Activity ratios measure how efficiently a company performs day-to-day tasks, such us the collection of receivables and management of inventory.
Short-term Activity Ratios (Summary)
Turnover Ratios
Average No. Days
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
The operational activity ratios indicate a general improvement in the efficiency of the cash conversion cycle over the analyzed period, despite a decline in working capital turnover efficiency.
- Inventory and Receivables Management
- Inventory turnover remained relatively stable, ranging between 2.44 and 3.00, with a peak in 2019. This stability is mirrored in the average inventory processing period, which decreased from 150 days in 2016 to 131 days in 2020, suggesting a slight improvement in inventory movement. Receivables management exhibited high consistency; the receivables turnover remained steady between 6.18 and 6.70, and the average collection period fluctuated minimally between 55 and 59 days.
- Payables and Operating Cycle
- Payables turnover showed a significant anomaly in 2019, spiking to 7.22, which corresponded with a sharp decline in the average payables payment period to 51 days. By 2020, these metrics reverted toward historical norms, with the payment period returning to 68 days. The operating cycle, which measures the time from inventory acquisition to cash collection, showed a net reduction from 208 days in 2016 to 186 days in 2020, indicating a more streamlined operational flow.
- Working Capital and Cash Conversion Efficiency
- A downward trend is observed in working capital turnover, which fell from 1.49 in 2016 to 1.00 in 2020, suggesting that the company is generating less revenue per unit of working capital. Conversely, the cash conversion cycle improved over the long term, decreasing from 139 days in 2016 to 118 days in 2020. This indicates that the company has become more efficient at converting its investments in inventory and receivables back into cash.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Inventory Turnover
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Cost of revenue | 1,036) | 1,076) | 1,033) | 926) | 732) | |
| Inventory | 372) | 359) | 386) | 333) | 300) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Inventory turnover1 | 2.78 | 3.00 | 2.68 | 2.78 | 2.44 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Inventory Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Inventory turnover = Cost of revenue ÷ Inventory
= 1,036 ÷ 372 = 2.78
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
Between 2016 and 2020, inventory management efficiency exhibited moderate fluctuations with an overall trend toward higher throughput, peaking in 2019 before returning to previous levels in 2020.
- Cost of Revenue and Inventory Scaling
- The cost of revenue demonstrated consistent growth from 2016 through 2019, rising from US$ 732 million to a peak of US$ 1,076 million. Inventory levels generally trended upward during the first three years, peaking at US$ 386 million in 2018. A contraction in inventory was observed in 2019, followed by a modest increase to US$ 372 million by the end of 2020.
- Inventory Turnover Performance
- The inventory turnover ratio increased from 2.44 in 2016 to 3.00 in 2019, indicating an improved rate of inventory clearance and asset utilization over that period. A temporary decline to 2.68 occurred in 2018, which correlates with the period of highest inventory accumulation relative to the cost of revenue.
- Analysis of Efficiency Peaks and Declines
- Operational efficiency reached its highest point in 2019, where the combination of maximum cost of revenue and reduced inventory levels resulted in a turnover ratio of 3.00. In 2020, this efficiency regressed to 2.78. This decline was driven by a simultaneous decrease in the cost of revenue to US$ 1,036 million and an increase in ending inventory, suggesting a slowdown in the movement of goods relative to the previous year.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Receivables Turnover
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Revenue | 3,239) | 3,543) | 3,333) | 2,752) | 2,398) | |
| Accounts receivable, net | 487) | 573) | 514) | 411) | 381) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Receivables turnover1 | 6.65 | 6.18 | 6.48 | 6.70 | 6.29 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Receivables Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Receivables turnover = Revenue ÷ Accounts receivable, net
= 3,239 ÷ 487 = 6.65
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
An analysis of short-term activity from 2016 to 2020 indicates a high level of stability in credit collection efficiency, despite fluctuations in overall revenue and outstanding receivables. Revenue expanded from 2,398 million USD in 2016 to a peak of 3,543 million USD in 2019, before moderating to 3,239 million USD in 2020.
- Revenue and Receivables Correlation
- Net accounts receivable grew steadily from 381 million USD in 2016 to a peak of 573 million USD in 2019, mirroring the upward trajectory of revenue. A simultaneous contraction in both revenue and net receivables was observed in 2020, with receivables decreasing to 487 million USD.
- Receivables Turnover Performance
- The receivables turnover ratio remained relatively constant throughout the period, fluctuating within a narrow range between 6.18 and 6.70. The highest efficiency was recorded in 2017 at 6.70, while the lowest point occurred in 2019 at 6.18. By 2020, the ratio recovered to 6.65.
- Operational Insights
- The stability of the turnover ratio suggests that the company maintained consistent credit and collection policies as the business scaled. The ability to keep the ratio within a tight range despite a significant increase in revenue between 2016 and 2019 indicates that the collection cycle was managed effectively in proportion to sales growth.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Payables Turnover
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Cost of revenue | 1,036) | 1,076) | 1,033) | 926) | 732) | |
| Accounts payable | 192) | 149) | 184) | 160) | 138) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Payables turnover1 | 5.40 | 7.22 | 5.61 | 5.79 | 5.31 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Payables Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Payables turnover = Cost of revenue ÷ Accounts payable
= 1,036 ÷ 192 = 5.40
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
Between 2016 and 2020, the management of short-term obligations exhibited a period of general stability interrupted by a significant fluctuation in 2019. While the cost of revenue followed a consistent upward trajectory for the majority of the period, accounts payable and the resulting turnover ratio displayed more volatility, reflecting shifts in supplier payment efficiency and working capital management.
- Cost of Revenue Trends
- A steady increase in the cost of revenue is observed from 2016 to 2019, rising from 732 million to 1,076 million. This growth suggests an expansion in operational scale and procurement activity. A slight contraction occurred in 2020, with the value decreasing to 1,036 million.
- Accounts Payable Dynamics
- Accounts payable grew incrementally from 138 million in 2016 to 184 million in 2018. A notable decrease to 149 million occurred in 2019, followed by a sharp increase to a five-year peak of 192 million in 2020. These fluctuations indicate periodic shifts in the timing of payments to vendors or changes in credit terms.
- Payables Turnover Analysis
- The payables turnover ratio remained relatively consistent between 5.31 and 5.79 from 2016 through 2018, suggesting a stable payment cycle. A significant spike to 7.22 was recorded in 2019, indicating a markedly faster turnover of payables, which corresponds with the decrease in accounts payable during that period. By 2020, the ratio reverted to 5.40, returning to levels consistent with the 2016-2018 baseline.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Working Capital Turnover
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | ||||||
| Current assets | 4,483) | 4,451) | 4,490) | 2,980) | 2,318) | |
| Less: Current liabilities | 1,244) | 665) | 1,804) | 746) | 705) | |
| Working capital | 3,239) | 3,786) | 2,686) | 2,234) | 1,613) | |
| Revenue | 3,239) | 3,543) | 3,333) | 2,752) | 2,398) | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Working capital turnover1 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 1.24 | 1.23 | 1.49 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Working Capital Turnover, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Working capital turnover = Revenue ÷ Working capital
= 3,239 ÷ 3,239 = 1.00
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
An analysis of operating activity from 2016 to 2020 reveals a general decline in the efficiency with which working capital was utilized to generate revenue. While both revenue and working capital grew during the first four years of the period, the expansion of working capital occurred at a faster rate than revenue growth, resulting in a diminished turnover ratio.
- Working Capital and Revenue Trends
- Working capital demonstrated a consistent upward trajectory from 2016 to 2019, increasing from 1,613 million US$ to a peak of 3,786 million US$. Revenue followed a similar growth pattern, rising from 2,398 million US$ in 2016 to 3,543 million US$ in 2019. In 2020, both metrics experienced a contraction, with working capital falling to 3,239 million US$ and revenue decreasing to 3,239 million US$.
- Working Capital Turnover Performance
- The working capital turnover ratio declined from 1.49 in 2016 to 0.94 in 2019. This downward trend indicates that the company required progressively more working capital to support its sales volume. The ratio remained relatively stable between 2017 and 2018 at approximately 1.23 to 1.24 before dropping significantly in 2019.
- Efficiency Insights
- The decline of the turnover ratio to below 1.00 in 2019 signifies a period where working capital exceeded annual revenue, suggesting a potential inefficiency in the management of short-term assets and liabilities. The slight recovery to a ratio of 1.00 in 2020 is a direct result of the reduction in working capital aligning exactly with the decline in revenue for that fiscal year.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Inventory Processing Period
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Inventory turnover | 2.78 | 3.00 | 2.68 | 2.78 | 2.44 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period1 | 131 | 122 | 136 | 131 | 150 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Inventory Processing Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Average inventory processing period = 365 ÷ Inventory turnover
= 365 ÷ 2.78 = 131
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The operational efficiency regarding inventory management exhibits a general improvement over the five-year period from 2016 to 2020, characterized by an overall reduction in the time required to process inventory and an increase in turnover frequency.
- Inventory Turnover Trends
- The inventory turnover ratio rose from 2.44 in 2016 to a peak of 3.00 in 2019. While fluctuations occurred, specifically a dip to 2.68 in 2018 and a decrease to 2.78 in 2020, the turnover rate remained consistently higher than the 2016 baseline, indicating a general increase in the velocity of inventory movement.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- A downward trend in the average inventory processing period is observed, starting at 150 days in 2016 and reaching a minimum of 122 days in 2019. This compression of the operational cycle suggests an improvement in the ability to move products through the supply chain. The subsequent increase to 131 days in 2020 aligns with the decrease in turnover, reflecting a return to the efficiency levels recorded in 2017.
The relationship between turnover and the processing period remains inversely proportional throughout the observed timeframe. The most significant gains in efficiency were realized between 2016 and 2019, while the 2020 metrics indicate a stabilization of inventory processing activity.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Receivable Collection Period
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Receivables turnover | 6.65 | 6.18 | 6.48 | 6.70 | 6.29 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average receivable collection period1 | 55 | 59 | 56 | 55 | 58 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Receivable Collection Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Average receivable collection period = 365 ÷ Receivables turnover
= 365 ÷ 6.65 = 55
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of operating activity ratios from 2016 to 2020 reveals a high degree of stability in the management of accounts receivable. The metrics indicate a consistent ability to convert receivables into cash throughout the five-year period, with minimal variance in collection efficiency.
- Receivables Turnover
- The receivables turnover ratio remained within a tight range of 6.18 to 6.70. A peak was observed in 2017 at 6.70, followed by a gradual decline to a period low of 6.18 in 2019, before recovering to 6.65 by the end of 2020. This consistency suggests a stable credit policy and a predictable rate of revenue collection relative to the average receivables balance.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The collection period fluctuated minimally between 55 and 59 days. The shortest collection cycles occurred in 2017 and 2020, both at 55 days, coinciding with the highest turnover ratios. The maximum collection period of 59 days was recorded in 2019. The narrow variance of four days over the five-year span demonstrates a disciplined approach to credit management and a reliable customer payment pattern.
- Operational Correlation
- A clear inverse relationship is maintained between the turnover ratio and the collection period. The data indicates an efficient working capital cycle, as there are no observable signs of deteriorating credit quality or significant delays in payment collection during the period analyzed.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Operating Cycle
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period | 131 | 122 | 136 | 131 | 150 | |
| Average receivable collection period | 55 | 59 | 56 | 55 | 58 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Operating cycle1 | 186 | 181 | 192 | 186 | 208 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Operating Cycle, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Operating cycle = Average inventory processing period + Average receivable collection period
= 131 + 55 = 186
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The overall operating cycle demonstrates a contraction over the analyzed five-year period, indicating an enhanced capacity to convert operational inputs into cash. The most substantial improvement was recorded between 2016 and 2017, with the total cycle length decreasing from 208 days to 186 days.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- Inventory turnover efficiency showed a general improvement, decreasing from a peak of 150 days in 2016 to a low of 122 days in 2019. The period ended at 131 days in 2020, suggesting a slight reversal of the efficiency gains achieved in the previous year.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- Receivables management remained highly consistent, with the collection period fluctuating minimally between 55 and 59 days. This stability indicates a steady and predictable cash inflow from customer payments regardless of other operational shifts.
- Operating Cycle
- The total operating cycle remained closely correlated with inventory processing trends due to the stability of the collection period. The duration fluctuated between a maximum of 208 days in 2016 and a minimum of 181 days in 2019, ending the period at 186 days in 2020.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Average Payables Payment Period
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Payables turnover | 5.40 | 7.22 | 5.61 | 5.79 | 5.31 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | ||||||
| Average payables payment period1 | 68 | 51 | 65 | 63 | 69 | |
| Benchmarks (no. days) | ||||||
| Average Payables Payment Period, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Average payables payment period = 365 ÷ Payables turnover
= 365 ÷ 5.40 = 68
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of short-term operating activity reveals fluctuations in the management of supplier obligations between 2016 and 2020. The relationship between payables turnover and the average payment period demonstrates a consistent inverse correlation, with significant volatility occurring in 2019.
- Payables Turnover
- The turnover ratio exhibited relative stability from 2016 to 2018, fluctuating between 5.31 and 5.79. A sharp increase to 7.22 was observed in 2019, representing the peak efficiency in payables turnover during the analyzed period. This trend reversed in 2020, as the ratio declined to 5.40, returning to levels comparable to the 2016 baseline.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- The timeframe for settling obligations began at 69 days in 2016 and remained moderately stable between 63 and 65 days through 2018. A significant contraction occurred in 2019, with the payment period dropping to 51 days, indicating an acceleration in the settlement of accounts payable. However, by 2020, the period extended back to 68 days, suggesting a return to previous credit utilization patterns and a slower payment cycle compared to the preceding year.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?
Cash Conversion Cycle
| Dec 31, 2020 | Dec 29, 2019 | Dec 30, 2018 | Dec 31, 2017 | Dec 31, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | ||||||
| Average inventory processing period | 131 | 122 | 136 | 131 | 150 | |
| Average receivable collection period | 55 | 59 | 56 | 55 | 58 | |
| Average payables payment period | 68 | 51 | 65 | 63 | 69 | |
| Short-term Activity Ratio | ||||||
| Cash conversion cycle1 | 118 | 130 | 127 | 123 | 139 | |
| Benchmarks | ||||||
| Cash Conversion Cycle, Competitors2 | ||||||
| AbbVie Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Amgen Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Danaher Corp. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Eli Lilly & Co. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Gilead Sciences Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Johnson & Johnson | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Merck & Co. Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Pfizer Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. | — | — | — | — | — | |
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-29), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-30), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).
1 2020 Calculation
Cash conversion cycle = Average inventory processing period + Average receivable collection period – Average payables payment period
= 131 + 55 – 68 = 118
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
Analysis of operational efficiency reveals a general contraction of the cash conversion cycle, which decreased from 139 days in 2016 to 118 days in 2020. This reduction indicates an enhanced ability to manage working capital and accelerate the recovery of cash expenditures over the observed period.
- Average Inventory Processing Period
- Inventory management exhibits a volatile but generally downward trend. From a peak of 150 days in 2016, the period decreased to a low of 122 days in 2019 before settling at 131 days in 2020. The reduction relative to the 2016 baseline suggests an improvement in inventory turnover efficiency.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The receivable collection period remained remarkably stable, fluctuating within a narrow range of 55 to 59 days. This consistency indicates a disciplined credit policy and a predictable cash inflow stream from customers throughout the five-year duration.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- Payment cycles to suppliers showed significant variability, specifically a sharp decline to 51 days in 2019. However, a recovery to 68 days by 2020 indicates a return to longer payment terms, which allows for better retention of cash within the business.
- Cash Conversion Cycle Integration
- The overall cycle is predominantly influenced by inventory processing times. In 2019, the gains made in inventory efficiency were offset by the contraction of the payables payment period, resulting in a cycle of 130 days. The optimal cycle of 118 days recorded in 2020 was achieved through the alignment of efficient inventory management and the extension of supplier payment terms.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
How can I help you?