Petronas Gas Analysis
Petronas Gas Analysis
Petronas Gas Analysis
Table of Contents
1.0 Executive Summary..................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Intra-firm analysis....................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Background............................................................................................................ 4
3.2 Revenue & Profit..................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Trend & Technical Analysis........................................................................................ 7
3.4 Fundamental Analysis............................................................................................... 8
4.0 Inter-firm Analysis (Comparison).................................................................................. 10
4.1 Ratio Analysis....................................................................................................... 10
A. PROFITABILITY RATIO...................................................................................... 10
B. ASSETS UTILISATION RATIOS............................................................................12
C. GEARING/ DEBT UTILISATION RATIOS...............................................................14
D. LIQUIDITY RATIOS........................................................................................... 15
E. SHAREHOLDER INVESTMENT RATIO.................................................................17
5.0 Political factors......................................................................................................... 19
5.1 Government subsidy............................................................................................... 19
6.0 Currency and Economic Factors.................................................................................... 20
6.1 Relationship between oil price and currencies fluctuations................................................20
7.0 Technology Changes Factor......................................................................................... 21
8.0 Environment and Social
Factor
22
9.0 Recommendation and Conclusion.................................................................................. 22
10.0 Bibliography.......................................................................................................... 23
11.0
Appendix
24
2.0 Introduction
Petroliam Nasional Berhad (Petronas) was established in August 17, 1974, fully owned by the Malaysian
government. Petronas Gas Limited (PGB) has been operating for 30 years and still growing strong. Since
its incorporation in 1983, PGB's business has been greatly expanded, although Challenges. Today, PGB
prosperity of Malaysia's leading gas infrastructure, and utility companies, with operations in locations
around the country. Through thirty years development and construction, Petronas has grown into a
multinational integrated oil and gas company, under the ownership of three subsidiaries (Petronas Trading
Co., Petronas Gas Co. and Malaysia International Shipping Co., Ltd.),. As Malaysia's national oil
company, Petronas holds the right to own and manage the nation's oil resources and add value to it.
PETRONAS manage all upstream operations within the territory of Malaysia, and participate in
exploration and production by hiring a number of international oil and gas companies, development and
production of oil and gas in Malaysia. Petronas also through subsidiaries directly involved in exploration,
Ltd. Malaysia billion cubic feet of natural gas reserves. Until the year March 31, 2005 As of the end of the
overall revenue Petronas for $ 36.1 billion, net profit of $ 9.4 billion. The company is the only ASEAN
country to be included in the Fortune Global 500 companies, in 2005 the world's top 500, in the revenue
and earnings were ranked 133 and 16.
Weakness:
1. Cost of environmental hazards.
2. Legal issues.
3. Employment scam.
Threats:
1.Government regulations.
2.High competition.
.
PGB is a very successful multinational company; it has been operasting over 50 countries around the
world. This has include, the fist retail station in Cambodia, contract with China National Offshore Oil
Corporation, Oil development and Pipeline project in Pakistanm, opened a new gas-based petrochemical
2010
2011
2012
2013
Based on the diagram above, we can see that movement of PGB over the past 5 years. The share price has
been growing since May 2010 from the price of RM10.00 per share up to RM25.00 July 2014. The 150%
growth in the share price for the past 5 years has been attracting many investors to invest in it. Besides
that, PGB has also been giving out high dividend over the years. The dividend per share of PGB has been
maintaining on 45 cents to 55 cents in the past 5 years. (Stock Price Movement, 2014)
Moreover, as we can see on the diagram, the white box highlighted the volume trading of PGB. We can
see that although the share price of PGB is very high, but the Volume of trading is still very high also.
This is due to the major players are mostly standing of large corporation investors, such as mutual fund
company, big institutional, government institutions, fund managers and other.
PROFITABILITY RATIO
Gross Profit margin
Return on investment (NET INCOME)
Return on equity (NET INCOME)
GEARING/ DEBT UTILISATION
RATIOS
Gearing ratio
Long-term debt to asset ratio
LIQUIDITY RATIO
Quick ratio
ASSETS UTILISATION RATIOS
Inventory turnover
Account receivable turnover
SHAREHOLDER INVESTMENT
PERFORMANCE RATIO
Earnings per share
Price earnings ratio
Dividend per share
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
('000)
2009
('000)
2010
('000)
2011
('000)
2012
('000)
2013
35.74%
9.44%
11.63%
36.57%
9.55%
11.72%
48.72%
10.50%
12.97%
49.49%
11.54%
15.59%
49.97%
15.58%
21.27%
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.22
0.20
0.15
0.14
10.72
11.11
5.05
1.81
1.44
14.99
10.68
14.19
10.00
13.15
7.16
17.53
10.02
50.43
5.47
46.90
0.21
44.98
47.60
0.21
50.00
54.60
0.28
40.00
71.00
0.27
50.00
105.10
0.23
55.00
Generally PGB is a very good profitability company in the past 5 years. In terms of profitability, we can
see that it has increasing gross profit margin which is from 35.74% to 49.97%. This means that PGB has a
9
10
A. PROFITABILITY RATIO
A profitability ratio provides information on companys ability to meet its short term, immediate
obligations. (Drake, 2011). These are known as performance ratio. They compare profits and different
levels with other figures and a higher ratio or percentage would signify the company is doing well.
i.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
35.74%
36.57%
48.72%
49.49%
49.97%
4.66%
1.48%
0.87%
0.87%
0.70%
Based on the figure above, Petronas Gas gross profit margin is stabilizing over the 5 years.
However, Shell has a decline of gross profit margin as compare to previous year. In this case,
Shell has an increase in sales revenue; however cost increase by a greater proportion. Thus, there
is a decline of gross profit margin. Hence, in my opinion, shell is not well managed and lack of
control of their inventories and manufacturing of oil. In comparing both companies. Petronas Gas
would be better to invest because it is creating profit from the sales. The main objective of
shareholder is to maximize shareholders wealth. Therefore, this show the effectiveness of
Petronas Gass sales team and shows the overall performance is better than Shell.
11
12
ii.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
35.00%
37.61%
51.38%
51.47%
48.91%
SHELL
0.31%
0.25%
0.28%
0.13%
0.09%
If a companys margin is increasing, it means that earning more per dollar of sales. Thus, the
higher the margin is better. Operating profit margin of Shell is lower by comparing with Petronas
Gas. This shows an unfavourable profitability of the business before financing costs. In
comparing both companies, it is obviously shown that Petronas Gas is better for invest by
comparing with Shell as it has higher operating profit margin. As a result, Petronas Gas are
efficient in handling its operating expenses to maintain the overall efficiency.
iii.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
9.44%
9.55%
10.50%
11.54%
15.58%
SHELL
9.03%
3.09%
3.24%
2.26%
3.60%
Return on Investment is used to measure a firms profitability by describe the rate of return that
management was able to earn on the firms assets for a given period of time. From the result, Petronas
Gas has increase in ROI whereas Shell is declining over the past 5 years. This could explain that
Petronas Gas is making more profits and earnings by each of the assets used by them. Petronas Gas
have a more profitability strategies in order to increase the earnings and profits of the company and
maximize the objective of shareholders. Hence, it is a very significant progress for Petronas to be able
to achieve ROI 15.58%. The higher Petronass return on investment, the better the profits and lead to
favourable return of investment.
13
iv.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
11.63%
11.72%
12.97%
15.59%
21.27%
SHELL
14.43%
5.08%
6.37%
5.32%
9.69%
Based on the figure above, Petronas Gas are increasing over the year whereas Shell had decline
and increase to 9.69% in year 2013. According to Petronas annual report, this is because of
improved profit after tax which increased income from fixed asset investment and lower cost of
finance. The higher the return on equity, it is favorable to invest due to Petronas ROI hit and
increase to 21.27%. Therefore, this gives investor confidence to invest because each dollar
invested is generating higher profits which attract potential investors to invest.
B. ASSETS UTILISATION RATIOS
i.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
0.35 Times
0.32 Times
0.25 Times
0.27 Times
0.29 Times
SHELL
2.68 Times
2.93 Times
2.67 Times
3.61 Times
3.27 Times
Generally, the higher the asset turnover times, the smaller is the investment requires generating
sales and thus the more profitable is the firm. (White and Sondhi, 1997). In this case, Shell gives
a higher asset turnover as compare to Petronas. However, the new capital of extensive plant
modernization introduce by Petronas to finance major project is expected to generate long-term
positive result. Thus, the total asset turnover for Petronas show a consistency which shows the
efficiency and effectiveness in utilizing its resources.
14
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
5.47 Times
10.03 Times
7.15 Times
10.00 Times
10.68 Times
SHELL
5.27 Times
15.73 Times
10.38 Times
6.97 Times
2.14 Times
Petronas is having a high receivable turnover 10.68 times in 2013. Petronas is high efficient for
the collection of the company from its company, it may show that the company having a good
credit policies and business structure that ensure the company operating well with a sufficient
cash flow from the customer. However, Shell is decreasing over the past 5 years and hit 2.14
times. This may be cause by having a long credit term offering to its customers or the company
might having an amount of bad debt.
iii.
Inventory Turnover
Inventory turnover measure the efficiency of the firm in managing and selling the inventory.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
14.99 Times
14.19 Times
13.15 Time
17.53 Times
50.43 Times
SHELL
9.06 Times
10.21 Times
8.60 Times
13.43 Times
10.67 Times
Based on the figure above, inventory turnover for Petronas increase over the years however Shell
decreases to 10.67 times in year 2013. This shows that Shell have high inventory and low sales
volumes. This is a bad sign where it doesnt generate profits. In contrast, Petronas buy large
quantities of inventories and take advantage of trade discount. It shows that Petronas are efficient
in inventory management and lead to fewer funds tied up in inventories. This shows that Petronas
is very efficient in keeping the inventory low and high sales volumes.
15
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
0.1853
0.1848
0.1957
0.1562
0.2236
SHELL
0.3699
0.4101
0.5591
0.5912
0.6630
In comparing both companies, the result shown that both companies is having a steady long term
debt ratio, this may be one of the reason that causes both company have positive revenue every
year.
ii.
Gearing Ratio
Gearing ratio has the meaning of the contribution of owners equity to borrowed funds and it able
to explains the degree to which the business is funded by the owner as against the borrowed
funds.
If the gearing ratio of a company is 50% or less can be considered reasonable; if the gearing ratio
is above 50%, it is consider being risky. This is because the funds are borrowed; the principal and
interest are required to be paid irrespective of the performance of the business, therefore a high
gearing ratio leads to high risk. (CIMA, 2004).
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
0.1670
0.1649
0.1486
0.2236
0.1504
SHELL
0.0800
0.2275
0.3410
0.4300
0.4564
Gearing ratio of both company consider reasonable as it did not exceed 50% By comparing both
companies, gearing ratio of Shell is higher and it explained that the company is dependence on
borrowing and long-term financing. However, Petronas is lower gearing and it dependence on
equity financing. Hence, Shell has higher level of financial risk due to the increased volatility of
profits. Thus, it causes the gearing ratio of Shell higher.
16
D. LIQUIDITY RATIOS
i.
Current Ratio
In order to test the companys financial strength, current ratio can be calculated. It uses to
calculate how many dollars in assets are like to be converted to cash within one year in order to
pay debts that come due during the same year. (Lunt and Weaver, 2005).
Current ratio below 1 shows critical liquidity problems because it means that total current
liabilities exceed total current assets. Although the general rule explained that the higher the
current ratio is better but, if a current ratio higher than 2.5 might indicate existence of idle or
underutilised resources in the company. If a too high current ratio may explained that
management has too much of cash on hand and they may be doing a poor job of investing it.
(Drake, 2011).
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
11.3972
11.7213
5.2232
1.8765
1.4719
SHELL
2.1131
2.8496
1.9479
2.0507
1.6020
Based on the figure above, both Petronas and Shell has sufficient to cover its current liabilities as the
ratio for both years is more than 1. According to Shell annual report, due to higher volume of sourced
products, the number of suppliers had increased and hence, this caused the increased in current
liabilities in 2013. Thus, the higher the current ratio means that current asset is easily sufficient to
cover current liabilities. However, we should not just judge on the positive side but also the limitation
that Shell have to be aware such as even though a high ratio gives comfort to creditor, it may mean
that the company is holding more in current asset than it requires in the short term. Thus, this is
wasteful as current asset rarely earn income where stocks need to be sold in order to produce profits.
(Lunt and Weaver, 2005). In my point of view, Petronas is better to invest as it has improved from
2009 to 2013 and and more stability.
17
ii.
Quick Ratio
This is also known as the acid test ratio because by eliminating inventory from current assets it
provides the acid test of whether the company has sufficient resources to settle its liabilities.
It is a more stringent test of liquidity than the current ratio, because it removes inventory from the
equation. As we know that, inventory of a company is the least liquid of the entire current asset. If
a company wants to liquidate inventory or turn it into cash, company need to find a buy and there
are not easy to get a buyer.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
10.7249
11.1071
5.0508
1.8081
1.4380
SHELL
1.2161
1.6551
1.0025
1.0897
0.7893
However, as mentioned above, a high ratio is very comforting but may be wasteful. Generally, a
ratio of 1:1 is considered ideal but many companies with very regular cash sales have very low
ratios due to their lack of debtors. (Lunt and Weaver, 2005). Based on the figure above. Although
Petronas showing a higher figure of quick ratio, this indicate the growing in sales, having quickly
converting receivable into cash and showing the company is easily to cover its financial
obligations.
On the other hand, Shells decreasing quick ratio may explain that the company is over leverage,
struggling to maintain or grow sales, too fast in paying bills or too slow in collecting receivables.
As a result, Petronass quick ratio is satisfactory and better to invest.
18
ii.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
9.70
9.80
15.20
19.52
24.28
46.90
47.60
54.60
71.00
105.10
44.98
50.00
40.00
50.00
55.00
P/E ratio
0.21
0.21
0.28
0.28
0.23
SHELL
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
10.520
10.760
9.180
8.400
6.360
(52.00)
35.00
(42.00)
(32.00)
(52.00)
50.00
50.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
P/E ratio
-0.21
0.30
-0.22
-0.26
-0.12
The price-earnings ratio (P/E ratio) gives an indication of how optimistic the financial market is about a
companys future earnings. However, the earning per share ratio (EPS ratio) provides an indication of the
amount of a companys earnings that are attributable to each share of common stock outstanding.
(Edmonds and McNair, 2008).
P/E ratio helps investor to indicate that how long the earnings will take to recover the cost of the share. In
the general rules, the higher P/R E ratio means that the more the market is willing to pay for each dollar
of the particular companys earnings because it shows higher growth expectations by investors. If the P/E
ratio falls, the management need to look into the causes that have resulted into the fall of the ratio because
the fall of the P/E ratio means that the willingness of market to buy the shares of the company is
decreasing.
In comparison of both companies, obviously that Petronas P/E is higher than Shell due to unfavourable
negative P/E. Thus, Petronas is more sustainable because it give a higher P/E ratio that encourage investor
to pay for each dollar of earnings that the company generate due to higher price that Petronas will grow in
the future. Petronas shares are more attractive for investor to buy the share of the company, investors are
expect more higher earnings from Petronas.
19
iii.
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
RM ('000)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PET GAS
4.6371
5.1020
2.6316
2.5615
2.2652
SHELL
4.7529
4.6468
4.3573
2.3810
0.0000
From the formula, we are able to know that dividend yield ratio is the relationship between dividends per
share and the market values of the shares. Dividend yield is the yield that a company pays out to its
shareholder in the form of dividends. This is based on the companys stock current market price
(CIMA,2004).
From the analysis above, dividend yield for both companies decreasing however there is no dividend
yield for Shell in Year 2013. The result shows that the dividend yield ratio is facing a fall to 2013 and
investors return on each dollar he invested is decreasing.
As a result, for investors who are seeking for a long term investment with a consistent return every year,
secure and less risky, they may hope to have a constant dividend per share to be pay from the company.
Consequently, investor who seek high return may invest in Petronas because they have high return
whereby current market price reflects future growth in earnings and dividends.
20
The price of oil and petroleum products are determined by the international market based on supply and
demand. These are factors beyond our control. OPEC also plays an important role in setting oil
production levels which in turn, affect the market price. Although Malaysia produces and exports oil, we
are not a member of OPEC, nor are we a major oil producing country. As such we have no influence on
how the price of oil is determined in the international market.
Without subsidies, premium petrol (RON95) would cost RM2.73 per liter, and not RM 2.10 that we are
paying now. In fact when a consumer buys a liter of premium petrol in Peninsular Malaysia, the
Government bears 63 sen that is 39 sen in the form of taxes forgone and 24.20 sen in subsidies.The actual
cost of diesel in Peninsular Malaysia is RM2.80 per liter. Consumers pay RM2.00 per liter because of the
59.13 sen subsidy and 19.64 sen tax forgone, per liter.
21
According to research, there is an inverse relationship between oil price and USD. This meaning that, the
rise of oil price will cause the USD to drop. This is related to the supply and demand concept, when oil
price goes up, more USD is needed to demand for the same quantity of oil. This will then cause the
supply of USD to increase. When supply of USD increases the price of USD will then drop and cause
depreciation of USD against other currency. (Dollar, Gold and Oil Chart - Last Ten Years, 2014)
Malaysia is the home country for PGB, and it is an oil export country. As we know US is one of the
largest oil demand countries. When oil price increased, PGB can sell its oil at a higher price to US. It will
then lead to higher profit margin. However, when PGB sell the oil to US, it will be dealing with USD. As
mention earlier, increase in oil price will caused USD to depreciate. Therefore, when PGB want to
convert its profits back to home country Malaysia, USD has actually depreciated against RM. The profits
that convert back will then be lesser. In short, increase in oil price will give PGB a higher profit margin,
but the profit will be lesser when it converts from USD back to RM because of currency has depreciate.
22
23
24
26
10.0 Bibliography
Anas Alam Faizli (2013) Higher royalty versus state ownership of Petronas, Available at:
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/04/30/higher-royalty-versus-state-ownershipof-petronas/ (Accessed: 25 July 2014).
Baidu Baike (2013) Introduction of Petronas, Available at: HTTP://baike.baidu.com/view/1854001.htm
(Accessed: 25 July 2014).
CIMA, 2004, Strategic Level paper P8 Financial Analysis CIMA Study Text, 1st edition, The Financial
Training Company Limited
Dollar, Gold and Oil Chart - Last Ten Years. (2014). Retrieved July 20, 2014, from Macrotrends:
http://www.macrotrends.net/1335/dollar-gold-and-oil-chart-last-ten-years
Drake, P.P., 2011, Financial Ratio Analysis, date accessed 21st November 2011, Available online,
(Accessed: 25 July 2014)
http://educ.jmu.edu/~drakepp/principles/module2/fin_rat.pdf
Elliott, B., and Elliot, J, 2008, Financial Accounting and Reporting, 12th edition, Pearson Education
Limited
Fraser, L.M., and Ormiston, A., 1998, Understanding Financial Statement, 5th edition, Prentice Hall
International
Guang yong SUN (2011) How Malaysia explore Oil, Available at:
http://www.in-en.com/article/html/energy_16311631961221294.html (Accessed: 25 July 2014).
Lunt, H., and Weaver, M., 2005, Financial Accounting Fundamentals, 1st edition, CIMA Publishing
27
Stock Price Movement. (2014). Retrieved July 18, 2014, from malaysiastock.biz:
http://www.malaysiastock.biz/Corporate-Infomation.aspx?type=C&value=KLCI&securityCode=6033
Walton, P., 2000, Financial Statement Analysis: An International Perspective, 1st edition, Business
Press Thomas Learning
28
11.0 Appendix
Petronas Gas Berhad Five Years Financial Summary
29
30