FINANCIAL RATIO ANALYSIS SHELL, PSO & BYCO

1. FINANCIAL RATIO ANALYSIS
Presented By:
Ammar Hussain-18342
FahadKhalid-18481
Mirza Asad Baig-18482
M. Ali Jahangir-19963
M.Obaid Ali Shah-18400
Umer Ali Khan-20656
PSO SHELL BYCO

2. Pakistan state oil has been driving the national economy and fueling the needs of the nation for
the past 39 years.
Pakistan State oil is the oil market leader in Pakistan
•73% market share in Black oil Market
•59% share in White oil market
Products are,
 Petroleum Oil Lubricants (POL)
 High Sulphur Furnace Oil (HSFO)
 Low Sulphur Furnace Oil (LSFO)
 High Speed Diesel (HSD)
 Lubricants
 Re- Gasified Liquefied Natural Gas (RLNG)
 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
 Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG)
VISION
As an innovative and dynamic energy company, we
want to excel in delivering value to customers that
gets to the future first
MISSION
The mission is the organizations commitment to
leadership in energy markets through competitive
advantage in providing the highest quality petroleum
products and services to our customers.
PAKISTAN STATE OIL

3. SHELL PETROLEUM
 Royal Dutch Shell plc commonly known as Shell is one of the 6th oil and gas super measures and 6th
largest company in the world measured by 2016 revenue
 Products
Fuels (Super , Diesel & V-Power)
Performance Oils (Shell Helix Ultra 5W-40 for Cars, Shell Advance Ultra for Motor cycles, Shell
Rimula R6 LME for Trucks and heavy vehicles)
Lubricants (Shell Lubricants for Agriculture, Shell Lubricants for Manufacturing, Shell Lubricants
for Construction,
Shell Lubricants for Power)
VISION
“Our vision is to reinforce our position as a leader in
the oil and gas industry in order to provide a
competitive shareholder return while helping to meet
global energy demand in a responsible way”
MISSION
“Our aim is to meet the energy needs of society, in
ways that are economically, socially and
environmentally viable, now and in the future.”

4. Byco is Pakistan’s emerging energy companies engaged in the businesses of oil
refining, petroleum marketing, chemicals manufacturing and petroleum logistics.
Companies under Byco umbrella are:
•Byco Oil Pakistan Limited (BOPL)
•Oil Refining & Chemical Manufacturing
•Byco Petroleum Pakistan Limited (BPPL)
•Oil Refining & Petroleum Marketing
•Byco Terminals Pakistan Limited (BTPL)
•Petroleum Infrastructure & Logistics
•Products are
•Refined Petroleum Products (Gasoline, High Speed Diesel, Furnace Oil etc).
BYCO
VISION
Our vision is to be a leading energy company
through delivering the core business, achieve
sustainable productivity and profitability to deliver a
superior shareholder return.
MISSION
“our mission to fulfill the energy demand within and
beyond borders.

5. PROFITABILITY RATIOS
1. Gross Profit Margin
2. Net Profit Margin
3. Return on Equity
4. Return on Total Assets

6. 2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 2.58 3.10 2.82 3.35
SHELL 5.66 3.02 4.56 4.36
BYCO 5.13 0.44 0.11 -8.8
Company Years Trend Reason
PSO 2012-2015 Decrease to lowest point in 2015
GPM decreased due to the fall in oil prices by 46% thus causing
GPM to decline .
Shell 2012-2015
Increase 5.66% in 2015 (twice that of PSO in comparison)
from 4.36% back in 2012
Shell has been able to increase GPM by maintaining its market
share after sudden drop in FY 2014.
Byco 2012-2015
Increasing trend from 2012, which was the lowest point in
the 4 year history
Due to falling oil prices, Byco has been able increase the gross
profit margin as the cost of selling the oil has decreased
significantly.
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
2015 2014 2013 2012
Gross Profit Margin Ratio
PSO SHELL BYCO

7. NET PROFIT MARGIN
INTERPRETATION
Company Years Trend Reason
PSO 2012-2015 NPM reduced in FY 2015 after shown rise in FY 2014. High financing costs caused NPM to be reduced in FY 2015.
Shell
2012-2015 Shell recovered its NPM in FY 2015 after sudden dip
in FY 2014.
Shell reduced its operating expenses and financing cost
causing better NPM in 2015.
Byco
2012-2015 Byco’s performance has increased significantly,
however it was only able to make a prodit in 2015
The falling oil prices have enabled the company to reduce
the losses and gradually improve its profitability
-18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
2015
2014
2013
2012
Net Profit Margin Ratio
BYCO SHELL PSO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 0.76 1.84 0.97 0.88
SHELL 0.49 -0.43 0.43 0.98
BYCO 0.08 -6.42 -3.41 -15.82

8. RETURN ON EQUITY
Company Years Trend Reasons
PSO
2012-2015 ROE decreased in FY 2015. Decreased sales revenue, and underwent inventory losses which
resultantly reduced net income due to 46% decrease in OilPrices
Shell
2012-2015 ROE increased in FY 2015 after poor
performance in FY 2014.
Decrease in oil prices but in 2015 increases as Better utilization of
resources, sales revenue increased
Byco
2012-2015 ROE shows variable trend due to
market conditions and management
decisions
The improving ROE is due to the decrease in the oil prices,
however the increase the ROE can be due to a management
decision to reorganize the capital structure
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
2015 2014 2013 2012
Return on Equity
PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 8.43 27.75 20.29 18.13
SHELL 15.23 -18.10 14.69 -33.72
BYCO 1.39 -117.52 66.23 -270.0

9. RETURN ON CAPITAL EMPLOYED
Company Years Trend Reasons
PSO
2012-2015 ROCE also like ROE and Profit
Margins decreased in FY 2015.
the net revenue of PSO had increased steadily to 200
billion from 2012
Shell
2012-2015 ROCE also like ROE and Profit
Margins increased in FY 2015 after
being declined in FY 2014..
inventory losses in FY 2014 which were recovered in FY
2015.
Byco
2012-2015 The return on capital employed has
improved slight, but lowered again in
2014
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2015 2014 2013 2012
Return on Capital Employed
PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 25.01 50.08 39.79 32.27
SHELL 31.96 7.49 31.78 N-A
Byco -0.46 -15.62 -6.46 -22.64

10. RETURN ON TOTALASSETS
Company Years Trend Reason
PSO
2012-2015 ROA also like ROCE and ROE and Profit Margins
decreased in FY 2015
Assets Utilization was not effective in FY 2015.
Shell
2012-2015 ROA also like ROCE and ROE Margins increased in FY
2015 after being declined in FY 2014.
Shell has been able to manage ROA after showing rising
trend in FY 2015.
Byco
2012-2015 Again the return improved slightly but then touched
a low in 2014
The improvement is due to improving oil prices, however
the fall implies a some kind of mismanagement within.
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
2015 2014 2013 2012
Return on Total Assets
PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 2.03 5.86 4.46 2.61
SHELL 2.40 -2.76 2.61 -4.64
BYCO -0.21 -8.08 -3.37 -6.23

11. LIQUIDITY RATIO
1. Current Ratio
2. Quick Ratio

12. CURRENT RATIO
Company Years Trend Reason
PSO 2012-2015 The current ratio fell and then increased
Initially a decrease in assets led to a decrease in the ratio, then he
fall in oil prices allowed the company to reduce the debt burden
and increase the asset base
Shell
2012-2015 The current ration decreased, increased and
then decreased again.
The company was able to build assets and pay off debtors, but
consequently decided to reduce the asset base
BYCO
2012-2015 The current ratio increase, but then
decreased
The decrease in oil prices allowed the company to build an asset
base, but a subsequent decision led to a increase in the liability
base
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2015 2014 2013 2012
Current Ratio PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 1.10 1.09 1.04 1.74
SHELL 0.83 0.85 0.90 0.88
BYCO 0.51 1.02 0.70 0.39

13. QUICK RATIO
Company Trend Reason
PSO Steady increase
Initially a decrease in assets led to a decrease in the ratio, then he fall in oil prices allowed the company to reduce the
debt burden and increase the asset base
Shell
Increase and then
decrease
The company was able to build assets and pay off debtors, but consequently decided to reduce the asset base
BYCO
Decrease, increase and
then decrease again
The decrease in oil prices allowed the company to build an asset base, but a subsequent decision led to a increase in
the liability base
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
2015 2014 2013 2012
Quick Ratio PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 0.87 0.79 0.55 1.29
SHELL 0.41 0.45 0.36 0.43
BYCO 0.38 0.78 0.50 0.31

14. EFFICIENCY RATIOS
1. Asset Turnover
2. Inventory Turnover Period
3. Account Receivable Period
4. Account Payable Period

15. ASSET TURN OVER
Company Trend Reasons
PSO
Fluctuating. First Decreases due to decrease in sales .In 2015, sales decreases to 21% as compare to 2014.
Shell
Fluctuating. company had used it assets efficiently to generate sales from 2012-2014 then Decrease as decrease in sales up to
15%. In 2015
Byco
Fluctuating The decreasing oil prices allowed the company to increased its return on the assets as the cost of assets was
reduced significantly.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2015 2014 2013 2012
Asset Turnover PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 2.67 3.19 4.6 2.95
SHELL 4.93 6.5 6.14 4.74
BYCO 1.71 1.56 1.51 0.50

16. INVENTORY TURNOVER PERIOD
Company Trend Reasons
PSO Decreases The falling oil prices allowed the company to sell its product relatively quickly
Shell Decreases
The falling oil prices allowed the company to sell its product relatively quickly but due to supply chain issues, the turn
increased temporarily
Byco Decreased
The falling oil prices allowed the company to sell its product relatively quickly, but lack of management planning
resulted in an increase in the turnover period.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2015 2014 2013 2012
Inventory Turnover Period
PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 24 27 36 33
SHELL 26 20 27 31
BYCO 13.19 12.72 11.60 6.58

17. ACCOUNT RECEIVABLE COLLECTION PERIOD
Company Trend Reason
PSO Fluctuating
The longer accounts received is because of the fact that most of PSO’s large customers are public sector entities
which have a very long payback period
Shell
Decreases The relatively quick payback show efficient creditor management, but the increase in 2015 shows a change in the
debtor management policy.
Byco Decreases A steady increase in the debtor payback period hints toward a lack of ability to manage the debtors.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2015 2014 2013 2012
Accounts Receivable Period PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 80 60 34 85
SHELL 20 19 16 21
BYCO 9.68 8.27 5.46 2

18. ACCOUNT PAYABLE PERIOD.
Company Trend Reason
PSO Steady decrease
The fall in the ratio is due to a change in the public policy to reduce the circular debt
associated with the power sector
Shell
Steady increase The increase in days points towards a management strategy to increase the Cash Conversion
Cycle
BYCO
Steady The very short period implies the inability of the management to negotiate better creditor
terms.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2015 2014 2013 2012
Accounts Payable Payment Period PSO SHELL BYCO
2015 2014 2013 2012
PSO 35 41 47 71
SHELL 57 41 40 45
BYCO 3.05 3.83 3.29 0.82

19. FINANCIAL LEVERAGE RATIOS
Debt to Equity Ratio

20. DEBT TO EQUITY RATIO
-4.00%
-2.00%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
2015 2014 2013 2012
Debt to Equity
SHELL PSO BYCO
Company 2015 2014 2013 2012
SHELL 7.78% 2.40% 4.63% 5.50%
PSO 10.11% 6.59% 6.02% 7.40%
BYCO
- 614% -1.77% -3.03% -2.21%

21. INVESTOR RATIOS
Price To Earning Ratio

22. -50
0
50
100
150
200
250
2015 2014 2013 2012
PRICE TO EARNING RATIO
PSO SHELL BYCO