盈利能力分析外文翻譯

1、在斯里蘭卡和馬來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西亞在2006年至2008年期間161上市制造業(yè)公司的經(jīng)驗數(shù)據(jù)，并比較了這些公司對兩種常用的財務(wù)業(yè)績指標(biāo)的表現(xiàn)：資產(chǎn)（ROA）和凈資產(chǎn)收益率回報（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，但在利潤較低的ROE方面均大大高于他們在馬來西亞的同行。 它還確定股票投資的相對較弱的地位，斯里蘭卡公司的制造業(yè)和屬性這許多因素，其 中包括：有相對不佳的股票市場，高利率和過度恐懼高風(fēng)險的投資。公司的盈利能力 和資產(chǎn)行業(yè)分析也可以觀察到類似的趨勢。關(guān)

2、鍵詞：盈利能力分析，上市，制造，企業(yè)，斯里蘭卡，斯里蘭卡，馬來西亞，經(jīng)驗，調(diào)查簡介斯里蘭卡和馬來西亞有許多共同點在五十年以前。這兩個國家是英國殖民地，并脫離 英國獨立9年分開-在1957年斯里蘭卡在1948年和馬來西亞。這兩個國家開始了獨 立后的時期，資源，雄厚的英國的法律和政治制度，以及類似的教育系統(tǒng)的豐富多 樣。I960年，馬來西亞有一個國民總收入（GNI）每280美元的人均 和斯里蘭卡在 1960年的每152美元的人均國民總收入?！坝捎?970年，斯里蘭 卡和馬來西亞也有 類似的生活標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”（莎莉，2009年，P1）。經(jīng)過五十年的獨立性，馬來西亞現(xiàn)在遠 遠領(lǐng)先于斯里蘭卡的許多方面，包括經(jīng)濟

3、和工業(yè)發(fā)展。今天，“馬來西亞被廣泛接受 為一個大發(fā)展的成功故事在發(fā)展中世界。盡管有1997-1998年金融危機期間的大規(guī)模經(jīng) 濟收縮經(jīng)驗豐富，馬來西亞的經(jīng)濟表現(xiàn)一直貫穿獨立后期間令人印象深刻。持續(xù)高增長 （平均近6 %年息百分之過去四十年），一直伴隨著生活水平的提高與收入的相對平 等分配 “（Athukorala , 2005 年，第 19 頁）。數(shù)據(jù)和理論：本研究的數(shù)據(jù)來自統(tǒng)計局范戴克的OS舊IS數(shù)據(jù)庫，提供財政和其他相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)超過 34000在130個國家的上市公司獲得。由于在這項研究中用來測量在斯里蘭卡 和馬來西 亞上市公司的盈利能力數(shù)據(jù)的主要來源是出版公司賬戶，本次研究的結(jié)果應(yīng)謹慎對 待

4、。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 家的表現(xiàn)。其中一個主要的限制是，在公司帳目確定的利潤是在此基礎(chǔ)上可能會有所 不同，從公司到公司的公司會計實務(wù)。例如，如折舊的量和庫存價值物品受到任意估 值一個相當(dāng)寬的范圍內(nèi)。此外，特別是在固定資產(chǎn)，基于歷史成本會計的概念數(shù)字 可能并不代表通貨膨脹期間實際值。在該公司賬目計算的利潤也受到企業(yè)和稅務(wù)法規(guī) 也不同國家之間變化的影響。在跨國公司的情況下，利潤的計算可能會容易通過實踐 各種操作，如轉(zhuǎn)讓定價（Robbins和Stobaugh，1974年）。雖然符合國際財務(wù)報告準(zhǔn)則（IFRS）-這是使用超過100 個國家，包括斯里蘭卡

5、和馬來西亞-方便可比性，還存在會計實務(wù)一些不同之處，這使 得它難以評估和比較一個企業(yè)的盈利能力現(xiàn)實的態(tài)度，尤其是當(dāng)這些企業(yè)都來自不同 的國家。公司樣本：這項研究的樣本公司制造的科倫坡股票上市公司交易所（CSE）及馬來西亞交易所（MYX ），只從公司選擇了與完整的財務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)為三 年，從2006年至2008年的OSIRIS數(shù)據(jù)庫的篩選過程，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行分類的全球行業(yè)分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（GICS）代碼作為識別他們的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)兩國企業(yè)的盈利能力，它被認為是適當(dāng)?shù)?，以消除企業(yè)與負的平均ROA為近三年

6、來，由于樣品中有這樣的公司扭曲的結(jié)果該分析。這個 篩選過程留下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 剩下的馬來西亞公司樣本中匹配，消除了馬來西亞公司不匹配的公司GICS代碼斯里蘭 卡樣本。這種匹配過程中離開，99家馬來西亞公司，然后將其選定為馬來西亞公司的樣本。經(jīng)濟實力：斯里蘭卡vs馬來西亞雙方斯里蘭卡和馬來西亞位于亞洲其中擁有世界人口的 60 %。這兩個地區(qū)，東 亞，其中馬來西亞位于和南亞，其中斯里蘭卡所在，也是占世界人口的 30 %。然而，相較于一些亞洲國家，如中國和印度具有巨大的人口，這兩個國家的人口，斯里 蘭卡（20億美元）和馬來西亞（27億美元）是比較

7、小的，因為他們占了不到1 %總亞 裔人口。下面的表2提供了有關(guān)這兩個國家在過去50年的經(jīng)濟表現(xiàn)一些有用的信息。表2在斯里蘭卡和馬來西亞人口與發(fā)展的一些指標(biāo)19602007斯里蘭卡馬來西亞%斯里蘭卡馬來西亞%人口總計（百萬）108.1818120.026.6133人均GNI （美元）15228018415406540425GDP （十億美元）1.52.315332.4186.7577GDP增長（每年）4.66.51416.86.393農(nóng)業(yè)增長（GDP%）3236113121083工業(yè)增長（GDP%）2018903048160服務(wù)業(yè)增長（GDP%）484696584272表2清楚地表明，在此期間一

8、九六零年至2007年對一些重要的經(jīng)濟指標(biāo)，兩國之間的 差距已經(jīng)拉大。如人均國民總收入-widely作為一個國家的經(jīng)濟表現(xiàn)的一個 基本指標(biāo)-斯 里蘭卡遠遠落后于馬來西亞，2007年與1540美元其國民總收入 的人均收入相比，馬來 西亞6540美元。1960年馬來西亞的人均國民總收入收 入僅為1.84倍斯里蘭卡的人均 國民總收入的收入，但到2007年這一差距擴大到4.25倍斯里蘭卡的人均國民總收入的 收入。類似的情況是觀察兩國的GDP。I960年，為23十億馬來西亞的GDP只是1.53倍斯里蘭卡為15十億GDP。然而， 2007年馬來西亞GDP已增至美元的巨額186.7十億，這是近6倍，斯里蘭卡在

9、2007 年達32.4十億GDP兩國之間的另一個值得注意的區(qū)別是，這兩個國家都按 比例減少其 農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)出，同時增加他們的工業(yè)產(chǎn)值之間的兩個時期顯著。引人注目的是，通過在1960年斯里蘭卡的工業(yè)產(chǎn)值（占GDP的20%），約10%叔比馬來 西亞 高。然而，雖然斯里蘭卡已經(jīng)從國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值1960年20%的貢獻提高到占GDP的30 %，2007年（同比增長50 %）取得了工業(yè)產(chǎn)出的增長顯著的進步，馬 來西 亞從18 %增加了其工業(yè)產(chǎn)值國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在1960年國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的48 %，2007年（同比增長167 %）。總體而言，上述數(shù)據(jù)清楚地表明，在此期間馬來西 亞已經(jīng)由顯著 保證金外進行斯里蘭卡的經(jīng)濟和工

10、業(yè)發(fā)展方面。盈利能力：斯里蘭卡VS馬來西亞凈資產(chǎn)收益率（ROA）表3顯示盈利率的分散，由ROA測得的，其中斯里蘭卡和馬來西亞的制造企業(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)達到15 %以 上，平均 ROA。表3資產(chǎn)回報率（ROA）的分布ROA范圍斯里蘭卡馬來西亞200620072008平均值20062007200

11、8平均值%5以下27162916323135305-10152339354138324410-15273515261512201615-2023188187128520-256863133325以上20323311總計100100100100100100100100無公司6262626299999999統(tǒng)計平均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馬來西亞公司的平均利潤率由7.5 %在3年

12、內(nèi)7.7 %的總體平均變化為8.7 %。仔細 看看 3年的平均盈利能力的分散顯示，99家馬來西亞公司的25 %達到10 %以上，而ROA 只有9 %的企業(yè)已經(jīng)能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)高于15 %的ROAo 用 5 %以下比較低盈利的 公司占全部馬 來西亞公司的30 %o什么是顯而易見的，主要從ROA兩國數(shù)字是斯里蘭卡的生產(chǎn)盈利能力比所有的馬來 西亞制造企業(yè)相對較高。更具體地說，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，馬來西亞公司的ROA為 同一 時期是在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

13、的72 %。仔細看看居留權(quán)的兩國間的分散也表明，斯里蘭 卡制造企業(yè)都在實現(xiàn)更高的盈利能力方面表現(xiàn)比馬來西亞制造企業(yè)更好。從下端，只 有16 %的斯公司已經(jīng)作為對馬來西亞公司獲得了類似的結(jié)果 的30%達到ROA的小于 5%o的情況也是類似的刻度的上端。而斯里蘭卡的公司23 %都取得了超過15 %的 ROA，只有9%的馬來西亞公司能夠?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家，包括日本，香港，泰國，韓國，馬來西亞，中國，印度尼西亞，新加坡和更高巴基斯坦。根據(jù)這項研究，這些國家在1995年的ROA從2.4 % （韓國）范圍為11.1

14、 % （巴基斯坦）。馬來西亞制造企業(yè)的ROA被認為是9.6 % （ Wijewardena 和 De 德索伊薩，2000 ）。結(jié)論：本文的主要目的是評估斯里蘭卡制造企業(yè)的業(yè)績相比，這對馬來西亞制造企業(yè)獲得了 一些見解改善他們目前的性能水平。為了實現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)，這項研究分析了161的制造企業(yè)，包括62斯里蘭卡企業(yè)，99家馬來西亞公司從OS舊IS數(shù)據(jù)庫選擇的 財務(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年使用的兩個性 能測量常用，ROA和ROE，計算和分析的樣品本公司的財務(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 行在馬來西亞更有利可

15、圖，這表明一個積極的結(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)滲透到投資在未來更高水 平的能力。與此相反，以ROA，馬來西亞公司已經(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西亞。盡管如此，似乎仍然是需求和 機會，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)投資進入其制造業(yè)。這項研究的另一個主要發(fā)現(xiàn)是，斯里蘭卡的相對

16、位置差-尤其是制造業(yè)的股權(quán)投資方面 -相比，馬來西亞公司60%的斯里蘭卡公司的股權(quán)資本僅為46%。類似的趨勢在這兩個 國家的所有六個行業(yè)觀察時股權(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)為幾個因素，如：比較差的股票市場，提供給非股權(quán)投資，過度 擔(dān)心高風(fēng)險的投資，而在高利率制造商的不足，相應(yīng)的投資機會剝削。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現(xiàn)更高的經(jīng)濟 和工業(yè)發(fā)展。未來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。出于這個原因，

17、一個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 AChandrakumara，PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LISTED MANUFACTURINGCOMPANIES IN SRI LANKA AND MALAYSIA，University of Wollongong, Australia.PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LISTEDMANUFACTURING COMPANIES IN SRILANKA AND MALAYSIAAnura De Zoy

18、sa, Athula S. Manawaduge, Palli Mulla K AChandrakumaraUniversity of Wollongong, AustraliaAbstractThis paper uses empirical data on 161 listed manufacturing companies in Sri LankaandMalaysia over the period of 2006 to 2008, and compares the performance ofthesecompaniesagainst two commonly usedfinanci

19、al performance indicators: Return onAssets (ROA) and Return onEquity (ROE). The results indicate that duringthis periodSri Lankanmanufacturing companies were considerably more profitable than their counterparts in Malaysia in terms of ROA but less profitable in terms of ROE. It alsoidentifies a rela

20、tively weaker position of equity investments in the manufacturing sectorof Sri Lankan companies and attributes this to a number of factors, including: arelatively poor equity market, high interest rates, and excessive fear of highriskinvestment. A similar trend was observed when the profitability an

21、d equity ofcompanies were analysed by industry.KeywordsProfitability, analysis, listed, manufacturing, companies, Sri, Lanka, Malaysia, empirical, investigationINTRODUCTIONSri Lanka and Malaysia had many things in common five decades ago.Both countries were British colonies and gained independence f

22、romBrita in nine years apart -Sri Lanka in 1948 and Malaysia in 1957. Both countries started the post-independence period with a rich mix ofresources, strong British legal and political institutions, and similar educational systems. In 1960, Malaysia had a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of a

23、bout $280 and Sri Lanka had a GNI per capita of US$152 in 1960. “ A1s9o7f0, Sri Lanka and Malaysia had similar living standards ” (Sally, 2009, p1.). After five decades of independence, Malaysia is now far ahead of Sri Lanka in many fronts, including economic and industrial development. Today, “ Mal

24、aysia is widely heldas a great development success story in the developing world. Not withstanding the massive economic contraction experienced during the 1997-98 financial crisis , Malaysia esconomic performance has been impressive throughout the postindependence period. Sustained high growth (aver

25、aging to nearly 6 per cent per annum for the past four decades) has been accompanied by rising living standards with a relatively equal distribution of income ” (Athukorala, 2005, p.19).DATA AND METHODOLOGYs OSIRISThe data for this study were obtained from Bureau Van Dijks OSIRISDatabase which provi

26、des 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 the profitability of listed companies in Sri Lanka and Malaysia is published company accounts, the results of this study should be viewed with cautio

27、n. Data disclosed in public accounts are generally inherited with some limitations, especially if used to compare the performance of companies in different countries. One of the major limitations is that profits determined in company accounts are based on company accounting practices which may vary

28、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 fairly wide range. Moreover, particularly in respect of fixed assets, accounting figures based on the historical cost concept may not represent realis

29、tic values in a period of inflation. Profits calculated in the company accountsare also influenced by business and tax regulations which also vary between different countries. In the case of multinational companies,profit calculationmay be liable to various manipulationsthroughpractices such as tran

30、sfer pricing (Robbins and Stobaugh, 1974).Although compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) -which are used by more tha n 100 coun tries in clud ing Sri Lanka and Malaysia - facilitate comparability, there are still some inconsistencies in accounting practices which makes i

31、t difficult to assessand compare the profitability of firms in a realistic manner, particularly when those firms are from different countries.SAMPLE OF COMPANIESThe sample companies of this study are manufacturing companies listed on the Colombo StockExchange (CSE) and the Malaysia exchange (MYX), c

32、hosen 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 applied to companies matching the above criteria. First, all remaining companies in the sample were classified by the Global Industry Classification S

33、tandard (GICS) codes to eliminate nonmanufacturing companies as identified by their GICS codes. Second, since the main objective of this study is to examine the profitability of manufacturing companies of both countries, it was considered appropriate to eliminate companies with a negative average RO

34、A for the past three years, since having such companies in the sample distorts the results of the analysis. This screening process left 62 manufacturing companies in the Sri Lankan sample. Third, the GICS codes of these 62 companies were then matched with the remaining Malaysian companies in the sam

35、ple, eliminating the Malaysian companies that did not match the GICS codes of the companies in the Sri Lankan sample. This matching process left, 99 Malaysian companies, which were then selected as the sample of Malaysian companies.ECONOMY: SRI LANKA VERSUS MALAYSIABoth Sri Lanka and Malaysia are lo

36、cated in Asia which hosts 60% of the world spopulation. The two regions, Eastern Asia where Malaysia is located and Southern Asia where Sri Lanka is located, also account for 30% of the world s population. However, in comparison to some countries inAsia such as China and India with enormous populati

37、ons, the populationof these two coun tries, Sri Lanka (20milli on) and Malaysia (27 millio n) is relatively small as they account for less than 1% of the total Asian populatio n. Table 2 below provides some useful in formati on about the econo mic performa nee of the two coun tries in the last 5 dec

38、ades.TABLE2Some indicalijrs of ckmograpliicdevelopment iu Sri Lanka and Malaysia19602007SLMAL%SLMAL%Population,. Total (inilliGiis)10 18120.026.6133GNI per capita ($)152280J SII.54O6.540125GDP (S in billicms)L52.315332 41S6.7577GDP Eiomli (annual %)4 61J16.S6.393Agile Lilt me. value addedof GDP)3236

39、1131210S3valiK added1%of(jDFI2018304S160Service vjilue atlded (% of GDF)484696584272Table 2 clearly shows that during the period from 1960 to 2007 the gap betwee n the two coun tries on some importa nt econo mic in dicators has widened. Like the GNI per capita -widely used as a basic indicator ofeco

40、nomic performanee of a country - Sri Lanka lagged far behindMalaysia in 2007 with its GNI per capita in come of $1,540 in comparis onto Malaysia s $6,540. In 1960 Malaysia caipGaArpeme wasjust 1.84 times Sri Lanka s GNI per capita in come but by 2007 this gapwide ned to 4.25 times Sri Lanka sGNI per

41、 capita in come. A similar situation iss GDFobserved for the GDP between the two countries. In 1960, Malaysia s GDP of $2.3s GDFbillion is just 1.53 times Sri Lankabilli on. However, by 2007 Malaysia DP has in creased to a massive$186.7 billion, which is almost 6 times Sri Lankas GDP of $32.4 billii

42、on2007. Another noteworthy difference between the two countries is that both countrieshave proportionately decreased their agricultural output while increasing their industrial output significantly between the two periods. Strikingly through, in 1960Sri Lanka insdustrial output (20%of GDP) is about

43、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%), Malaysia has increased its industrial output from 18% of GDP in 1960 to 48%

44、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 LANKA VERSUS MALAYSIA Return on Assets (ROA)Table 3 demonstrates the disper

45、sion 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 Sri Lankan companies for the period from 2006 to 2008 ranged from 10% to

46、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, 23% of the compa nies have achieved an average ROA of above 15% over the

47、3 year period.The average profitability of Malaysia n compa nies varied from 7.5% to 8.7% duri ng 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% of the 99 Malaysian companies achieved morethan 10% ROA while only 9%

48、of the compa nies have bee n able to achieve ROA of higher tha n 15%. The compa nies with relatively low profitability of below 5% acco un ted for 30% of all Malaysia n compa ni es.ABLE: 3 uf R 過 urn onROA RangeSri LantaMalaria2(KJ6%2U07 %21KJ6%2007 %2UOS Av rt age%Below 527162916323J35305 -1015茁購55

49、413S迂4410-15215515261512201615-2023IS818128s20 * 2?6s631333Above 25-03力3311Total100100100LOUICO100100100No of CoiLipaLues6262626299999999Mean10 911.410.010.97.5S.77.67.7Miuinnun-4.54SA034-4.6-7.9-3.1NtaxLiniuii4&D23.146.829.727.826. HSTD8.12JTT37T62$5What is primarily appare nt from the ROA figures

50、betwee n the 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 compa nies over the three year period was in the range of 10% to 11% with an overall average of 10.

51、9%.Contrarily, 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 countri

52、es also reveals 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 SriLankan companies have achieved less than 5% of ROA as against 30% of Malaysian companies achieving simil

53、ar results. 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 rev

54、ealed that 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

55、 Korea) to 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 SriLankan manufacturing companies in comparison to that of Malaysian manufacturing companies t

56、o obtain 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

57、 study cover 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

58、 more profitable than their counterparts inMalaysia, 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 high 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 per