Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138

Content available at: https://www.ipinnovative.com/open-access-journals

Journal of Management Research and Analysis

Journal homepage: https://www.jmra.in/

Original Research Article

Financial analysis by return on equity (ROE) and return on asset (ROA)-A
comparative study of HUL and ITC
Ashok Kumar Panigrahi1, *, Kushal Vachhani1
1 Dept. of Technology Management, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies, Shirpur, Dhule, Maharashtra, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history: The financial performance of the top two companies of the FMCG sector HUL and ITC are analyzed in this
Received 20-09-2021 research paper by using the two most popular financial tools of analysis i.e., ROE and ROA. Similar to the
Accepted 01-10-2021 DuPont method, components of Return on Equity (ROE) and Return on Asset (ROA) are segregated to do
Available online 09-10-2021 the analysis of financial performance and to accomplish the objective. To calculate ROE and ROA, ratios
such as net profit ratio (NPR), total asset turnover ratio (TATR), and equity multiplier (EQM) will be used.
It is observed that the use of financial leverage was mainly responsible for the whole decrease in return on
Keywords: equity (ROE). In terms of return on equity, we found that the Asset Turnover Ratio increases somewhat,
Financial analysis
while in the case of ITC, the ratio either remains the same or slightly decreases in value. As a result, HUL’s
Return on Equity (ROE)
total asset turnover ratio (TATR) is greater than that of ITC, suggesting that HUL is more efficient in its
Return on Asset (ROA) asset use. We were able to demonstrate statistically, via the use of the One-way Anova test, that there is a
ITC
significant meaningful association among the ratios.
HUL
Du Pont Analysis This is an Open Access (OA) journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon
the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under
the identical terms.
For reprints contact: reprint@ipinnovative.com

1. Introduction money. In some industries, managers may rely on the return

on assets when making decisions. It’s a useful statistic
Companies do look at their financial health via the use of
for determining the return on investment in manufacturing
gross margin, net margin, ROA, and ROE. The information
and other industrial companies, so they may assess their
helps one to judge the firm’s overall condition since it shows
efficiency. Often when a company in the infrastructure
how a company performs in comparison to other businesses.
sector has a big profit margin, it will discover that its ROA
Even though these numbers are not very useful on their
is even higher. If you discover how to do this with fewer
own, they may be used to measure oneself against others
assets, you may be able to increase your profit margin. But
in the industry or to see how much one has improved over
the authority of the management team extends to corporate
time. A company’s financial future may be determined using
shares and debt, and their primary priority is profitability.
these kinds of research. 1 It is a common occurrence for
Calculations will be performed by the DuPont method after
shareholders to be more interested in this information than
breaking down the fundamental ROE and ROA formulae
business executives. The advisors will first assess the two of
into their various components.
them to see whether they are even eligible to get engaged.
It shows whether or not the company is worthwhile to
invest in. The banks will also take into account all of these 1.1. Return on equity (ROE)
details when determining whether or not to provide business ROE indicates how much profit may be made for every
* Corresponding author. rupee invested in a business. In every sector, this is a crucial
E-mail address: ashok.panigrahi@nmims.edu (A. K. Panigrahi). ratio, and for certain firms, it’s more important than ROA.

https://doi.org/10.18231/j.jmra.2021.027
2394-2762/© 2021 Innovative Publication, All rights reserved. 131
132 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138

For example, banks often bolster their capital by taking in as the chance of default. Even when there is no danger, more
many deposits as possible before making loans with a higher debt lowers the return on equity. Increased interest expenses
interest rate. Their return on assets (ROA) is almost non- lead to lower net income. This causes the company’s net
existent, therefore they aren’t doing very well at generating profit margin to decrease.
money. However, present in all organizations, but it may
vary in terms of equity for each business. 1.2. Return on asset (ROA)
The following formula is used to calculate the return on
equity (ROE): Return on asset (ROA) is an investment return of sorts, and
ROE = T OT AL S HNAREET P ROF I T it may be defined broadly (ROI). It gives us information
HOL DE R′ S FU N D
Equation: 1-A (Basic formula of ROE) about the amount of money returned to you in return for
every rupee invested in the business. ROA demonstrates the
capacity of your business to produce profits utilizing its
Calculation of Return on Equity (ROE) will be into assets. In some sectors, ROA is greater than others because
three components: operating efficiency, asset efficiency, the amount of capital invested in assets varies. Businesses
and leverage. Net Profit Margin is a metric of operational that make products will frequently shell out big money
efficiency that indicates how much net income is made for infrastructure and equipment. It may be essential for
per rupee of revenue generated by a business. The Total a service company to acquire costly IT technology. Stores
Asset Turnover Ratio (TATR) is a financial indicator of asset need to have a large supply of merchandise. No matter what
efficiency that indicates the amount of money generated per kind of company you have, it gives us a view of the whole
rupee invested in assets. Finally, the Equity Multiplier is in picture.
charge of financial leverage calculation. The company’s operational efficiency is affected by the
use of resources, which is seen in the net profit margin.
Success and failure are not necessarily tied to high and low-
profit margins. A business may have low margins yet still
be successful if it is creating a high return on its investments
and assets. The two factors used to calculate a company’s
total operational efficiency are combined. Asset turnover
calculates how well an organization utilizes its assets, while
net profit margin evaluates how profitable the company’s
sales are. The following figure indicates the basic integrated
analysis of ROA.

Fig. 1: (Breaking down ROE into three components)

The following is the equation of ROE after breaking

down into three factors:

ROE = N PR X T AT R X EQM
Equation: 1-B (Basic formula for ROE after breaking
down into components)
Where, NPR= net profit ratio, TATR= total turnover ratio,
and EQM=equity multiplier
We may alternatively express the components as a set of
ratios, as follows: Fig. 2: (Breaking down ROA into two components)

ROE = N ET P ROF I T
S AL E S X T OTSAL
AL E S
AS S ET X The following equation is of ROA after breaking down
T OT AL AS S ET into two factors:
S AL E SS H ARE HOL DE RS FU N D
Equation: 1-C (Formula of ROE in three-component)
RO A = N PR X T AT R
An organization’s output rises as these factors rise. Net Equation: 2-A ((Basic formula for ROA after breaking
Profit Margin and Total Asset Turnover are also subject down in components)
to a give-and-take within different industries. The last Where, NPR= net profit ratio, TATR= total turnover ratio
component, financial leverage, deals with the company’s We may alternatively express the components as a set of
financial dealings. The more the company’s debt, the higher ratios, as follows:
 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138 133

of the listed food brands, followed by Food Merce and

ROE = N ET P ROF I T
S AL E S X T OTSAL
AL E S
AS S ET
then Dongwon Home Food and Lotte Food. These four
Equation: 1-C (Formula of ROA in two-component) companies are big names in their industries. The author
The Return on Assets Ratio (ROA) is a useful found that the best ways to gauge the profitability of
measure for measuring the total profitability and operational a business are the return on equity and the return on
efficiency of a business since it demonstrates how investment. It accounts for the choices that people may
profitability and operational activity interact. This concept make about running, investing, finance, and leveraging.
posits that raising the return on investment, or return on Fitri Sukmawati and Innes Garsela (2016) 3 investigated
capital, either by expanding sales volume or improving the relationship between the return on assets and the return
profit margin, would improve the firm’s performance. on equity of a company’s stock price. In this research,
the author used descriptive-quantitative analysis, which
2. Literature Review included the application of the classical assumption test.
Multiple linear regression analysis, multiple correlation
S. Christina Sheela and Dr. Karthikeyan (2012) evaluated analysis, determination, the t-test, and the f test are some
the pharmaceutical industry’s financial performance from of the statistical techniques used by the author. The author’s
2003 to 2012, concentrating on three main players: Cipla, 1 results show that variances can explain the stock price by
Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, and Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals. demonstrating that as the return on equity rises, the stock
The author used DuPont analysis to ascertain the company’s price declines. Variations The ratios of the return on assets
earning potential (ROI and ROE). According to the and return on equity can explain the variance in share prices
author, it is a critical tool for assessing an organization’s when considered together.
financial performance. The author concluded that the Bhagya Lakshmi (2019) 4 conducted research in which
DuPont research (which calculated ROI and ROE for India’s DuPont analysis was used to evaluate the performance of
top three pharmaceutical companies) showed that absolute selected automobile companies, assessed by ROCE (ROE).
metrics are not always appropriate in all circumstances. As The study was designed to assess the performance of a
a consequence, it is essential to create a consistent basis company and the value it produces relative to total assets,
of comparison for various companies when computing the sales, and other key variables. A team of researchers from
ratio, as well as to build rankings of relative sizes to assess IIM, Bangalore, conducted their study on 10 automotive
efficiency. companies listed on the National Stock Exchange (NSE),
Citra Shahnia and Endri (2020) examined the financial from 2013 to 2017. The author states that the correlation
performance of seven companies listed on the Jakarta Stock and regression analysis is performed to identify if a
Exchange from 2014 to 2018. The author utilizes DuPont relationship exists between the aforementioned variables
analysis to evaluate a company’s operational performance and to determine the ROE and EM effects. As the author
using return on equity and return on assets. Various financial discovered, all of the variables except EM were linked
measures are used in this study to evaluate the degree of a together, and selected companies had significantly different
business’s success in managing corporate assets from sales- financial performances when compared on return on equity
generated earnings. Author’s findings: Let us start with and return on assets.
financial ratios for trading. Assuring current debt repayment
is measured by the liquidity ratio. Financial health and
2.1. Need of research
capacity to meet immediate and long-term obligations are
known. Based on the author’s study during 2014-2018, these After examining several research papers on ROE and
companies’ liquidity ratios were over 1. The activity ratio ROA, we found that none of them included critical
examines the link between sales and needed assets. Most information regarding ROE and ROA. Additionally, none of
valuable in 2014-2018 was PT Alakasa Industrindo Tbk. the publications included instructions on how to do a ROA
The proportion of activity is related to sales volume. The analysis. 5 Due to the absence of a comprehensive financial
greater the ratio, the better. ABM Investama Tbk and Global analysis of the FMCG sector in India, we selected two
Mediacom Tbk provide higher returns to shareholders than companies from the NIFTY FMCG index to undertake our
Bakrie and Brothers, Polaris Investama Tbk, and Saratoga research: HUL and ITC. Our study addressed in detail ROA
Sedaya Tbk. and ROE, as well as how to analyze them by breaking them
Kim (2016) 2 assessed the financial well-being of a down into components. Additionally, this article discusses
food distribution company in light of its number of sales. several components, including the Total Asset Turnover
The author analyzed ROE and ROA using the DuPont Ratio (TATR), the Net Profit Ratio (NPR), and the Equity
framework to reach the goal, and the results have been Multiplier (EQM). The aim of breaking into components
presented in tables that show how these ratios have changed is to identify associations between them as well as the
over time. According to the results of the study, Hyundae long-term effects of all of these components on ROE and
Green Food leads the financial performance of all four ROA. The purpose of this study is to analyze the financial
134 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138

performance of selected companies such as HUL and ITC,

to determine their profitability using ROE and ROA, and to

ROE (%)

143.19
120.41
117.13
83.49
86.33
79.45

66.11
68.97
73.70
79.04
84.02
16.85
determine the effect of the Net Profit Ratio (NPR), the Total
Asset Turnover Ratio (TATR), and the Equity Multiplier
(EQM) on ROE and ROA. Essentially, this tutorial will
explain to investors how to do a fundamental analysis of a
business’s profitability.

ROA (%)

22.69
22.19
24.47
31.67
28.69
30.24
28.06
28.50
29.19
32.50
33.48
11.63
3. Research Methodology
We selected two FMCG companies from the NIFTY FMCG
index to examine as part of our research, namely HUL and
ITC. Between 2010 and 2021, a total of twelve years of data
will be collected. Secondary data was gathered from annual

EQM (%)

367.95
389.09
324.71
452.20
419.71
387.41
235.59
242.00
252.47
243.23
250.94
144.92
reports and the moneycontrol.com website. Excel was used
to gather all of the data and do all of the mathematical
computations. To determine if there was an association
between NPR, TATR, and EQM into excel, an ANOVA
test was performed. This test aimed to determine whether

Share Holders
or not two groups are associated based on the assumption

2583.52
2659.52
3512.93
2674.02
3277.05
3724.78
of two hypotheses. The P-value is used to determine the

47434
fund

6279
6490
7075
7659
8031
validity of the hypotheses. If the P-value is less than the
usual significance threshold of 0.05, the null hypothesis is
rejected and alternative hypotheses are considered. The null
hypothesis says that no connection exists between the two
186.60
193.50
205.45
223.32
212.55
221.57
217.58
211.14
199.00
211.02
197.40
TATR

68.41
groups selected for the test, while the alternative hypothesis (%)
argues that an association exists between the two groups
selected for the test.
Total Assets

4. Scope of Research
10348
11407
12092
13754
14430
14793
15706
17862
18629
20153
68740
9506

This research examines the financial performance of two

large-scale FMCG companies, ITC and HUL. This research
study has assessed the ratios of ROE and ROA, breaking
them down into their and two components by using the
NPR (%)

DuPont technique, and demonstrating them with tables that

12.16
11.47
11.91
14.18
13.50
13.65
12.90
13.50
14.67
15.40
16.96
illustrate how they have changed over time. To review ROE 17.00
and ROA, we analyzed the elements by breaking them
down. This included evaluating NPR, TATR, and EQM. The
three components of return on equity: net profit margin,
Net Profit

total asset turnover, and equity multiplier, and the two

2157
2296
2791
3829
3946
4363
4151
4476
5214
6054
6748
7995
Table 1: (Collected and calculated data of HUL)

components of return on asset: net profit margin and total

asset turnover. 6 This research focuses on the comparison
ratio.

5. Data and Analysis

17738
20023
23436
27004
29234
31972
32186
33162
35545
39310
39783
47028
Sales

In this section, the financial data of HUL and ITC is given in

Table 1 and Table 2 respectively and data of one-way Anova
test is also given in this section.
Were, NPR= Net Profit Ratio
1. TATR= Total Asset Turnover Ratio
2. EQM= Equity Multiplier
3. ROA= Return on Asset
Year

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021

4. ROE= Return on Equity

 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138 135

Table 2: (Collected and calculated data of ITC)

Year Sales Net NPR (%) Total TATR(%) Share EQM ROA (%) ROE (%)
Profit Assets Holders (%)
Fund
2010 19127 4168 21.79 23817 80.31 14064.38 169.34 17.50 29.64
2011 22566 5018 22.24 26391 85.51 15953.27 165.43 19.01 31.45
2012 26516 6258 23.60 30085 88.14 18791.89 160.10 20.80 33.30
2013 31618 7608 24.06 35329 89.50 22287.85 158.51 21.53 34.14
2014 35306 8891 25.18 40848 86.43 26262.02 155.54 21.77 33.85
2015 38817 9663 24.89 45952 84.47 30735.69 149.51 21.03 31.44
2016 39192 9344 23.84 51651 75.88 32929 156.86 18.09 28.38
2017 42768 10289 24.06 55898 76.51 45340.96 123.28 18.41 22.69
2018 43449 11271 25.94 64241 67.63 51400.07 124.98 17.54 21.93
2019 48340 12592 26.05 71739 67.38 57949.79 123.80 17.55 21.73
2020 49388 15306 30.99 77311 63.88 64029.16 120.74 19.80 23.90
2021 49257 13161 26.72 73761 66.78 59004.58 125.01 17.84 22.31

Table 3: (Data summary of anova test for NPR_ITC and TATR_ITC)

Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
NPR_ITC 12 24.9467 2.4089 0.6954
TATR_ITC 12 77.7017 9.3467 2.6982
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of Sum of SquaresSS Mean F-Stat P-Value
FreedomDF SquareMS
Between Groups 1 16698.5402 16698.5402 358.4778 0
Within Groups 22 1024.7996 46.5818
Total: 23 17723.3398

Table 4: (Data summary of anova test for NPR_ITC and EQM_ITC)

Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
NPR_ITC 12 24.9467 2.4089 0.6954
EQM_ITC 12 144.425 19.066 5.5039
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of Sum of SquaresSS Mean SquareMS F-Stat P-Value
FreedomDF
Between Groups 1 85650.385 85650.385 463.8336 0
Within Groups 22 4062.4667 184.6576
Total: 23 89712.8517

Table 5: (Data summary of anova test for EQM_ITC and TATR_ITC)

Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
EQM_ITC 12 144.425 19.066 5.5039
TATR_ITC 12 77.7017 9.3467 2.6982
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of Sum of SquaresSS Mean F-Stat P-Value
FreedomDF SquareMS
Between Groups 1 26711.9926 26711.9926 118.4901 0
Within Groups 22 4959.6047 225.4366
Total: 23 31671.5973
136 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138

Table 6: (Data summary of anova test for npr_HUL and TATR_HUL)

Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
NPR_HUL 12 13.9417 1.8128 0.5233
TATR_HUL 12 195.6283 41.6337 12.0186
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of FreedomDF Sum of SquaresSS Mean SquareMS F-Stat P-Value
Between Groups 1 198060.1237 198060.1237 228.0943 0
Within Groups 22 19103.1634 868.3256
Total: 23 217163.2871

Table 7: (Data summary of anova test for npr HUL and EQM_HUL)
Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
NPR_HUL 12 13.9417 1.8128 0.5233
EQM_HUL 12 309.185 93.779 27.0717
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of Sum of Mean SquareMS F-Stat P-Value
FreedomDF SquaresSS
Between Groups 1 523011.6372 523011.6372 118.8962 0
Within Groups 22 96775.6579 4398.8935
Total: 23 619787.2951

Table 8: (Data summary of anova test for tatr_hul and eqm_hul)

Data Summary
Groups N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error
TATR_HUL 12 195.6283 41.6337 12.0186
EQM_HUL 12 309.185 93.779 27.0717
ANOVA Summary
Source Degrees of Sum of SquaresSS Mean SquareMS F-Stat P-Value
FreedomDF
Between Groups 1 77370.7447 77370.7447 14.6983 0.0009
Within Groups 22 115806.524 5263.9329
Total: 23 193177.2687

Table 9: (Data summary of f-statistical value and p-value of all group)

Groups F-Statictical Value P-Value
NPR_ITC AND TATR_ITC 358.47778 0
NPR_ITC AND EQM_ITC 463.83358 0
EQM_ITC AND TATR_ITC 118.49005 0
NPR_HUL AND TATR_HUL 228.0943 0
NPR_HUL AND EQM_HUL 118.89618 0
TATR_HUL AND EQM_HUL 14.69828 0.0009

6. Findings 1. Net Profit Margin: Throughout the period 2010-

2021, HUL’s net profit margin remained steady, with
Finally, we have examined the results of the model and data the bulk of it falling between 13 % and 15 % on an
gathered for ITC and HUL in this part. Net profit is the annual basis. For ITC, the net profit margin has ranged
basis used to assess the effectiveness of an organization’s between 22 % and 24 % during the same period in
operations. The asset turnover ratio is a measure of the question. To determine how much HUL lags behind
efficiency with which assets are used. The equity multiplier ITC, it is obvious that Net Profit Margin is an important
is a measure of the amount of leverage used. Examining the element to consider. By growing income, such as by
performance of HUL and ITC in respect to the parameters selling more products or by raising pricing, HUL may
mentioned above, we may determine who is lagging behind improve their net profit margin, and by decreasing
the rest of the field.
 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138 137

expenses, they can increase their net profit margin (e.g., 3. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed
finding cheaper sources for raw materials). that there was a significant association between TATR
2. Asset Turnover Ratio: As can be seen, HUL’s Total and EQM of ITC, p < 0.05.
Asset Turnover ratio has continuously been between 4. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed
200 % and 220 %, while ITC’s Total Asset Turnover that there was no significant association between NPR
ratio is lower and has been falling from 80 to 65 % and TATR of HUL, p < 0.05.
since inception, suggesting that assets are not being 5. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed
effectively used. ITC lags in this regard. Asset turnover that there was no significant association between NPR
ratios may be improved by properly stocking shops and EQM of HUL, p < 0.05.
with marketable products, restocking inventory only 6. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed
when necessary, and extending operating hours to that there was a significant association between TATR
maximize customer foot traffic and income. and EQM of HUL, p < 0.05.
3. Financial leverage: It is measured by the equity
multiplier. For the period 2011-2021, HUL has an The One-way ANOVA test findings seem to show that the
equity multiplier in the region of 250 % to 300 %, groups are all linked together. Both the Dupont model and
while ITC has an equity multiplier in the range of the integration analysis of ratios are well suited to the job of
120 % to 150 %. This indicates that HUL is highly analyzing ROE and ROA.
indebted. 7 The example of HUL also demonstrates that
the company has made extensive use of leverage in the 7. Conclusion
years 2013 and 2014, with an increase of about 400 %.
The purpose of this study was to examine how profitability
When we look at HUL more closely, we can see that the measures such as ROE and ROA may be used to assess
whole change in return on equity was due to the increased financial performance. We used the DuPont method to break
use of financial leverage. 5 Furthermore, we find that when down ROE and ROA into components like NPR, TATR, and
ROE rises, the Asset Turnover Ratio rises somewhat, but EQM and analyze them. According to the findings of the
in the case of ITC, it almost stays the same or falls study, there is a strong relationship between three variables:
little. HUL outperforms ITC in terms of return on assets NPM, TATR, and EQM, which states that a high level of
ROA because HUL’s TATR is higher than ITC’s, which management effectiveness and efficiency of an investor’s
essentially indicates that HUL is making greater use of its money can predict a high level of profit margin, and we also
assets. 8 found that there can be a positive or negative relationship
Using the One-way Anova test, we discovered an between all of these components using statistical tests.
association between all of the variables that are responsible According to our results, the Total Asset Turnover Ratio has
for the change in the company’s return on equity and return an impact on return on equity, while the ITC ratio remains
on assets. All the related data for the test are given in the the same or slightly decreases in value. As a result, HUL’s
Table 3 to Table 9. total asset turnover ratio (TATR) is greater than ITC’s,
indicating that HUL uses its assets more efficiently. To have
µ0 = there is no association between two groups. a better sense of the FMCG industry’s future profitability,
sector analysts and investors should pay more attention
to asset turnover ratio changes rather than profit margin
improvements.
µ1 = there is association between two groups.
8. Source of Funding
W here µ1 is the alternative hypothesis that
we can accept when the µ0 is re jected. None.

The null hypothesis will be rejected if the p-value is 9. Conflict of Interest

less than the usual significant threshold of 0.05, and the
None.
alternative hypothesis will be taken into account. Below are
the results of the test;
References
1. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed 1. Khan MY, Jain PK. Financial Management: Text, Problems and Cases;
that there was a significant association between NPR 2018. p. 1446.
and TATR of ITC, p < 0.05. 2. Kim HS. A Study of Financial Performance using DuPont
Analysis in Food Distribution Market. Culinary Sci Hospitality Res.
2. The one-way ANOVA test of independence showed 2016;22(6):52–60.
that there was a significant association between NPR 3. Panigrahi A, Joshi V. Financing Decisions: A Study of Selected
and EQM of ITC, p < 0.05. Pharmaceutical Companies of India. J Dr GDPol Found. 2019;9(2):78–
90.
138 Panigrahi and Vachhani / Journal of Management Research and Analysis 2021;8(3):131–138

4. Lakshmi B. A study on financial performance evaluation using DuPont Res. 2016;Available from: https://doi.org/10.2991/gcbme-16.2016.8.
analysis in select automobile companies. Int J Manag Technol Eng. doi:10.2991/gcbme-16.2016.8.
2019;9:1–9.
5. Sheela SC, Karthikeyan K. Financial Performance of Pharmaceutical
Industry in India using DuPont Analysis. Eur J Business Manag. Author biography
2012;4(14):114–23.
6. Business News | Stock and Share Market News | Financial News. (n.d.). Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, Associate Professor
Www.Moneycontrol.Com. Retrieved September 12, 2021, . Available
from: https://www.moneycontrol.com/. Kushal Vachhani, Student
7. Shahnia C, Purnamasari ED, Hakim L, Endri E. Determinant of
profitability: Evidence from trading, service and investment companies
in Indonesia. Evid Trading Serv Investment Companies Indonesia.
2020;6(5):787–94. doi:10.5267/j.ac.2020.6.004. Cite this article: Panigrahi AK, Vachhani K. Financial analysis by
8. Sukmawati F, Garsela I. The Effect of Return on Assets and return on equity (ROE) and return on asset (ROA)-A comparative study
Return on Equity to the Stock Price. Adv Econ Business Manag of HUL and ITC. J Manag Res Anal 2021;8(3):131-138.