDP只是1.53倍斯里蘭卡為15十億GDP。然而，2007年馬來(lái)西亞GDP已增至美元的巨額186.7十億，這是近6倍，斯里蘭卡在2007年達(dá)32.4十億GDP兩國(guó)之間的另一個(gè)值得

9、注意的區(qū)別是，這兩個(gè)國(guó)家都按比例減少其農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)出，同時(shí)增加他們的工業(yè)產(chǎn)值之間的兩個(gè)時(shí)期顯著。引人注目的是，通過(guò)在1960年斯里蘭卡的工業(yè)產(chǎn)值（占GDP的20），約10叔比馬來(lái)西亞高。然而，雖然斯里蘭卡已經(jīng)從國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值1960年20的貢獻(xiàn)提高到占GDP的30，2007年（同比增長(zhǎng)50）取得了工業(yè)產(chǎn)出的增長(zhǎng)顯著的進(jìn)步，馬來(lái)西亞從18增加了其工業(yè)產(chǎn)值國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在1960年國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的48，2007年（同比增長(zhǎng)167）?？傮w而言，上述數(shù)據(jù)清楚地表明，在此期間馬來(lái)西亞已經(jīng)由顯著保證金外進(jìn)行斯里蘭卡的經(jīng)濟(jì)和工業(yè)發(fā)展方面。盈利能力：斯里蘭卡VS馬來(lái)西亞凈資產(chǎn)收益率（ROA）表3顯示盈利率的分散，由ROA

10、測(cè)得的，其中斯里蘭卡和馬來(lái)西亞的制造企業(yè)2006年至2008年，平均ROA為三年期限在一起。如表3所示，斯里蘭卡公司的期間為2006年至2008年的平均利潤(rùn)率從10到11.4，與3年的平均水平10.9?？傮w而言，樣本公司中49已經(jīng)能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)ROA大于10，比3年。而該公司的16已取得的ROA小于5效果差，該公司的23已在3年內(nèi)達(dá)到15以上，平均ROA。表3資產(chǎn)回報(bào)率（ROA）的分布ROA 范圍斯里蘭卡馬來(lái)西亞200620072008平均值200620072008平均值%5以下27162916323135305-10152339354138324410-15273515261512201615-2

11、023188187128520-256863133325以上20323311總計(jì)100100100100100100100100無(wú)公司6262626299999999統(tǒng)計(jì)平均10.911.410.07.67.7最小-4.5-0.3-5.40.3-9.3-4.6-7.9-3.1最大46.023.193.346.832.829.727.826.8STD8.15.9馬來(lái)西亞公司的平均利潤(rùn)率由7.5在3年內(nèi)7.7的總體平均變化為8.7。仔細(xì)看看3年的平均盈利能力的分散顯示，99家馬來(lái)西亞公司的25達(dá)到10以上，而ROA只有9的企業(yè)已經(jīng)能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)高

12、于15的ROA。用5以下比較低盈利的公司占全部馬來(lái)西亞公司的30。什么是顯而易見的，主要從ROA兩國(guó)數(shù)字是斯里蘭卡的生產(chǎn)盈利能力比所有的馬來(lái)西亞制造企業(yè)相對(duì)較高。更具體地說(shuō)，斯里蘭卡公司在三年內(nèi)的ROA是在10至11的范圍內(nèi)有10.9的整體平均水平。相反，馬來(lái)西亞公司的ROA為同一時(shí)期是在7到9的范圍內(nèi)以7.7的總體平均水平。這是斯里蘭卡公司的ROA和42贊成斯里蘭卡公司的差的72。仔細(xì)看看居留權(quán)的兩國(guó)間的分散也表明，斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)都在實(shí)現(xiàn)更高的盈利能力方面表現(xiàn)比馬來(lái)西亞制造企業(yè)更好。從下端，只有16的斯公司已經(jīng)作為對(duì)馬來(lái)西亞公司獲得了類似的結(jié)果的30達(dá)到ROA的小于5。的情況也是類似的刻度

13、的上端。而斯里蘭卡的公司23都取得了超過(guò)15的ROA，只有9的馬來(lái)西亞公司能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)這一結(jié)果。先前的研究，審查了在亞洲的制造企業(yè)的盈利能力還透露，在斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)的盈利能力比一些亞洲國(guó)家，包括日本，香港，泰國(guó)，韓國(guó)，馬來(lái)西亞，中國(guó)，印度尼西亞，新加坡和更高巴基斯坦。根據(jù)這項(xiàng)研究，這些國(guó)家在1995年的ROA從2.4（韓國(guó)）范圍為11.1（巴基斯坦）。馬來(lái)西亞制造企業(yè)的ROA被認(rèn)為是9.6（Wijewardena和De德索伊薩，2000）。結(jié)論：本文的主要目的是評(píng)估斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)的業(yè)績(jī)相比，這對(duì)馬來(lái)西亞制造企業(yè)獲得了一些見解改善他們目前的性能水平。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)，這項(xiàng)研究分析了161的制造企

14、業(yè)，包括62斯里蘭卡企業(yè)，99家馬來(lái)西亞公司從OSIRIS數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)選擇的財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)。在研究中使用的數(shù)據(jù)涵蓋了為期三年，從2006年至2008年使用的兩個(gè)性能測(cè)量常用，ROA和ROE，計(jì)算和分析的樣品本公司的財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)。這一分析表明，在此期間2006至08年的斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)均大大高于他們的同行在馬來(lái)西亞更有利可圖，這表明一個(gè)積極的結(jié)果斯里蘭卡。當(dāng)盈利被業(yè)界分析，據(jù)透露，所有在斯里蘭卡六大行業(yè)錄得較高的ROA比他們的同行在馬來(lái)西亞。從在斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)高盈利水平的主要觀察的是，這已經(jīng)滲透到投資在未來(lái)更高水平的能力。與此相反，以ROA，馬來(lái)西亞公司已經(jīng)整體表現(xiàn)比斯里蘭卡企業(yè)稍好ROE方面。然而，行業(yè)間的

15、分析表明，除了在農(nóng)產(chǎn)品和種植園部門，斯里蘭卡的所有其他制造業(yè)已經(jīng)分別取得了較高的凈資產(chǎn)收益率比同行的馬來(lái)西亞。盡管如此，似乎仍然是需求和機(jī)會(huì)，為公司在斯里蘭卡，以改善他們的ROE。提高ROE水平是斯里蘭卡重要的，如果它要吸引更多的股權(quán)投資進(jìn)入其制造業(yè)。這項(xiàng)研究的另一個(gè)主要發(fā)現(xiàn)是，斯里蘭卡的相對(duì)位置差 - 尤其是制造業(yè)的股權(quán)投資方面 - 相比，馬來(lái)西亞公司60的斯里蘭卡公司的股權(quán)資本僅為46。類似的趨勢(shì)在這兩個(gè)國(guó)家的所有六個(gè)行業(yè)觀察時(shí)股權(quán)的水平是由行業(yè)分析。究其原因，在斯里蘭卡公司股本較低水平可以歸結(jié)為幾個(gè)因素，如：比較差的股票市場(chǎng)，提供給非股權(quán)投資，過(guò)度擔(dān)心高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的投資，而在高利率制造商的不足

16、，相應(yīng)的投資機(jī)會(huì)剝削。然而，股權(quán)投資水平高是至關(guān)重要的斯里蘭卡制造業(yè)是成功的在其努力實(shí)現(xiàn)更高的經(jīng)濟(jì)和工業(yè)發(fā)展。未來(lái)這方面的研究還需要考察多方面因素的影響 - 如大小，年齡，位置，出口，資產(chǎn)和資本結(jié)構(gòu)，勞動(dòng)力成本，員工的工作效率和管理效率，等等 - 在斯里蘭卡公司公司的盈利能力。出于這個(gè)原因，一個(gè)縱向分析具有較大的樣品是理想的。 本文摘自Anura De Zoysa, Athula S. Manawaduge, Palli Mulla K A Chandrakumara，PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LISTED MANUFACTURING COMPANIES IN SRI

17、 LANKA AND MALAYSIA，University of Wollongong, Australia.PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LISTED MANUFACTURING COMPANIES IN SRILANKA AND MALAYSIAAnura De Zoysa, Athula S. Manawaduge, Palli Mulla K A ChandrakumaraUniversity of Wollongong, AustraliaAbstractThis paper uses empirical data on 161 listed manufact

18、uring companies in Sri Lankaand Malaysia over the period of 2006 to 2008, and compares the performance of thesecompanies against two commonly used financial performance indicators: Return onAssets (ROA) and Return on Equity (ROE). The results indicate that during this periodSri Lankan manufacturing

19、companies were considerably more profitable than their counterparts in Malaysia in terms of ROA but less profitable in terms of ROE. It alsoidentifies a relatively weaker position of equity investments in the manufacturing sectorof Sri Lankan companies and attributes this to a number of factors, inc

20、luding: arelatively poor equity market, high interest rates, and excessive fear of highriskinvestment. A similar trend was observed when the profitability and equity ofcompanies were analysed by industry.KeywordsProfitability, analysis, listed, manufacturing, companies, Sri, Lanka, Malaysia, empiric

21、al, investigationINTRODUCTIONSri Lanka and Malaysia had many things in common five decades ago. Both countries were British colonies and gained independence from Britain nine years apart Sri Lanka in 1948 and Malaysia in 1957. Both countries started the post-independence period with a rich mix of re

22、sources, strong British legal and political institutions, and similar educational systems. In 1960, Malaysia had a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of about $280 and Sri Lanka had a GNI per capita of US$152 in 1960. “As of 1970, Sri Lanka and Malaysia had similar living standards” (Sally, 2009

23、, p1.). After five decades of independence, Malaysia is now far ahead of Sri Lanka in many fronts, including economic and industrial development. Today, “Malaysia is widely held as a great development success story in the developing world. Not withstanding the massive economic contraction experience

24、d during the 1997-98 financial crisis, Malaysias economic performance has been impressive throughout the postindependence period. Sustained high growth (averaging to nearly 6 per cent per annum for the past four decades) has been accompanied by rising living standards with a relatively equal distrib

25、ution of income” (Athukorala, 2005, p.19).DATA AND METHODOLOGYThe data for this study were obtained from Bureau Van Dijks OSIRIS Database which provides financial and other related data for over 34,000 listed companies in 130 countries. Since the main source of data used in this study for measuring

26、the profitability of listed companies in Sri Lanka and Malaysia is published company accounts, the results of this study should be viewed with caution. Data disclosed in public accounts are generally inherited with some limitations, especially if used to compare the performance of companies in diffe

27、rent countries. One of the major limitations is that profits determined in company accounts are based on company accounting practices which may vary from company to company. For example, items such as the amount of depreciation and the value of inventory are subject to arbitrary valuation within a f

28、airly wide range. Moreover, particularly in respect of fixed assets, accounting figures based on the historical cost concept may not represent realistic values in a period of inflation. Profits calculated in the company accounts are also influenced by business and tax regulations which also vary bet

29、ween different countries. In the case of multinational companies, profit calculation may be liable to various manipulations through practices such as transfer pricing (Robbins and Stobaugh, 1974). Although compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) which are used by more than

30、 100 countries including Sri Lanka and Malaysia facilitate comparability, there are still some inconsistencies in accounting practices which makes it difficult to assess and compare the profitability of firms in a realistic manner, particularly when those firms are from different countries.SAMPLE OF

31、 COMPANIESThe sample companies of this study are manufacturing companies listed on the Colombo StockExchange (CSE) and the Malaysia exchange (MYX), chosen from only the companies on the OSIRIS database with complete financial data for the three years from 2006 to 2008. A screening process was then a

32、pplied to companies matching the above criteria. First, all remaining companies in the sample were classified by the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) codes to eliminate nonmanufacturing companies as identified by their GICS codes. Second, since the main objective of this study is to ex

33、amine the profitability of manufacturing companies of both countries, it was considered appropriate to eliminate companies with a negative average ROA for the past three years, since having such companies in the sample distorts the results of the analysis. This screening process left 62 manufacturin

34、g companies in the Sri Lankan sample. Third, the GICS codes of these 62 companies were then matched with the remaining Malaysian companies in the sample, eliminating the Malaysian companies that did not match the GICS codes of the companies in the Sri Lankan sample. This matching process left, 99 Ma

35、laysian companies, which were then selected as the sample of Malaysian companies.ECONOMY: SRI LANKA VERSUS MALAYSIABoth Sri Lanka and Malaysia are located in Asia which hosts 60% of the worlds population. The two regions, Eastern Asia where Malaysia is located and Southern Asia where Sri Lanka is lo

36、cated, also account for 30% of the worlds population. However, in comparison to some countries in Asia such as China and India with enormous populations, the population of these two countries, Sri Lanka (20million) and Malaysia (27 million) is relatively small as they account for less than 1% of the

37、 total Asian population. Table 2 below provides some useful information about the economic performance of the two countries in the last 5 decades.Table 2 clearly shows that during the period from 1960 to 2007 the gap between the two countries on some important economic indicators has widened. Like t

38、he GNI per capita widely used as a basic indicator of economic performance of a country Sri Lanka lagged far behind Malaysia in 2007 with its GNI per capita income of $1,540 in comparison to Malaysias $6,540. In 1960 Malaysias GNI per capita income was just 1.84 times Sri Lankas GNI per capita incom

39、e but by 2007 this gap widened to 4.25 times Sri Lankas GNI per capita income. A similar situation is observed for the GDP between the two countries. In 1960, Malaysias GDP of $2.3 billion is just 1.53 times Sri Lankas GDP of $1.5 billion. However, by 2007 Malaysias GDP has increased to a massive $1

40、86.7 billion, which is almost 6 times Sri Lankas GDP of $32.4 billion in 2007. Another noteworthy difference between the two countries is that both countries have proportionately decreased their agricultural output while increasing their industrial output significantly between the two periods. Strik

41、ingly through, in 1960 Sri Lankas industrial output (20% of GDP) is about 10%t higher than that of Malaysia. However, while Sri Lanka has made significant progress in the growth of industrial output by increasing its contribution from 20% of GDP in 1960 to 30% of GDP in 2007 (an increase of 50%), Ma

42、laysia has increased its industrial output from 18% of GDP in 1960 to 48% of GDP in 2007 (an increase of 167%). Overall, the above data clearly shows that over this period Malaysia has out-performed Sri Lanka in terms of economic and industrial development by a significant margin.PROFITABILITY: SRI

43、LANKA VERSUS MALAYSIAReturn on Assets (ROA)Table 3 demonstrates the dispersion of profitability rates, as measured by ROA, among Sri Lankan and Malaysian manufacturing companies from 2006 to 2008, together with the average ROA for the three year period. As Table 3 shows, the average profitability of

44、 Sri Lankan companies for the period from 2006 to 2008 ranged from 10% to 11.4% with a 3 year average of 10.9%. Overall, 49% of the sample companies have been able to achieve an ROA greater than 10% over the 3 year period. While 16% of the companies have achieved poor results of less than 5% of ROA,

45、 23% of the companies have achieved an average ROA of above 15% over the 3 year period.The average profitability of Malaysian companies varied from 7.5% to 8.7% during the 3 year period with an overall average of 7.7%. A closer look at the dispersion of 3 year average profitability reveals that 25%

46、of the 99 Malaysian companies achieved more than 10% ROA while only 9% of the companies have been able to achieve ROA of higher than 15%. The companies with relatively low profitability of below 5% accounted for 30% of all Malaysian companies.What is primarily apparent from the ROA figures between t

47、he two countries is that the manufacturing profitability of Sri Lanka is relatively higher than that of all of the Malaysian manufacturing companies. More specifically, the ROA of Sri Lankan companies over the three year period was in the range of 10% to 11% with an overall average of 10.9%. Contrar

48、ily, the ROA of Malaysian companies for the same period was in the range of 7% to 9% with an overall average of 7.7%. This is 72% of the ROA of Sri Lankan companies and a difference of 42% in favour of Sri Lankan companies. A closer look at the dispersion of the ROA between the two countries also re

49、veals that Sri Lankan manufacturing companies have fared better than Malaysian manufacturing companies in terms of achieving higher profitability. From the lower end, only 16% of the Sri Lankan companies have achieved less than 5% of ROA as against 30% of Malaysian companies achieving similar result

50、s. The situation is also similar for the top end of the scale. While 23% of the Sri Lankan companies have achieved more than 15% ROA, only 9% of Malaysian companies were able to achieve this result. A previous study that examined the profitability of manufacturing companies in Asia also revealed tha

51、t the profitability of manufacturing companies in Sri Lanka was higher than that of some Asian countries including Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, South Korea, Malaysia, China, Indonesia, Singapore and Pakistan. According to this study, the ROA of these countries in 1995 ranged from 2.4% (South Korea) t

52、o 11.1% (Pakistan). The ROA of Malaysian manufacturing companies was found to be 9.6% (Wijewardena and De Zoysa, 2000).CONCLUSIONSThe major objective of this paper was to assess the performance of Sri Lankan manufacturing companies in comparison to that of Malaysian manufacturing companies to obtain

53、 some insights into improving their current level of performance. In order to achieve this objective, this study analysed the financial data of 161 manufacturing companies consisting of 62 Sri Lankan companies and 99 Malaysian companies selected from the OSIRIS Database. The data used in the study c

54、over a three-year period from 2006 to 2008. Using this financial data of the sample companies two commonly used performance measures, ROA and ROE, were calculated and analysed. This analysis revealed that during the period from 2006 to 2008 Sri Lankan manufacturing companies were considerably more p

55、rofitable than their counterparts in Malaysia, indicating a positive result for Sri Lanka. When profitability was analysed by industry, it was revealed that all of the six industries in Sri Lanka recorded a relatively higher ROA than their counterparts in Malaysia. The primary observation from a hig

56、h profitability level for manufacturing companies in Sri Lanka is that this has the capacity to penetrate into a greater level of investment in the future.On the contrary to ROA, Malaysian companies have overall performed slightly better than Sri Lankan companies in terms of ROE. However, inter-industry analysis