home / Online services/ Integral assessment of the financial and economic state of the enterprise. Integral assessment of financial stability Integral indicator of financial condition assessment

Integral assessment of the financial and economic state of the enterprise. Integral assessment of financial stability Integral indicator of financial condition assessment

Considering the variety of financial processes, the multiplicity of indicators of financial stability and the differences in the level of their critical assessments, many foreign and domestic analysts recommend an integral scoring of financial stability (Table 6).

The essence of this technique is to classify the organization according to the level of risk, i.e. any analyzed organization can be assigned to a certain class depending on the number of points scored, based on the actual values of financial stability indicators.

Class I - organizations with absolute financial stability, whose loans and obligations are supported by information that allows you to be sure of the return of loans and the fulfillment of other obligations in accordance with contracts and a good margin for error.

Class II - organizations with a normal financial condition, demonstrating a certain level of risk in terms of debt and liabilities and revealing a certain weakness in financial indicators.

Class III - these are problem organizations, the financial condition of which can be assessed as average. When analyzing the balance sheet, the weakness of individual financial indicators is revealed. It is unlikely that there is a threat of loss of funds, but the full receipt of interest and the fulfillment of obligations seems doubtful.

Table 6

Grouping of organizations according to the criteria for assessing the financial condition according to JSC Novodel for 2009, thousand rubles.

Indicator of financial condition	Class boundary according to criteria

Absolute liquidity ratio (K al)	0.5 and above - 20 points	0.4 and above - 16 points	0.3 - 12 points	0.2 - 8 points	0.1 - 4 points	Less than 0.1 - 0 points
Urgent (quick) liquidity ratio (K bl)	1.5 and above - 18 points	1.4 - 15 points	1.3 - 12 points	1.2-1.1 - 9-6 points	0.1 - 3 points	Less than 1.0 - 0 points
Current liquidity ratio (K tl)	2 and above - 16.5 points	1.9-1.7 - 15-12 points	1.6-1.4 -10.5-7.5 points	1.3-1.1 - 6-3 points	1 - 1.5 points	Less than 1.0 - 0 points
Autonomy coefficient (K a)	0.6 and above - 17 points	0.59-0.54 - 15-12 points	0.53-0.43 - 11.4-7.4 points	0.47-0.41 - 6.6-1.8 points	0.4 - 1 point	Less than 0.4 - 0 points
SOS security factor (K sos)	0.5 and above - 15 points	0.4 - 12 points	0.3 - 9 points	0.2 - 6 points	0.1 - 3 points	Less than 0.1 - 0 points
The coefficient of financial independence in terms of the formation of reserves (K fnz)	1 and above - 13.5 points	0.9 - 11 points	0.8 - 8.5 points	0.7-0.6 - 6-3.5 points	0.5 - 1 point	Less than 0.5 - 0 points
Minimum border value

Class IV - these are organizations with an unstable financial condition, because there is a risk in dealing with them. Such enterprises have an unsatisfactory capital structure, and solvency is at the lower limit of acceptable values. Profit is absent or insignificant.

Class V - organizations with a financial crisis. Non-paying capable and absolutely not stable.

The final values of the indicators are drawn up in the form of a table, from which it is possible to determine the type of financial condition of the enterprise (to which class this enterprise belongs).

According to the analysis, it can be said with certainty that the financial condition of Novodel OJSC is unstable, since, in accordance with the table proposed above, it belongs to the fourth grade and scores only 34 points, which are made up of indicators:

1) absolute liquidity ratio 0.037, belongs to the 5th class;

2) quick liquidity ratio of 0.7 corresponds to class 4;

3) current liquidity ratio 1.63 3 classes;

4) the coefficient of financial independence of 0.55 corresponds to the 2nd class;

5) the coefficient of provision with own working capital is 0.3 and belongs to the 3rd class;

6) the coefficient of provision of stocks with own capital of 0.58 is included in the boundaries of the third class.

Such enterprises have an unsatisfactory capital structure, and solvency is at the lower limit of acceptable values. Profit is absent or insignificant.

In addition to the measures proposed in the course of the analysis to improve the financial condition of OAO Novodel, in this case, in order to achieve an increase in the efficiency of OAO Novodel, additional financing from the outside is advisable. The new production will raise sales, increase revenue, and hence the profitability of the enterprise.

Based on the analysis of the financial condition of the JSC "Novodel" enterprise, carried out on the basis of financial statements, recommendations were made to improve the financial condition of JSC "Novodel". In the course of the work, a vertical and horizontal analysis was carried out, the calculation of the net assets of the enterprise, an analysis of the dynamics of assets and liabilities, an analysis of the financial condition was carried out according to the absolute data of the balance sheet, an analysis of liquidity, business activity, the diagnostics of JSC "Novodel" was carried out using financial ratios, carried out an integral assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise.

In general, the state of the enterprise can be characterized as unstable, if at the beginning of the year the value of the main sources of inventory formation was 31998 thousand rubles, then by the end of the year the situation tends to decrease this indicator, amounting to 14878 thousand rubles, but it retains the possibility of restoring solvency .

The liquidity of the analyzed balance can be characterized as insufficient. At the beginning of the year, there is a shortage of the most liquid assets to cover the most urgent liabilities. But over the analyzed period, the lack of the most liquid assets to cover the most urgent liabilities has significantly decreased, which indicates a positive trend

The value of the financing ratio at the beginning of the reporting period is less than one (most of the company's property is formed from borrowed funds), this may indicate the danger of insolvency and make it difficult to obtain a loan if necessary. By the end of the year, the funding ratio had doubled. This happened in connection with the reduction of short-term debt, due to the timely payment of debts to suppliers and contractors.

The deterioration in turnover is due to the fact that in the reporting year there was a decrease in production and sales volumes, however, inventories and accounts receivable decreased at an even slower pace.

In the case of OAO Novodel for the study period, the demand for manufactured products significantly decreased, which led to a decrease in sales proceeds, profit fell below zero, profitability indicators are negative, which indicates that the company is operating at a loss.

These findings indicate that a program is needed to improve the financial condition of the enterprise, which will be discussed in the third chapter of the master's thesis.

The article substantiates the need for the formation and use of a comprehensive assessment in the implementation of the procedure for financial analysis of the state of an industrial enterprise. As a basis for constructing the final value, it is proposed to use the mechanism of forming an integral indicator using an additive model. The choice of initial indicators for constructing an assessment is based on the application of the method of expert assessments: a reasoned choice is made, weight values of financial indicators are calculated. Based on the analysis, the integral coefficient is determined. The necessity of including bankruptcy indicators in the integral assessment indicator as one of the main criteria affecting the financial condition of an enterprise in modern economic conditions is substantiated. The issues of determining the lower and upper boundaries of the integral indicator of an enterprise in the industrial sector under the conditions of changing factors of the external economic environment are considered.

financial condition

comprehensive assessment

integral indicator

expert method

industrial enterprise

1. Vinnikova I.S. Some aspects of optimizing the financial condition of the enterprise // Problems of the modern economy (Novosibirsk). - 2014. - No. 21. - P. 107–111.

3. Vinnikova I.S., Kuznetsova E.A. Finance of organizations (by industry): Textbook / I.S. Vinnikova, E.A. Kuznetsov; NGPU them. K. Minina. - Ivanovo: LISTOS, 2015. - 164 p.

4. Kondaurova L.A., Vladimirova T.A. To the question of the integral assessment of the financial condition of railway transport enterprises // Siberian Financial School. - 2000. - No. 2. - S. 78–81.

5. Kulakova I.S. Development of an integral indicator for assessing the financial condition of ferrous metallurgy enterprises // Fundamentals of Economics, Management and Law. - 2012. - No. 6 (6). – S. 98–102.

6. Lagutin M.B. Visual Mathematical Statistics: Textbook. – M.: BINOM. Knowledge Laboratory, 2007. - 472 p.

7. Rinchina T.Yu. Integral assessment of the financial stability of an insurance company // Proceedings of the St. Petersburg State University of Economics. - 2010. - No. 5. - P. 149a–152.

8. Fomin Ya.A. Diagnosis of the crisis state of the enterprise: Textbook for universities. - M.: UNITI-DANA, 2003. - 349 p.

The current situation in the Russian economy is characterized by a curbing of industrial growth, our companies are denied access to Western loans and high technologies. External lending, as a result of the imposed sanctions, for the industry where "long and cheap" money is needed, is practically closed. Industrial enterprises, which are currently experiencing a shortage of working capital, simply need credit funds. The currently observed backlog in the development of its own high technologies is considered an even more serious problem for the industry. modern Russia. Taken together, the indicated difficulties put before the management sector of companies the primary task of developing short-term and medium-term strategies for operational management. Often, in the presence of such tasks, taking into account the unfavorable external economic environment, it is quite difficult to choose a starting point to start implementing the plans.

The initial analysis of the enterprise as a whole helps to identify the main problems and discover the hidden potential of the enterprise, which is still not in demand and is clearly relevant in the new economic conditions. The basis of such a study is an analysis of the financial condition of the enterprise. The dynamics of financial indicators will help to most objectively assess the enterprise from the standpoint of the availability of financial potential and build the most correct management strategy, taking into account the available capabilities and own resources.

In the theory and practice of analyzing the financial condition of an economic entity, the system of indicators obtained in the calculations is used very widely: to determine the current financial situation in its various aspects, to predict the likelihood of bankruptcy and to determine the main points in financial activity that contribute to an increase in the probabilistic indicator, to develop directions for improving economic activity, not only in the direction of the main type of activity, but, at the same time, investment and financial operations in the market. It is worth noting that, despite the entire long period of use of financial analysis tools at Russian enterprises, a system of generally accepted financial assessment indicators has not yet been developed to provide a complete, reliable and objective picture of the financial and economic activities of the entity. In addition, of particular interest is the use integral assessment to solve the task. The introduction into practice of applying an integral assessment will allow solving the designated problem for any enterprise, excluding the differentiation of the latter, taking into account industry affiliation.

In general, the use of integral estimates is intended to give a general indicator characterizing the rate of decline and the amount of deviation of the controlled variable in the aggregate, without determining both indicators separately. Some aspects of the formation of the integral indicator have already been considered by the example of ferrous metallurgy enterprises, railway transport, and insurance organizations. Since this issue is addressed in the works of a number of researchers, the problem of developing a methodology for constructing a comprehensive assessment of the financial condition of industrial enterprises based on an integral indicator can be considered quite relevant.

Within the framework of the theory of financial analysis, researchers who touch upon the issue of improving the process under consideration offer quite a lot of alternative ways of implementation. At the same time, according to the observations of the authors, the most common stages for improving the methods of financial analysis in order to achieve the task of integration can be considered the following:

Analysis of the structure of financial statements for the subsequent determination of the current situation in industrial enterprises;

Identification of specific features of the values of financial ratios for industry, optimal levels of indicators that objectively characterize the process;

Definition specific gravity the impact of the indicators under consideration on the final assessment of the financial position of the enterprise, taking into account the opinions of experts and the characteristics of the industrial sector;

Integral assessment of the financial activity of the enterprise, based on the calculations of previous procedures;

Presentation of an opinion on the financial activity of the enterprise, where the rating of the enterprise is determined, the factors of current and future changes and recommendations are formulated for further building a strategy and making decisions.

When determining and selecting diagnostic features for assessing the financial condition of industrial enterprises, first of all, it is necessary to be guided by indicators that allow an objective assessment of the current state of the object in question. Among the features characteristic of this assessment, we single out the analysis of liquidity, solvency and financial stability indicators, as well as indicators of financial performance and bankruptcy analysis. This group of indicators, according to the authors, allows you to form an objective initial picture when conducting a financial analysis and will determine the ways of forming and conducting further research in dominant directions.

The calculation of the integral assessment should be carried out on the basis of an additive model, in which the factors selected for the study are included in the form of an algebraic sum:

where In is the integral indicator of the n-th industrial enterprise,

i - number of partial integral indicators (indices), i from 1 to I,

ri - i-th partial integral indicator (index),

pi - expert weight of the i-th private integral indicator (index).

To compile the integral index, let's focus on the following financial indicators:

absolute liquidity ratio,

Quick liquidity ratio,

Total solvency ratio,

Share ratio own funds in current assets,

autonomy coefficient,

Altman bankruptcy assessment coefficient (five-factor model),

Product profitability ratio.

In the current economic conditions of instability, non-payments and sanctions, the need to introduce additional control over the financial situation at industrial enterprises, as well as over possible bankruptcy, is of particular importance. Based on the above factors, it is proposed to introduce Altman's bankruptcy coefficient, which characterizes the creditworthiness of the organization, as one of the indicators of the financial analysis of the enterprise into the list of mandatory ones. This creditworthiness index is formed using the apparatus of multiplicative discriminant analysis and allows, as a first approximation, to divide economic entities into potential bankrupts and those who, according to current indicators, are not threatened with bankruptcy.

The choice of financial ratios can diversify depending on the current targets of an industrial company and the position of its management regarding the valuation. The weight of individual indicators is determined by the method of expert assessments, which is implemented through the analysis of the significance of financial ratios in assessing the current financial condition of an economic entity.

The integral indicator, taking into account the selected coefficients, will take the following form:

I = p1* Cabs.liq. + p2* Kbys.liq. + p5*Kavt + p6*Co. bankr. + p7*Krent.pr

The experts are faced with the task of determining the degree of influence of the proposed indicators on the overall financial condition of an industrial enterprise. It should be noted that for each enterprise, the set of weights will be unique: not only the industry and the size of the enterprise, but also the degree of intensity of environmental factors, the stage life cycle enterprises and management targets at the moment.

The sum of points for assessing the totality of financial indicators is N points. The coefficient that has the greatest impact on the financial condition is assigned the highest score, the least impact - the lowest.

We calculate the weighted average value of each expert assessment. The share of the assessment of each indicator of individual experts (j) in their total amount is calculated by the formula:

where k is the value of the assessment of each indicator by a separate expert.

The total share of the indicator can be determined:

The total share of the i-th indicator in their total assessment:

With the help of the coefficient of concordance, the degree of agreement between the opinions of experts is determined. The coefficient can take values from 0 (in the absence of consistency) to 1 (with maximum consistency). As an example, the Kendell concordance factor can be used. The significance of the values of the indicators is established using the Pearson distribution criterion.

The Kendell Concordance Coefficient is calculated using the formula:

where S is the sum of squared deviations of the sum of ranks of each object of expertise from the arithmetic mean,

n - number of experts,

m - number of financial indicators.

The Pearson distribution criterion includes:

The greater the discrepancy between two comparable distributions, the greater the empirical value of .

At the next stage, we determine the value of pi, adjusting the calculated value by the normative value of each i-th financial ratio:

where hi is the lower limit of the norm for each indicator.

Further, taking into account the obtained values, the lower (H) and upper (B) normative limits of the values of the coefficients are determined. According to the value of the calculated integral indicator, the corresponding financial position of the industrial enterprise is determined:

with I ≤ H - the enterprise is in a crisis state;

H< I ≤ В - предприятию не угрожает кризис;

I ≥ B - the company uses available resources inefficiently, which can lead to losses.

An analysis of the industrial sector shows that enterprises in this segment of the economy, characterized by a crisis level of financial condition, represent a fairly high level of slowly sold assets in overall structure current assets business entities, which is also confirmed by the low turnover of current assets. Along with this, own sources for financial activities are clearly not enough, which is also reflected in low profitability ratios. products sold and assets of organizations by type of activity.

Taken together, the level of financial condition of the industrial sector is significantly affected by the lack of flexibility and readiness to adapt the development process of economic entities in the light of dynamic changes, both domestically and foreign market in the industrial sector. This largely depends on the degree of elaboration of the enterprise's strategy, on the level of alternative development strategies and the degree to which they correspond to the variant development of the external economic environment.

Thus, when forming an assessment of the level of financial condition of industrial enterprises, the significance of each of the selected indicators for constructing an assessment is considered a primary and necessary condition. Inclusion of indicators that do not have a significant impact on the total may cause the total to deviate from the correct value and adversely affect subsequent decisions. Further work on regulating the activities of enterprises should be built taking into account the identified features and specifics, as well as the value of the integral coefficient for individual enterprises in the industrial sector.

Bibliographic link

Vinnikova I.S., Kuznetsova E.A. FEATURES OF THE INTEGRAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FINANCIAL STATE OF AN INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISE UNDER MODERN ECONOMIC CONDITIONS // International Journal of Applied and fundamental research. - 2016. - No. 5-2. - S. 302-305;
URL: https://applied-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=9243 (date of access: 04/03/2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"

How to assess the financial risks of a company on the basis of financial statements

The financial activity of the company in all its forms is associated with numerous risks, the degree of influence of which on the results of this activity and the level financial security is increasing significantly at the present time. The risks that accompany the company's business activities and generate financial threats are grouped into a special group of financial risks that play the most significant role in the overall "risk portfolio" of the company. A significant increase in the impact of the company's financial risks on the results of economic activity is caused by the instability of the external environment: the economic situation in the country, the emergence of new innovative financial instruments, the expansion of the sphere of financial relations, the volatility of the financial market and a number of other factors. Therefore, the identification, assessment and monitoring of the level of financial risks is one of the urgent tasks in the practical activities of financial managers.

The accounting statements of the enterprise are used as initial information when assessing financial risks: the balance sheet, which fixes the property and financial position of the organization as of the reporting date; profit and loss statement presenting the results of operations for the reporting period. The main financial risks assessed by enterprises:

risks of loss of solvency;
risks of loss of financial stability and independence;
risks of the structure of assets and liabilities.

The model for assessing the liquidity risk (solvency) of the balance sheet using absolute indicators is shown in fig. eleven .

The order of grouping assets and liabilities

The order of grouping assets according to the degree of speed of their transformation into cash

The procedure for grouping liabilities according to the degree of urgency of fulfilling obligations

A 1 . Most liquid assets

A 1 \u003d page 250 + page 260

P 1. Most urgent obligations

P 1 = p. 620

A 2 . Marketable Assets

A 2 = p. 240

P 2 . Short-term liabilities

P 2 \u003d p. 610 + p. 630 + p. 660

A 3 . Slow selling assets

A 3 = page 210 + page 220 + page 230 + page 270

P 3 . Long-term liabilities

P 3 \u003d p. 590 + p. 640 + p. 650

A 4 . Hard-to-sell assets

A 4 = p. 190

P 4 . Permanent liabilities

P 4 = p. 490

Type of liquidity condition

A 1 ≥ P 1 A 2 ≥ P 2

A 3 ≥ P; A4 ≤ P4

A 1< П 1 А 2 ≥ П 2 ;

A 3 ≥ P 3; A 4 ~ P 4

A 1< П 1 ; А 2 < П 2 ;

A 3 ≥ P 3; A 4 ~ P 4

A 1< П 1 ; А 2 < П 2 ;

A 3< П 3 ; А 4 >P 4

Absolute liquidity

Permissible Liquidity

Disturbed liquidity

Crisis liquidity

Rice. 1 Balance sheet liquidity risk assessment model using absolute indicators

Risk assessment of the financial stability of the enterprise is presented in fig. 2.

Calculation of the value of sources of funds and the value of stocks and costs
1. Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own working capital	2. Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own and long-term borrowed sources of reserves and costs	3. Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of the total value of the main sources for the formation of reserves and costs
±Fs \u003d SOS - ZZ ±Fs = p. 490 - p. 190 - (p. 210 + p. 220)	±Ft = SDI - ZZ ±Ft = p. 490 + p. 590 - p. 190 - (p. 210 + p. 220)	±Fo \u003d JVI - ZZ ±Pho = p. 490 + p. 590 + p. 610 - p. 190 - (p. 210 + p. 220)
S (Ф) = 1 if Ф > 0; = 0 if Ф< 0.

Type of financial condition
±Фс ≥ 0; ±ft ≥ 0; ±Фо ≥ 0; S = 1, 1, 1	±Fs< 0; ±Фт ≥ 0; ±Фо ≥ 0; S = 0, 1, 1	±Fs< 0; ±Фт < 0; ±Фо ≥ 0; S = 0, 0, 1	±Fs< 0; ±Фт < 0; ±Фо < 0; S = 0, 0, 0
Absolute independence	Normal independence
Sources of cost coverage used
Own working capital	Own working capital plus long-term loans	Own working capital plus long-term and short-term loans and borrowings
Brief description of the types of financial condition
High solvency; The company is not dependent on creditors	Normal solvency; Efficient use of borrowed funds; High profitability of production activities	Violation of solvency; The need to attract additional sources; Opportunity to improve the situation	Insolvency of the enterprise; The brink of bankruptcy

Assessing the risk of financial instability
Risk Free Zone	Acceptable Risk Zone	Critical Risk Zone	Catastrophic Risk Zone

Risk assessment of the company's financial stability Pic. 2.

For enterprises engaged in production, a general indicator of financial stability is the surplus or lack of sources of funds for the formation of stocks and costs, which is determined as the difference between the value of sources of funds and the value of stocks and costs.

The assessment of liquidity and financial stability risks using relative indicators is carried out by analyzing deviations from the recommended values. The calculation of the coefficients is presented in Table. 12.

The essence of the methodology for a comprehensive (scoring) assessment of the financial condition of an organization lies in the classification of organizations by level financial risk, that is, any organization can be assigned to a certain class, depending on the number of points scored, based on the actual values of its financial ratios. Integral scoring of the financial condition of the organization is presented in table. 3.

1st class (100-97 points) - these are organizations with absolute financial stability and absolutely solvent.

2nd class (96-67 points) - these are organizations of normal financial condition.

3rd class (66-37 points) - these are organizations whose financial condition can be assessed as average.

4th class (36-11 points) - these are organizations with an unstable financial condition.

5th class (10-0 points) - these are organizations with a financial crisis.

Table 1. Financial liquidity ratios 2

Indicator	Calculation method		Comment
1. General liquidity ratio			Shows the ability of the company to carry out settlements for all types of obligations - both for the nearest and for distant
2. Absolute liquidity ratio		L 2 > 0.2-0.7	Shows how much of the short-term debt the organization can repay in the near future at the expense of Money
3. Coefficient of "critical evaluation"		Permissible 0.7-0.8; preferably L 3 ≥ 1.5	Shows what part of the organization's short-term liabilities can be immediately repaid at the expense of funds in various accounts, in short-term securities, as well as settlement proceeds
4. Current liquidity ratio		Optimal - not less than 2.0	Shows what part of current liabilities on loans and settlements can be repaid by mobilizing all working capital
5. The coefficient of maneuverability of functioning capital		The decrease in the indicator in dynamics is a positive fact	Shows how much of the functioning capital is immobilized in production stocks and long-term receivables
6. Equity ratio		Not less than 0.1	Characterizes the availability of own working capital of the organization necessary for its financial stability

Table 2. Financial ratios used to assess the financial stability of a company 3

Indicator	Calculation method		Comment
1. Autonomy coefficient		The minimum threshold value is at the level of 0.4. The excess indicates an increase in financial independence, an increase in the possibility of attracting funds from outside	Characterizes independence from borrowed funds
2. Ratio of borrowed and own funds		U 2< 1,5. Превышение указанной границы означает зависимость предприятия от внешних источников средств, потерю финансовой устойчивости (автономности)	Shows how much borrowed funds the company has attracted for 1 ruble of its own funds invested in assets
3. Equity ratio		U 3 > 0.1. The higher the indicator (0.5), the better the financial condition of the enterprise	Illustrates that the enterprise has its own working capital necessary for its financial stability
4. Financial stability ratio		U 4 > 0.6. A decrease in indicators indicates that the company is experiencing financial difficulties.	Shows how much of an asset is financed from sustainable sources

Table 3. Integral scoring of the financial condition of the organization 4

	Criterion		Criterion reduction conditions
	higher	lower	Criterion reduction conditions
1. Absolute liquidity ratio (L 2)	0.5 and above - 20 points	Less than 0.1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 0.5, 4 points are deducted
2. Coefficient of "critical evaluation" (L 3)	1.5 and above - 18 points	Less than 1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 1.5, 3 points are deducted
3. Current liquidity ratio (L 4)	2 and above - 16.5 points	Less than 1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 2, 1.5 points are deducted
4. Coefficient of autonomy (U 1 )	0.5 and above - 17 points	Less than 0.4 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 0.5, 0.8 points are deducted
5. Equity ratio (U 3 )	0.5 and above - 15 points	Less than 0.1 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 0.5, 3 points are deducted
6. Financial stability ratio (U 4 )	0.8 and above - 13.5 points	Less than 0.5 - 0 points	For every 0.1 points down from 0.8, 2.5 points are deducted

Example

CJSC Promtechenergo 2000 is a regional representative of CJSC ZETO (Electrical Equipment Plant). "ZETO", being one of the leading enterprises in Russia in the development and production of electrical equipment, for more than 45 years of history has mastered more than 400 types of products for various needs of the electric power industry.
To analyze the company by the risk criterion, the reporting for 2004-2006 was used. on the basis of the "Balance Sheet" (form No. 1) and the "Profit and Loss Statement" (form No. 2). The analysis results are grouped into tables.
So, let's start with solvency (liquidity). The solvency of an enterprise characterizes its ability to pay its financial obligations in a timely manner due to the sufficient availability of ready-made means of payment and other liquid assets. The assessment of the risk of loss of solvency is directly related to the analysis of the liquidity of assets and the balance sheet as a whole (Tables 4-6).
According to the type of the state of liquidity of the balance according to the results of 2004-2006. the enterprise fell into the zone of acceptable risk: current payments and receipts characterize the state of normal balance liquidity. AT given state the enterprise has difficulties in paying obligations for a time interval of up to three months due to insufficient receipt of funds. In this case, group A 2 assets can be used as a reserve, but additional time is required to turn them into cash. Asset group A 2, according to the degree of liquidity risk, belongs to the low risk group, but the possibility of loss of their value, violation of contracts and other negative consequences is not ruled out. Hard-to-sell assets of group A 4 account for 45% of the asset structure. They fall into the high-risk category in terms of their liquidity, which may limit the solvency of the enterprise and the possibility of obtaining long-term loans and investments.
Graphically, the dynamics of groups of liquid funds of the organization for the period under study is shown in Fig. 3 (in thousand rubles).
One of the characteristics of financial stability is the degree to which reserves and costs are covered by certain sources of financing. The risk factor characterizes the discrepancy between the required value of current assets and the possibilities of own and borrowed funds for their formation (Tables 7, 8).
Table 4. Liquidity analysis of the balance sheet in 2004

Assets

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

Passive

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

A 1< П 1 ; А 2 ≥ П 2 ; А 3 ≥ П 3 ; А 4 ~ П 4 . Предприятие попадает в зону допустимого риска.
Table 5. Liquidity analysis of the balance sheet in 2005

Assets

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

Passive

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

Payment surplus (+) or deficiency (-)

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

The most liquid assets A 1 (DS + FVkr)

The most urgent obligations P 1 (accounts payable)

Quickly realizable assets A 2 (accounts receivable)

Short-term liabilities P 2 (short-term loans and borrowings)

Slowly realizable assets A 3 (stocks and costs)

Long-term liabilities P 3 (long-term loans and borrowings)

Hard-to-sell assets A 4 (non-current assets)

Fixed liabilities P 4 (real equity)

A 1< П 1 ; А 2 ≥ П 2 ; А 3 ≥ П 3 ; А 4 ~ П 4 . Предприятие попадает в зону допустимого риска.
Table 6. Liquidity analysis of the balance sheet in 2006

Assets

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

Passive

Absolute values

Specific gravity (%)

Payment surplus (+) or deficiency (-)

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

beginning of the year

the end of the year

The most liquid assets A 1 (DS + FVkr)

The most urgent obligations P 1 (accounts payable)

Quickly realizable assets A 2 (accounts receivable)

Short-term liabilities P 2 (short-term loans and borrowings)

Slowly realizable assets A 3 (stocks and costs)

Long-term liabilities P 3 (long-term loans and borrowings)

Hard-to-sell assets A 4 (non-current assets)

Fixed liabilities P 4 (real equity)

A 1< П 1 ; А 2 ≥ П 2 ; А 3 ≥ П 3 ; А 4 ~ П 4 . Предприятие попадает в зону допустимого риска.

Rice. 3. Liquidity analysis of CJSC Promtechenergo 2000
Table 7. Calculation of coverage of reserves and costs with the help of certain sources of financing

Indicator

01.01.04

01.01.05

01.01.06

01.01.07

Stocks and costs

Own working capital (SOS)

Own and long-term borrowed sources

The total value of the main sources

A) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own working capital

B) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own and long-term borrowed sources of reserves and costs

C) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of the total value of the main sources of formation of reserves and costs

Three-component indicator of the type of financial situation, S

Table 8. Type of financial condition

Conditions

S = 1, 1, 1

S = 0, 1, 1

S = 0, 0, 1

S = 0, 0, 0

Absolute independence

Normal independence

Unstable financial condition

Crisis financial condition

Assessing the risk of financial instability

Risk Free Zone

Acceptable Risk Zone

Critical Risk Zone

Catastrophic Risk Zone

As a result of the calculations carried out, it can be concluded. At the end of the study period, stocks and costs are covered by short-term loans. 2004-2005 were characterized by absolute financial stability and corresponded to the risk-free zone. At the end of the analyzed period, the financial condition of the enterprise deteriorated, became unstable and corresponds to the critical risk zone. This situation is associated with a violation of solvency, but it remains possible to restore balance as a result of replenishing equity capital and increasing own working capital by attracting loans and credits, reducing receivables.
In accordance with the calculated liquidity indicators of the balance from the point of view of risk assessment, we can say that the total liquidity indicator (L 1 = 0.73) at the end of the study period does not fit into the recommended values, the absolute liquidity ratio (L 2) has a negative trend. The readiness and mobility of the company to pay short-term obligations at the end of the study period (L 2 = 0.36) is not high enough. There is a risk of non-fulfillment of obligations to suppliers. The critical assessment coefficient (L 3 = 0.98) shows that the organization in the period equal to the duration of one turnover of receivables is able to cover its short-term obligations, however, this ability differs from the optimal one, as a result of which the risk of non-fulfillment of obligations to credit organizations— in the acceptable zone.
The current liquidity ratio (L 4 = 1.13) makes it possible to establish that, in general, there are no predictive payment possibilities. The amount of current assets does not correspond to the amount of short-term liabilities. The organization does not have the amount of free cash and from the standpoint of the interests of the owners in terms of the predicted level of solvency is in the zone of critical risk.
Table 9. Balance sheet liquidity indicators

Indicator

2004

2005

2006

Changes (+, -) 04–05

Changes (+, -) 05–06

1. General liquidity ratio (L 1)

2. Absolute liquidity ratio (L 2)

L 2 > 0.2-0.7

3. Coefficient of "critical evaluation" (L 3)

L 3 > 1.5 - optimal; L 3 \u003d 0.7-0.8 - normal

4. Current liquidity ratio (L 4)

5. The coefficient of maneuverability of functioning capital (L 5)

A decrease in the indicator in dynamics is a positive fact

6. Equity ratio (L 6)

Table 10. Indicators of financial stability

Indicator

2004

2005

2006

Changes (+, -) 04–05

Changes (+, -) 05–06

1. Coefficient of financial independence (autonomy) (U 1)

2. The ratio of borrowed and own funds (capitalization ratio) (U 2)

3. Equity ratio (U 3)

lower limit — 0.1 ≥ 0.5

4. Financial stability ratio (U 4)

In terms of risk assessment, the following can be said:
2. Failure to comply with the regulatory requirements for the indicator U 3 is a signal for the founders of an unacceptable risk of loss of financial independence.
3. The values of the coefficients of financial independence (U 1) and financial stability (U 4) reflect the prospect of deterioration in the financial condition.
Table 11. Classification of the level of financial condition

Indicator of financial condition

2004

2005

2006

Number of points

The actual value of the coefficient

Number of points

The actual value of the coefficient

Number of points

Let's draw conclusions.
2nd class (96-67 points) - in 2004 the enterprise had a normal financial condition. The financial indicators are quite close to optimal, but there is a certain lag in certain ratios. The company is profitable, is in the zone of acceptable risk.
3rd grade (66-37 points) - in 2005-2006. the company has an average financial condition. When analyzing the balance sheet, the weakness of individual financial indicators is revealed. Solvency is at the border of the minimum acceptable level, financial stability is insufficient. In relations with the analyzed organization, there is hardly a threat of loss of funds, but the fulfillment of its obligations on time seems doubtful. The enterprise is characterized by a high degree of risk.
The results of the study according to the risk criterion at the end of the study period are presented in Table. 12.
It can be assumed that the rather unsatisfactory risk levels of CJSC Promtechenergo 2000 are associated with the active investment activity of the enterprise in recent times. The beginning of the study period was characterized by a fairly high level of surplus of own working capital (about 21 million rubles), at the end of the study period there was a deficit (12 million rubles). However, during the period of active growth and development of the enterprise, this situation is considered normal.
Table 12. Results of the company's risk assessment

Type of risk

Design model

Level of risk

Risk of loss of solvency

Absolute balance sheet liquidity indicators

Acceptable Risk Zone

Relative indicators of solvency

Acceptable Risk Zone

Risk of loss of financial stability

Absolute indicators

Critical Risk Zone

Relative indicators of capital structure

In terms of equity and financial stability ratios — high risk

Comprehensive risk assessment of the financial condition

Relative indicators of solvency and capital structure

High risk area

1 Stupakov V.S., Tokarenko G.S. Risk management: Proc. allowance. M.: Finance and statistics, 2006.

3 Dontsova L.V. Analysis of financial statements: Textbook / L.V. Dontsova, N.A. Nikiforov. 4th ed., revised. and additional Moscow: Delo i Service Publishing House, 2006.

When summarizing the results of the conducted analytical calculations, it is sometimes difficult to give a general assessment of the level of stability of the financial condition. This is due to the fact that it is recommended to use and use many indicators to characterize it, some of which were discussed above. For many indicators, there are no standard values or there are differences in the level of recommended standards. In addition, the analysis reveals multidirectional dynamics of individual indicators and deviations of their actual values from the established standards.

To overcome these difficulties, it is possible to apply the methodology of the rating assessment of the financial condition, in which the multi-criteria method for assessing the financial condition is reduced to a single-criteria one.

AT practical work a method of scoring the degree of stability of the financial condition can be used, which is based on ranking organizations (assigning to one of five classes) according to the level of risk of relationships with them associated with the loss of money or their incomplete return. At the same time, organizations assigned to a certain class are characterized by their stability as follows:

I class - organizations with high financial stability. Their financial condition allows us to be confident in the timely and complete fulfillment of all obligations with a sufficient margin in case of a possible mistake in management.

Class II - organizations with good financial condition. Their financial stability as a whole is close to optimal, but some lag is allowed for certain coefficients. There is practically no risk in dealing with such organizations.

Class III - organizations whose financial condition can be assessed as satisfactory. The analysis revealed the weakness of individual coefficients. In relations with such organizations, there is hardly a threat of losing the funds themselves, but the fulfillment of obligations on time seems doubtful.

Class IV - organizations with an unstable financial condition. They have an unsatisfactory capital structure, and solvency is at the lower limit of acceptable values. They belong to the organizations of special attention, tk. in dealing with them there is a certain risk of loss of funds.

Class V - organizations with a financial crisis, practically insolvent. Relationships with them are extremely risky.

The constituent elements of the proposed methodology for scoring the stability of the financial condition are:

- a system of basic coefficients (K1, K2, K3, K4, K5, K6, the content and calculation method of which were discussed above), characterizing the financial condition of the organization;
- the rating of coefficients in points, characterizing their significance in assessing the financial condition, the upper and lower limits of their values and the order of transition from upper to lower limits, necessary to classify the organization as a certain class (rating, boundaries and the order of transition are established by expert opinion) - table. 12.15. The definition of the class of organizations according to the level of values of indicators of financial condition is given in Table. 12.16.

Based on the table 12.16 and the actual values of the coefficients calculated in paragraphs 12.5 and 12.6 in Table. 12.17 an integral assessment of the stability of the financial condition was made. She showed that if the beginning of the year is an organization whose balance sheet is given in Table. 12.1, can be attributed with some stretch only to class III, then the increase in the level of coefficients brought it closer to class II at the end of the reporting period. Calculations based on the revised indicators make it possible to fairly confidently attribute the organization to class II, i.e. to the class of organizations with financial stability close to optimal, in relations with which there is practically no risk.

Table 12.15

Criteria level of values of indicators of the financial condition of the organization

	indicator	Criteria level		Criteria level reduction
	indicator			Criteria level reduction
		0.5 and above = 20 points	Less than 0.1 = 0 points	For every 0.1 reduction from 0.5, 4 points are deducted
Quick (urgent) liquidity ratio (KG))		1.5 and above = 18 points	Less than 1 = 0 points	For every 0.1 reduction from 1.5, 3 points are deducted
		3 and above = 16.5 points	Less than 2 = 0 points	For every 0.1 reduction from 3, 1.5 points are deducted
		0.6 and above = 17 points	Less than 0.4 = 0 points	For every 0.01 reduction from 0.6, 0.8 points are deducted
The coefficient of financial independence in terms of current assets (К.,)		0.5 and above = 15 points	Less than 0.1 = 0 points	For every 0.1 reduction from 0.5, 3 points are deducted
		1 and above = 13.5 points	Less than 0.5 = 0 points	For every 0.1 reduction from 1, 2.5 points are deducted

Table 12.16

Determination of the class of the organization by the level of values of indicators of financial condition

Indicators of financial stability		Criteria boundaries of the class of enterprises
Indicators of financial stability
Absolute liquidity ratio (K ()	0.5 and above = 20 points	16 points	12 points	8 points		Less than 0.1 = 0 points
Quick (urgent) liquidity ratio (K5)	1.5 and above = 18 points	15 points	12 points	9–6 points		Less than 1.0 = 0 points
Current liquidity ratio (K6)	3 and above = 16.5 points	15-12 baals	2.6-2.4 = 10.5-7.5 points	2.3 - 2.1 = 6-3 points	1.5 points	Less than 2 = 0 points
Overall financial independence ratio (K,)	0.6 and above = 17 points	0,59-0,54 = 116,2-12,2	0.53-0.48 = 11.4-7.4 points	0.47-0.41 = 6.6-1.8 points		Less than 0.4 = 0 points
Financial independence ratio in terms of current assets (K2)	0.5 and above = 15 points	12 points	9 points	6 points		Less than 0.1 = 0 points
(K3)	1 and above = 13.5 points	11 points	8.5 points	0.7-0.6 = 6.0-3.5 points		Less than 0.5 = 0 points

Of interest are others, different from the above methods of rating, proposed by V. V. Kovalev and O. N. Volkova, as well as A. D. Sheremet, R. S. Saifulin and E. V. Negashev, O. V. Antonova, G. V. Savitskaya. Access from the reference-legal system "ConsultantPlus".

Based on the ranking of the points of the integral assessment, a group of leading enterprises was identified, the value of the indicator of the integral assessment of which by the end of 2015 was in the zone of stable financial condition and had a relatively stable trend throughout the study period. Such enterprises include METKOM LLC, Aloid LLC, Trubstalkomplekt LLC, ST LLC, YugmetalStroy LLC, Grand Resource LLC, Derkul LLC, Atlantis LLC. The second group includes enterprises whose financial condition was unstable, the value of the integral indicator fluctuated, while they entered the zone of uncertainty, both with positive and negative dynamics: TransMet LLC, ASTM-Standard LLC, SVmetal LLC ”, OOO Sevazh, OOO Alta, OOO OptMetall-Service, OOO Metalotorg.

The results of the integrated assessment indicate the possibility of using this approach for forecasting the financial condition, since for most of the enterprises under study, the results of the analysis obtained using the integral assessment and for individual financial indicators do not contradict each other. In addition, the integral indicator allows you to combine individual financial parameters with multidirectional dynamics. Despite certain advantages, the considered algorithm for the integral assessment of the financial condition of economic entities has some disadvantages:

1) ignoring the additive value of the integral assessment in terms of individual components of the financial condition of the enterprise, that is, the impossibility of determining the impact of the level of liquidity, financial stability and efficiency of capital use on the overall assessment of financial activity. Eliminating this gap will allow us to study the financial condition in certain areas, identify factors that negatively affect the overall level of the integral indicator, and develop measures to eliminate them;

2) limited use with a negative value of net borrowed capital. In this case, the financial condition is assessed as unsatisfactory, which is associated with the negative value of the loan capital turnover ratio, which further reduces the value of the integral indicator;

3) a high level of generalization and a low degree of detail of the overall assessment of the financial condition;

4) the presence of a zone of uncertainty with a large range of changes in the value of the integral indicator, which complicates the assessment of the financial condition. That is, when obtaining the value of the integral indicator, which is included in the zone of uncertainty, the analyst needs to conduct a more detailed analysis of the financial activities of the enterprise. But this can be avoided by taking the opportunity to explore the individual components of the integral assessment.

It is advisable to eliminate these problems on the basis of a geometric interpretation of the integral assessment of the financial condition. This approach considers the integral estimate as a point in a multidimensional space, that is, the integral estimate is a point X with coordinates (x^ x2; x3; ...; xm). Based on the theory of additive value, it can be argued that the integral assessment of the financial condition is formed on the basis of financial stability, liquidity and solvency, and the efficiency of capital use.

Since the indicators characterizing the financial condition have a different impact, it is recommended to use the weighted arithmetic mean formula to build an integral indicator, that is, each indicator has a certain level of significance:

where m is the number of financial indicators of the integrated assessment; 5, - standardized value of the financial indicator; a, - weight (significance) of the financial ratio.

Thus, the construction of an integral indicator of the financial condition of a business entity, according to the proposed approach, involves the following steps: 1) the formation of a certain set, in this case, it is the selection of indicators (factors) characterizing the financial condition of the enterprise; 2) substantiation of the significance of financial ratios and determination of their impact on the level of integral assessment; 3) determination of the procedure for standardization of indicators.

The economic meaning of the integral assessment lies in a comprehensive study of the financial condition of the enterprise, ha-

characterized by many different indicators, the analysis of each of which separately does not allow us to assess the overall financial situation. In this regard, it is very important to use an aggregated indicator.

Improving the integral assessment of the financial condition of metallurgical enterprises of the Rostov region

Based on the proposed approach and the previously defined integral indicator, it is proposed to improve the existing mechanism for the integral assessment of the financial condition of an economic entity.

The fundamental moment of building an integral assessment should be the selection of financial indicators included in its composition. Based on the analysis carried out by the authors, it is advisable to consider as input data a system of financial indicators that characterize various aspects of the financial condition of an enterprise: net profit return on current assets (72); return on fixed capital (£3); profitability of investments (capital) (74); return on equity (75); return on assets in terms of cash flows (76); overall profitability of products (77); profitability of implementation (78); return on sales in terms of net profit (79); return on sales in terms of cash flows (210); turnover of working capital (2I); turnover of tangible assets (212); equity turnover (213); accounts payable turnover (214); receivables turnover (215); absolute liquidity (U1); general liquidity (U2); coverage of liabilities with receivables (U3); current liquidity (U4); security with own working capital (X1); the ratio of own and borrowed funds (X2); financial independence (X3); long-term borrowing (X4); maneuverability of own funds (X5); concentration of borrowed capital (X6); covering the debt with cash flow (X7).

The resulting indicator of the assessment of the financial condition is its integral value (I).

The above factors reflect various aspects of the financial condition of an economic entity, while for some of them it is possible to assess the financial component as a whole, while others act as additional

additional features. In addition, as a result of the analysis of individual financial ratios, certain contradictions and inconsistencies arise, complicating the determination of an adequate and specific assessment of the financial condition of an enterprise.

With this in mind, the density of communication and interdependence between individual coefficients is determined, which makes it possible to avoid the inadequate influence of these indicators on complex conclusions regarding the financial condition of a business entity. The density of the connection between individual indicators and their influence on the integral assessment of the financial condition should be investigated using the methods of correlation analysis, which involves the calculation of the coefficients of selective and paired correlations. Maximum value The correlation coefficient indicates the density of the relationship between financial indicators.

The parameters characterizing the financial condition of an enterprise are in a certain relationship, and this is a prerequisite for the emergence of a hypothesis about the presence of multicollinearity, the essence of which lies in the high interdependence between financial indicators, which negatively affects the objectivity of a comprehensive assessment of financial activity, since a slight change in any of them can have significant impact on the value of the integral assessment.

This fact necessitates finding indicators that are closely related to each other, since neglecting this in the future may adversely affect the adequacy of predictive models.

Indicators with a high correlation coefficient (greater than 0.8) should be excluded from the study. At the same time, the decision which indicator to keep and which one to eliminate will be influenced by the value of the correlation coefficient with the dependent indicator of the integral assessment .

Parameters that are closely correlated with each other can be eliminated by defining pair correlation indicators. This approach provides for the construction of a correlation matrix, which reflects both sample and paired correlation coefficients (Table 2).

Based on the calculations performed, indicators were identified that inadequately affect the integral assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise due to the effect of multicollinearity.

>T o 1 CO 1 s ^ 1 1

>T o, o 1 o 7 1L

>T o o o o o o 1 o

>T o, sl 00 1 CO c^, 1 u

o o o 1 Och u 1 ^

o o 00 ^ 00 o 1L o o o 1 SO ^^ o 1 , o

o o 1L u o o u Och, 1 1 00

o o ^ o Och 1L o CO s ^ 1 u 1 00 s ^, 1

o o 1L s^, CO o 1 u o o 1 00 o s^1 1L s^, ^ 1 o 1 o

M3 o 00 s^, o yu 1L o, ^ o 1L 1 CO 1 o o

M" o o, ^ o o o 00 o o o s^1 o 7 o 1 1

M "o o o 1L 00 ^ ^ s ^, o 1L 00 h ^ yu h 00 o 1 1,

M "o 1L 00 o, o, 1L, s ^, CO 1 1L 1 o 1

xG o o 1L o o" 1 s^1 1 1 1L u o o 00 s^1 o s^1 o o o o 1 ^

N o o o o" o" o o o 1L o o 1L o o o o 1 s^1 o

o o" o" co o" o g ^ o o yu 1L ^ , ^ 1L, 1L 1L 1 1L 1 1L

xG o ^ o "o co o" o "o s ^, o 1L yu 1L o o o yu ch o o 1 s ^ 1

N ° o o o "yu o o" 1 o o "co 00 o" 1L o "1 1L 1L o 1 t 1 yu 1 00 o o 1L o ^ CO o 1 o CO o 1 1L o o s ^,

N° o o "o o" 00 o "1 o" o o "o" 1 o 1 1L 1 o o 1 o o 1 1 1L 1 u 1 1L 1 o o 1 1 1 1L o o

m "o co o" o "1 co o" ^ 1L o "co o" O o "o" 1 1L Och Och s ^, o g ^ u h, s ^, yu u o 00 1 1 ^

^ o o o" o o" o o o" o" 1L o" 1 o" o" 1 co o 1 1 sl 1 1 o r^ o 1 o 1 o 1 ^ o 1 ^ 1 c^1 o 1 CO sl 1 u 1 u g^ 1 c^, u o c^1 1

o o "1 o 00 o" 00 o o "co o" co o co o "o" u s^ 1L 1L 1L yu o, 00 1L u ^ Och o 1 1 ^ o

o o 00 o "1L o" o o "1L o" o "1 o" 1L o "o 00 o 00 o 1L 1 00 SO u s ^, 1L o h o s ^, 1L 00 s ^, yu u 1 00 s^, 1 1L

o o o so o o o" 1 o o o" 1 1L o o o" 1 o o o" 1 o o o" o 1 L o o o" 1 ^ o o o" 1 00 ^ o" 1 o o" 1 1L 1L o "1 Och 1 o 1 00 o 1 o s ^ 1 1 00 o o CO 1 00 Och o s ^, 1 o g ^ o 1 o o o 1, 1L o 1 o ^ o 1 o o 1 1L 1 1L o 00 , s^1 ,1 o o, s^1 1

M "m" N ° N ° - ^ N xG Ny > g > g

arity, to eliminate the negative impact of which it is necessary to eliminate: Z1,

Z4, Z5, Z6, Z11, Z14, ^2, ^3, X1, X2, X6"

The exclusion of these indicators will allow, by eliminating multicollinearity, to increase the objectivity of the influence of individual of them on the integral indicator of the financial condition of the enterprise.

The next step in improving the integral assessment is to determine the impact of each of the financial indicators remaining after elimination. The need for this is due to the fact that individual financial parameters affect the overall assessment of performance in different ways.

To determine the level of influence of each indicator on the integral assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise, we use the significance of the correlation coefficient:

Table 3

Estimated and tabular significance of the ^Student distribution for the sample set of the enterprises under study*

Influence level

Display - g 1 g g 1 - a; p - 2 yaniya on in-

tel g integral estimate

0.20 1.783296 0.85 essential

0.01 0.065159 0.85 insignificant

0.18 1.534401 0.85 essential

0.01 0.064849 0.85 insignificant

^10 -0.02 0.132333 0.85 insignificant

^12 -0.13 1.09404 0.85 significant

^15 -0.31 2.753947 0.85 significant

0.37 3.401118 0.85 significant

P -0.17 1.431922 0.85 significant

X3 -0.11 0.967139 0.85 significant

X4 0.01 0.044345 0.85 insignificant

X5 0.01 0.118051 0.85 insignificant

X7 -0.02 0.164526 0.85 insignificant

where t1 - a. n - 2 - tabular value of the Student's ^-criterion, defined at level a, with n - 2 degrees of freedom and the Student's ^-distribution indicator:

where r is the value of the correlation coefficient; n is the number of observations (with n - 2 degrees of freedom and significance level a = 0.4).

The choice of these parameters of the ^ distribution is due to the sufficient level of their adequacy for constructing financial models. The degree of influence of financial indicators determines the need for their inclusion in the integral assessment (Table 3).

Table data analysis. 3 allows you to identify factors that do not significantly affect the integral assessment of the financial condition, in particular, these are the coefficients Z7, Z9, Z10, X4, X5, X7. Therefore, it is advisable to exclude these indicators from the system that determines the integral assessment.

Thus, an integral assessment of the financial condition of metallurgical enterprises should include the following indicators:

1) profitability of products sold and current assets;

2) turnover of tangible assets and receivables;

3) absolute, current liquidity and financial independence.

The relationship of the integral indicator with individual indicators characterizing financial activity reflects the correlation indicator, which makes it possible to determine the level and direction of the influence of indicators on the integral assessment of the financial condition.

It is advisable to determine the significance of each indicator based on the range of changes in the actual level of the sample correlation coefficient, which reflects the density of the relationship between the integral assessment and the corresponding parameters. The choice of the change interval was based on the following principles:

1) if the indicator does not affect the financial condition, its weight, respectively, is equal to zero;

2) the greatest significance of the indicator was calculated based on the logic of constructing an integral assessment, in which the total amount should not exceed 100, and since the selected number of indicators is 7, then, accordingly, the maximum influence of the indicator is 14 (100/7);

3) for a more accurate reflection of the connection density, it is proposed to use the significance change lag at level 1 (Table 4).

As it was determined, the financial condition of the enterprise is characterized by indicators of financial stability, liquidity, solvency and efficiency

Table 4

Determining the weight of financial indicators based on the correlation coefficient*

Absolute interval of change of the correlation indicator The value of the weight (weight) of the financial indicator in the integral assessment

0.356 and more 14

Indicator Weight and. d Standard value a.

Return on current assets 8 0.175

Profitability of sold products 7 0.128

Turnover ratio of tangible assets 5 12.836

Accounts receivable turnover ratio 12 7.617

Absolute liquidity ratio 14 0.189

Current liquidity ratio 7 1.648

Financial stability, X

Financial independence ratio 4 0.639

ical indicators on the average value of the corresponding financial parameters of those enterprises, the dynamics of which tends to improve.

That is, the standard value is proposed to be calculated as follows:

where x. - the actual value of the financial indicator; a( - the average value of the financial indicator of the enterprises under study.

Thus, the integral indicator of financial condition (2), based on a certain standardization mechanism (5), will be calculated as follows:

Table 5

Indicators and their significance in the integrated assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise*

use of capital, and the integral assessment is a summary characteristic of their standardized values.

Standardization of the values of financial indicators should reflect the optimal formation and allocation of financial resources for the enterprises under study.

In this regard, this procedure is proposed to be carried out by dividing the actual

where x. - the actual value of the financial indicator; a( - the average value of the financial indicator; - the weight (significance) of the financial ratio.

Carrying out all stages of building an integral assessment allowed the authors to identify a system of financial indicators, determine their standardized value and influence (through significance) on the overall assessment of the financial condition (Table 5).

The analysis of the results obtained allows us to conclude that the level of the integral indicator in particular and the assessment of the financial condition in general are most influenced by the turnover of receivables and the level of absolute liquidity.

The resulting model allows you to determine which components of the integral assessment of the financial condition - the efficiency of capital use, solvency and liquidity or financial stability - tend to deteriorate, and timely develop measures to prevent negative dynamics.

The advantage of this model is a clear identification of the component that negatively affects the overall assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise.

Detailing the types of financial condition of the enterprise

The issue of expediency of referring an enterprise to a certain class remains relevant, that is, assigning a certain value of a letter (A, B, C, etc.) depending on the value of the integral indicator. On our

Table 6

Integral indicator of the financial condition of the investigated metallurgical enterprises of the Rostov region*

Company/ years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Z Y X I Z G X I Z G X I Z G X I Z G X I

METCOM LLC 26.38 7.10 3.99 37.47 25.19 8.68 4.22 38.09 31.25 11.57 4.19 47.01 21.63 7.22 4.00 32 .84 20.73 5.25 3.11 29.10

Aloid LLC 6.56 3.94 2.91 13.41 -75.57 3.77 1.42 -70.38 20.92 6.34 1.90 29.16 13.40 6.24 1, 63 21.28 24.76 6.76 2.17 33.69

OOO Trubstal-Komplekt 27.69 2.85 2.98 33.52 16.02 3.45 2.87 22.35 18.84 3.88 2.63 25.34 27.16 4.88 3, 57 35.61 32.43 5.55 3.48 41.47

OOO ST 3.39 1.44 -1.34 3.49 3.42 1.02 -2.06 2.37 35.87 1.50 -1.79 35.58 56.27 1.85 - 1.24 56.88 23.82 3.50 0.67 28.00

OOO Yugmetal-Stroy 11.26 21.39 1.95 34.59 12.22 6.80 1.34 20.36 4.23 7.05 1.07 12.36 10.85 8.61 2, 06 21.53 13.18 7.93 1.89 23.00

Grand Resource LLC 3.82 3.25 1.51 8.58 9.21 5.95 1.69 16.85 4.11 3.05 0.29 7.45 7.79 6.36 2.09 16.25 17.39 4.08 1.38 22.85

ZAO Derkul 20.35 5.40 3.25 28.99 28.47 22.07 3.28 53.81 30.50 29.91 3.51 63.92 22.93 12.08 3.23 38 .25 18.47 14.26 2.43 35.16

OOO Atlantis 14.07 2.42 2.25 18.73 28.57 2.77 1.90 33.24 46.56 4.10 1.89 52.55 39.99 6.60 1.78 48 .37 30.81 5.45 2.28 38.53

OOO TransMet 8.85 3.73 1.11 13.69 9.16 3.66 0.70 13.52 -9.03 2.98 -0.03 -6.09 8.73 3.49 - 0.18 12.04 10.29 3.50 0.70 14.49

ASTM-Standard LLC 12.16 5.37 1.95 19.47 26.98 8.49 2.52 37.99 29.52 8.94 2.93 41.39 18.38 11.27 4, 17 33.82 17.05 15.28 4.48 36.81

OOO SVmetall 22.93 0.91 -1.90 21.95 -17.33 0.74 -2.14 -18.73 -8.33 0.56 -3.06 -10.84 -5, 19 0.87 -5.69 -10.00 -24.85 0.62 -10.22 -34.45

OOO Sevazh -49.43 1.04 -4.03 -52.42 -59.10 0.84 -6.04 -64.30 -25.02 1.47 -7.53 -31.07 - 35.26 0.58 -13.92 -48.60 -10.74 0.59 -14.32 -24.47

OOO Alta 15.10 9.55 4.88 29.53 25.69 10.92 4.63 41.24 34.85 15.92 3.53 54.30 37.31 56.06 4.21 97 .58 31.43 54.86 4.34 90.63

OOO Optmetall-Service 46.20 33.70 4.90 84.79 73.21 67.04 5.13 145.38 74.74 54.79 5.15 134.67 67.30 58.91 5, 44 131.65 58.90 92.91 5.32 157.14

OOO Metallotorg 35.57 9.53 5.05 50.15 54.61 21.75 5.38 81.74 67.89 71.46 5.43 144.77 49.44 67.52 5.41 122 .37 31.77 22.75 4.44 58.96

Table 7

Classification of types of financial condition depending on the value of the integral indicator*

The value of the integral indicator Financial condition Generalizing characteristic of the financial condition

Less than 0 Unsatisfactory Characterized by unprofitable activities, low liquidity, dependence on external sources of financing and lack of working capital

0 -30 Unstable Low level of capital efficiency, typical unstable capital structure and low liquidity

31-61 Satisfactory Average level of profitability and turnover of assets with an insufficient level of solvency or financial stability

61 and more Stable Indicators characterizing the financial condition, which are at the optimal level

It seems that such a methodological approach is limited, since it provides for a generalized assessment of the financial condition based on the value of the integral indicator and does not consider the dynamics of changes in its main components. This may lead to an inadequate conclusion regarding the reasons for the change in the financial condition of the enterprise. Therefore, the authors propose to detail the types of financial conditions of the enterprise by analyzing the main components of the integral assessment. To determine the type of financial condition, it is advisable to use the calculated value of the components of the integral assessment Z, X, Y (Table 6).

The grouping of enterprises according to the levels of indicators characterizing individual elements of the financial condition made it possible to determine the types of financial condition determined by the quality and level of efficiency in the use of capital, financial stability, liquidity and solvency.

Based on the possible range of changes and standard values of financial indicators, the following types of the financial condition of the enterprise are schematically defined (Fig. 2).

The proposed approach involves the assignment of the enterprise to a certain group, depending on the value of integral indicators characterizing financial stability, efficiency of capital use, liquidity and solvency. The advantage of this approach is the definition of the financial condition on the basis of its components that characterize certain aspects of the financial condition, that is, this approach has a large degree of devaluation.

talization, which positively affects the adequacy and reliability of the general conclusion about the financial condition of an economic entity.

If necessary, conclusions about the financial condition of the enterprise, you can use the value of the integral indicator - I, which allows you to objectively conduct a comprehensive assessment of the financial condition, since it is a consolidating mechanism of financial indicators.

On the basis of certain types of financial condition and the level of their integral assessment, the types of financial condition of an economic entity are determined, which determine its characteristics (Table 7).

It should be noted that the choice of detailing the linguistic definition of the type or type of financial condition depends on the goals of analysis and forecasting.

It is advisable to give an assessment both on the basis of individual components of the financial condition, and on the basis of an integral indicator, since these linguistic characteristics complement each other.

Thus, the integral indicator of financial condition is calculated in stages:

1. Calculation of financial indicators characterizing the financial condition of the enterprise (the list of indicators is given in Table 5).

2. Definition by formula (5) of standardized indicators of financial condition.

3. Determination of the coordinates of the financial condition of the enterprise according to the formulas:

Zone of efficient use of capital Type 12 Profitable enterprises with a high level of liquidity, but lack of internal sources of financing; leads to loss of financial independence Zone of optimal level of liquidity and solvency Type 15 Profitable enterprises with unsatisfactory financial stability, which is largely due to a significant amount of borrowed capital Type 18 Successful enterprises with a high level of efficiency in the use of capital, optimal structure financing of current activities and a high level of liquidity and solvency

1>0 X<0 У>20 1>0 0<Х<3 У>20 1>0 X>3 Y>20

Type 11 Enterprises that use capital efficiently, but a disproportion in the structure of assets and / or capital leads to a loss of financial independence Zone of insufficient liquidity and solvency Type 14 Profitable enterprises that depend on external sources of financing, with a low level of liquidity and solvency 17th type Enterprises that use capital efficiently and have a sufficient level of financial stability, but do not pay enough attention to the level of solvency and liquidity of the enterprise

1>0 X<0 10<У<20 1>0 0<Х<3 10<У<20 1>0 Х>3 10<У<20

10th type Profitable enterprises that have the opportunity to receive loans, but this leads to dependence on external sources of financing. At the same time, the level of solvency of these enterprises is outside the recommended level Zone of unsatisfactory level of liquidity and solvency Type 13 Enterprises with a sufficient level of efficiency in the use of capital and an insufficient level of solvency and financial stability. Type 16 Stability of the financial condition is ensured by the efficient use of capital and its optimal structure, while there is a lack of the most liquid funds to ensure a sufficient level of liquidity

1>0 X<0 У <10 1>0 0<Х<3 У <10 1>0 X>3 Y<10

Zone of negative financial stability Zone of unsatisfactory financial stability Zone of stable financial stability

Zone of inefficient use of capital Type 1 Financial condition can be characterized as close to bankruptcy. This type is characterized by unprofitable activity, low asset turnover and lack of own funds to finance the current activities of the enterprise Zone of unsatisfactory level of liquidity and solvency 4th type This type is characterized by a low level of liquidity and financial stability due to inefficient use of capital of an industrial enterprise 7th type enterprises, but at the expense of their own and equivalent sources, it is possible to ensure the stability of financial stability

1<0 Х<0 У <10 1<0 0<Х<3 У <10 1<0 Х>3 U<10

2nd type Stability of this type depends on external sources of financing. This type is characterized by a low level of efficiency in the use of capital, liquidity and solvency Zone of insufficient level of liquidity and solvency 5th type Unprofitable activity and a significant amount of current liabilities leads to loss of financial stability and solvency of the enterprise 8th type This type is characterized by an insufficient level of solvency and unprofitability , but a sufficient amount of own resources allows for a high level of financial stability

1<0 Х<0 10<У<20 1<0 0<Х<3 10<У<20 1<0 Х>3 10<У<20

Type 3 Enterprises that use capital inefficiently, but due to the synchronization of receivables and payables, they manage to achieve a high level of solvency with a suboptimal financing structure Zone of the optimal level of liquidity and solvency Type 6 Enterprises whose liquidity level is at the normative level, but Inefficient use of capital leads to loss of financial independence

1<0 Х<0 У>20 1<0 0<Х<3 У>20 1<0 Х>3 Y>20

Rice. 2. Matrix of types of financial condition of the enterprise

where Z, Y, X are the coordinates of the financial condition, characterizing the dynamics of changes in its individual components; r, y, x, - actual values of the corresponding financial indicators; Yu; - weight (importance) of the financial ratio; I. - the average value of the financial indicator; m - the number of financial indicators of the integral assessment.

The weight and standard value of the indicators are defined in Table. 5.

4. Finding an integral indicator of financial condition according to the formula:

5. Comparison of the obtained numerical indicators with the linguistic types of the financial condition by coordinates (see Fig. 2, Table 7).

6. Generalization of the conclusion regarding the financial condition of the enterprise on the basis of an integral indicator.

The application of the above approach involves the construction of a number of analytical tables. These calculations were carried out for all the enterprises under study, but the volume of the article does not allow drawing conclusions and calculations for all economic entities, therefore, as an example, calculations are given for Trubstalkomplekt LLC, where the proposals developed by us were put into practice (Table 8) .

On the basis of the performed calculations and the proposed matrix of types of financial condition of Trubstalkomplekt LLC, the general trends in its change were determined and the factors negatively affecting the financial condition of the company were identified. Analysis of the data obtained makes it possible to assert that the main reason for the negative dynamics of the change in the integral indicator in 2011-2013. there was a reduction

Table 8

Integral indicator of the financial condition of Trubstalkomplekt LLC*

indicator and. g a. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

y y x f. y y y x f. y y y x f. y y y x f.

Capital efficiency, Z

Return on current assets 8 0.175 0.231 10.55 0.021 0.97 0.043 1.96 0.191 8.73 0.208 9.49

Profitability of sold products 7 0.128 0.142 7.77 0.075 4.08 0.069 3.76 0.131 7.16 0.159 8.71

Mother turnover ratio 5 12.836 8.670 3.38 9.395 3.66 11.220 4.37 8.533 3.32 7.358 2.87

real assets

Debtor turnover ratio 12 7.617 3.806 6.00 4.637 7.31 5.556 8.75 5.047 7.95 7.212 11.36

debt

27,69 16,02 18,84 27,16 32,43

Solvency and liquidity, U

Absolute liquidity ratio 14 0.189 0.001 0.101 0.001 0.065 0.001 0.087 0.002 0.145 0.001 0.093

Current liquidity ratio 7 1.648 0.647 2.747 0.798 3.390 0.892 3.789 1.114 4.733 1.286 5.460

У 2.85 3.45 3.88 4.88 5.55

Financial stability, X

Financial independence ratio 4 0.639 0.477 2.984 0.459 2.871 0.420 2.631 0.571 3.575 0.556 3.479

X 2.98 2.87 2.63 3.57 3.48

Integral indicator 33.52 22.35 25.34 35.61 41.47

General characteristics of the financial condition satisfactory unstable unstable satisfactory satisfactory

economics of the region vol. 12, no. 2 (2016) www.economyofregion.com

the level of efficiency in the use of capital, due to a decrease in the profitability of product sales. In addition, there was an insufficient level of liquidity and financial stability, but at the same time a slight gradual improvement in the solvency of the enterprise. In 2014-2015 Trubstalkomplekt LLC, by increasing the efficiency of capital use, managed to improve financial stability and bring it closer to the recommended value.

It should be noted that during the study period, the company experienced a lack of liquidity, which led to an insufficient level of solvency, which negatively affected the overall assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise. Thus, in order to further improve the financial condition of Trubstalkomplekt LLC, it is necessary to implement a policy that

aimed at optimizing the ratio of assets and liabilities.

Based on the study, it can be argued that the integral assessment is the basis for predicting the financial condition of the enterprise, since it consists of the main indicators that comprehensively reflect it.

The possibility of decomposing the integral assessment into components - financial stability, liquidity, solvency and efficiency of capital use - will make it possible to identify factors that significantly affect the financial condition of the enterprise and to forecast its activities in a dynamic perspective. In general, the universality and adequacy of the proposed approach to the integral assessment will make it possible to use it as the basis for predicting the financial condition of an enterprise.

List of sources

1. Peshkova E. P., Kyurdzhiev S. P., Mambetova A. A. A methodological approach to the formation and assessment of the level of competitiveness of business entities // Bulletin of the Rostov State Economic University (RINH). - 2015. - No. 2 (50). - S. 117-125.

2. Balabanov I. T. Financial management. Theory and practice: textbook. - M.: Prospect, 2010. - 656 p.

3. Savitskaya GV Comprehensive analysis of economic activity of the enterprise: textbook. allowance. - M.: NITs Infra-M, 2013. - 607 p.

4. Kovalev VV Analysis of the balance, or how to understand the balance: educational and practical. allowance, 3rd ed. - M.: Prospekt, 2013. - 320 p.

5. Berdnikova T. B. Analysis and diagnostics of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise: textbook. allowance. - M.: Infra-M, 2012. - 215s.

6. Taffler R., Tisshaw H. Going, going, gone - four factors which predict // Accountancy. - 1977. - No. 3. - P. 50-54.

7. Sahakian C. E. The Delphi Method // The Corporate Partnering Institute. - 1977. - No. 5. - P. 47-54.

8. Tereshchenko O. O. Anti-crisis financial management at the enterprise. - Kyiv: KNEU, 2004. - 268 p.

9. Erina A. M. Statistical modeling and forecasting: textbook. allowance. - Kyiv: KNEU, 2012. - 170 p.

10. Dougherty K. Introduction to econometrics: Per. from English. - M.: Infra-M, 2002. - 402 p.

11. Kremer N. Sh., Putko B. A. Econometrics: a textbook for universities. - M.: Unity-Dana, 2013. - 311 p.

12. Pogostinskaya N. N. System analysis of financial statements: textbook. allowance. - St. Petersburg: Mikhailov V. A. Publishing House, 2010. - 96 p.

13. Chesser D. L. Predicting Loan Noncompliance // The Journal of Commercial Bank Lending. - 1974. - No. 56 (12). - R. 28-38.

14. Beaver W. H. (1966). Financial ratio and Predictions of Failure. Empirical Research in Accounting Selected Studies // Supplement to Journal of Accounting Research. - 1966. - No. 4. - R. 39-47.

15. Altman E. I. Personal Internet homepage. Retrieved from http://www.pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ealtman/index.html (accessed 3/21/2015).

Kurdzhiev Sergey Panteleevich - Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Professor, Head of the Department of Economics, Finance and Environmental Management, South-Russian Institute of Management - Branch of the RANEPA ( the Russian Federation, 344002, Rostov-on-Don, st. Pushkinskaya, 70; e-mail: [email protected]).

Mambetova Aleksandra Aleksandrovna - Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Professor, Rostov State University of Economics (RINH) (Russian Federation, 344002, Rostov-on-Don, Bolshaya Sadovaya St., 69, 522; e-mail: [email protected]).

Peshkova Elena Petrovna - Doctor of Economics, Professor, South-Russian Institute of Management - Branch of the RANEPA (Russian Federation, 344002, Rostov-on-Don, Pushkinskaya St., 70, 614; e-mail: [email protected]).

For citation: Ekonomika regiona. - 2016. - Vol. 12, Issue 2. - pp. 586-601

S. P. Kyurdzhiev a), A. A. Mambetova b), E. P. Peshkova a)

a) South-Russian Institute of Management - Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public

Administration (Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation; e-mail: [email protected]) b) Rostov State University of Economics (Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation)

An Integral Evaluation of the Financial State of the Regional Enterprises

The subject matter of the article is the development of theoretical positions and methodical approaches to the integral evaluation of the financial state of the region's metallurgical enterprises. The purpose is to show the possibility of dividing the integral evaluation into separate elements for using this tool to build individual models based on the forecasting of the various coordinates of the financial position of an enterprise. methodological approaches to the increase of the quality of analysis by eliminating certain shortcomings of discriminant models in order to clarify the algorithm of constructing the integral index. , abstraction, comparison whi ch give the possibility of determining the financial indicators needed to build the predictive models of financial state; the methods of correlation and regression analysis, which allow to improve the integral value and to build the mathematical forecasting models. With the purpose of improving the integral evaluation of the financial condition of an enterprise, the geometric interpretation is used, which involves the dividing of the integral indicator on the individual elements. The special feature of the proposed methodological approach consists in the implementation rules for the certain procedures of the evaluation of financial position and generalization of the analysis results. The proposed approach can be used by financial analysts to elaborate the strategic plans of company development and structure optimization of financial resources. This research allows to define quantitative the influence of separate parameters on the general assessment of the financial position for the purpose of its forecasting, which is understood as the system of the evidence-based probabilistic assumptions of the basic and alternative structural changes of the enterprise" s assets and liabilities.

Keywords: modeling of financial position, integral evaluation of the financial position, financial performance, profitability, paying capacity, liquidity, financial stability, composition and structure of assets and capital, efficiency of enterprise management, forecasting

1. Peshkova, E. P. & Kyurdzhiev, S. P. & Mambetova, A. A. (2015). Metodicheskiy podkhod k formirovaniyu i otsenke urovnya konkurentosposobnosti khozyaystvuyushchikh subektov . Vestnik Rostovskogo state ekonomicheskogo universiteta (RINKh), 2(50), 117-125.

2 Balabanov, I. T. (2010). Financial management. Teoriya i praktika: uchebnik. Moscow: Perspektiva Publ., 656.

3. Savitskaya, G. V. (2013). Kompleksnyy analiz khozyaystvennoy deyatelnosti predpriyatiya: ucheb. posobie. . Moscow: NITs Infra-M Publ., 607.

4. Kovalev, V. V. (2013). Analiz balansa, or kak ponimat balans: uchebno-praktich. posobie, 3rd ed. . Moscow: Prospekt Publ., 320.

5. Berdnikova, T. B. (2012). Analiz i diagnostika finansovo-khozyaystvennoy deyatelnosti predpriyatiya: ucheb. posobie. Moscow: Infra-M Publ., 215.

6. Taffler, R. & Tisshaw, H. (1977). Going, Going, Gone - Four Factors Which Predict. Accountancy, 3, 50-54.

7. Sahakian, C. E. (1977). The Delphi Method. The Corporate Partnering Institute, 5, 47-54.

8. Tereshchenko, O. O. (2004). Antikrizisnoye finansovoye upravlenie na predpriyatii. Kiev: KNEU Publ., 268.

9. Erina, A. M. (2012). Statisticheskoye modeling and forecasting: ucheb. posobie. Kiev: KNEU Publ., 170.

10. Dougerti, K. (2002). Introduction to econometriku: per. sengl. Moscow: Infra-M Publ., 402.

11. Kremer. N. Sh. & Putko, B. A. (2013). Ekonometrika: uchebnik dlya vuzov. Moscow: Yuniti-Dana Publ., 311.

12. Pogostinskaya, N. N. (2010). Sistemnyy analiz finansovoy otchetnosti: ucheb. posobie. St. Petersburg: Mikhaylov V. A. Publ., 96.

13. Chesser, D. L. (1974). Predicting Loan Noncompliance. The Journal of Commercial Bank Lending, 56(12), 28-38.

14. Beaver, W. H. (1966). Financial Ratio and Predictions of Failure. Empirical Research in Accounting Selected Studies. Supplement to Journal of Accounting Research, 4, 39-47.

15. Altman, E. I. Personal Internet Homepage. Retrieved from: http://www.pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ealtman/index.html (date of access: 03/21/2015).

Sergey Panteleyevich Kyurdzhiev - Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Economics, Finances and Environmental Management, South-Russian Institute of Management - the Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (70, Pushkinskaya St., Rostov-on-Don, 344002, Russian Federation; e-mail: [email protected]).

Aleksandra Aleksandrovna Mambetova - Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Professor, Rostov State University of Economics (69, Bolshaya Sadovaya St., Rostov-on-Don, 344002, Russian Federation; e-mail: [email protected]).

Elena Petrovna Peshkova - Doctor of Economics, Professor, South-Russian Institute of Management - the Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (70, Pushkinaskaya St., Rostov-on-Don, 344002, Russian Federation; e- mail: [email protected]).

Assets	Absolute values		Specific gravity (%)		Passive	Absolute values		Specific gravity (%)
Assets	beginning of the year	the end of the year	beginning of the year	the end of the year	Passive	beginning of the year	the end of the year	beginning of the year	the end of the year	beginning of the year	the end of the year

Indicator	01.01.04	01.01.05	01.01.06	01.01.07
Stocks and costs
Own working capital (SOS)
Own and long-term borrowed sources
The total value of the main sources
A) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own working capital
B) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of own and long-term borrowed sources of reserves and costs
C) Surplus (+) or shortage (-) of the total value of the main sources of formation of reserves and costs
Three-component indicator of the type of financial situation, S

Conditions
S = 1, 1, 1	S = 0, 1, 1	S = 0, 0, 1	S = 0, 0, 0
Absolute independence	Normal independence	Unstable financial condition	Crisis financial condition
Assessing the risk of financial instability
Risk Free Zone	Acceptable Risk Zone	Critical Risk Zone	Catastrophic Risk Zone

Indicator	2004	2005	2006	Changes (+, -) 04–05	Changes (+, -) 05–06
1. General liquidity ratio (L 1)
2. Absolute liquidity ratio (L 2)						L 2 > 0.2-0.7
3. Coefficient of "critical evaluation" (L 3)						L 3 > 1.5 - optimal; L 3 \u003d 0.7-0.8 - normal
4. Current liquidity ratio (L 4)
5. The coefficient of maneuverability of functioning capital (L 5)						A decrease in the indicator in dynamics is a positive fact
6. Equity ratio (L 6)

Indicator of financial condition	2004		2005		2006
Indicator of financial condition		Number of points	The actual value of the coefficient	Number of points	The actual value of the coefficient	Number of points

Type of risk	Design model	Level of risk
Risk of loss of solvency	Absolute balance sheet liquidity indicators	Acceptable Risk Zone
Risk of loss of solvency	Relative indicators of solvency	Acceptable Risk Zone
Risk of loss of financial stability	Absolute indicators	Critical Risk Zone
Risk of loss of financial stability	Relative indicators of capital structure	In terms of equity and financial stability ratios — high risk
Comprehensive risk assessment of the financial condition	Relative indicators of solvency and capital structure	High risk area

Integral assessment of the financial and economic state of the enterprise. Integral assessment of financial stability Integral indicator of financial condition assessment

Bibliographic link

Example

Password recovery