Financial Analysis of Amazon and Walmart

After thoroughly analyzing and reviewing both Amazon and Walmart’s annual reports to ascertain their financial standings, it becomes clear that these two retail powerhouses, each with its unique business model and market approach, present distinct advantages and disadvantages for potential investors. Amazon, recognized globally as the largest online retailer and service provider, operates primarily through e-commerce platforms. Meanwhile, Walmart, an American multinational corporation, maintains dominance through its extensive chain of brick-and-mortar stores (Bureau, 2016). These companies are persistently engaged in a fierce battle for retail supremacy, each exhibiting unique financial characteristics that warrant a closer examination.

Profitability Analysis

Evaluating profitability, Amazon's gross profit percentage stands at 37.07% for the current year. This figure indicates the proportion of revenue left after accounting for the cost of goods sold, suggesting Amazon's impressive ability to generate revenue above production costs. A higher gross profit percentage implies more substantial profitability. In contrast, Walmart's gross profit percentage is 25.37%, positioning it below Amazon and highlighting that Amazon is more adept at converting revenue into gross profit. However, gross profit tells only part of the story.

Another crucial metric for assessing profitability is the net profit margin. Amazon's net profit margin is 1.71%, whereas Walmart's is slightly higher at 2.10%. This margin is a critical indicator of cost management, revealing that Walmart is slightly more efficient at controlling its expenses relative to its revenue, albeit the difference is not substantial. The disparity in net profit margins indicates Walmart's skill in managing overheads and operational costs more effectively than Amazon.

Furthermore, examining the return on equity (ROE), we find Amazon's ROE is 23,497, while Walmart's is 80,678.5. ROE reflects a company's capability to generate profit with the equity available, but it can be misleading if a company has high leverage. Walmart’s high ROE could imply effective use of shareholder investments, but it may also suggest significant reliance on debt, a factor that investors should scrutinize closely.

Liquidity and Solvency

Liquidity, the capacity of a company to meet its short-term obligations, is another critical financial measure. Amazon's current ratio is 1.04, suggesting it has a slightly better ability to cover its short-term liabilities compared to Walmart, whose current ratio is 0.76. A current ratio above one, as seen with Amazon, denotes a healthier liquidity position, indicating sufficient liquid assets to cover impending liabilities. Conversely, Walmart's ratio below one raises concerns about its ability to meet short-term financial commitments, which could be a red flag for cautious investors.

In addition to liquidity, the receivable turnover ratio provides further insights into operational efficiency. Amazon has a receivable turnover of 16.54, while Walmart's is significantly higher at 87.40. A higher turnover ratio can suggest efficient receivables collection or cash-based operations. Walmart’s higher ratio highlights its superior efficiency in converting receivables into cash, a critical aspect of maintaining smooth cash flow and operational efficiency.

When addressing solvency, the ability to fulfill long-term obligations, we look at the debt-to-asset ratio. Amazon's ratio is 0.79, while Walmart's is 0.60, indicating that Walmart employs less financial leverage relative to its assets than Amazon. A lower ratio suggests a stronger equity position, implying less reliance on debt for Walmart. Additionally, the times interest earned ratio, which measures a company’s ability to meet interest obligations, is 5.48 for Amazon and 8.65 for Walmart. A higher ratio, like Walmart’s, signifies a more robust ability to cover interest expenses, indicative of lower financial risk.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while both Amazon and Walmart present viable investment opportunities, they do so through different financial strengths. Amazon demonstrates formidable growth potential and an impressive gross profit margin, suggesting strong revenue generation capabilities. However, Walmart exhibits superior cost control, as reflected in its net profit margin and liquidity indicators, alongside impressive solvency metrics. Investors would do well to consider these varied financial aspects, aligning them with their risk tolerance and investment goals. Ultimately, the decision to invest in Amazon or Walmart should be guided by a comprehensive analysis of their financial performance and strategic growth trajectories, ensuring a well-informed investment decision.

Did you like this example?

747

31