Analysis of Short-term (Operating) Activity Ratios
Quarterly Data
Activity ratios measure how efficiently a company performs day-to-day tasks, such us the collection of receivables and management of inventory.
Paying user area
Try for free
Time Warner Cable Inc. pages available for free this week:
- Statement of Comprehensive Income
- Common-Size Balance Sheet: Assets
- DuPont Analysis: Disaggregation of ROE, ROA, and Net Profit Margin
- Enterprise Value to FCFF (EV/FCFF)
- Dividend Discount Model (DDM)
- Net Profit Margin since 2006
- Return on Equity (ROE) since 2006
- Return on Assets (ROA) since 2006
- Price to Sales (P/S) since 2006
- Analysis of Revenues
The data is hidden behind: . Unhide it.
Get full access to the entire website from $10.42/mo, or
get 1-month access to Time Warner Cable Inc. for $22.49.
This is a one-time payment. There is no automatic renewal.
We accept:
Short-term Activity Ratios (Summary)
Time Warner Cable Inc., short-term (operating) activity ratios (quarterly data)
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
- Receivables Turnover
- The receivables turnover ratio exhibited some fluctuations over the analyzed period. Initially, it declined from 30.88 at the end of the first quarter of 2012 to a low of 23.19 by the end of 2013. Following this dip, a partial recovery is noted with values oscillating between 22.55 and 28.5 from 2014 through the first quarter of 2016, reaching 28.5 in the latest quarter. This suggests intermittent variations in how efficiently the company collected its receivables, with a generally modest improvement towards the end of the period.
- Payables Turnover
- The payables turnover ratio showed a notable downward trend. From an initial high of 26.34 in the first quarter of 2012, the ratio steadily decreased, bottoming out at 8.76 in the fourth quarter of 2013. Subsequent quarters showed slight variation but remained generally low, ranging mostly between 8.86 and 12.12. This denotes a growing length of time the company took to settle its payables, potentially indicating changes in payment policies or cash flow management.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The average receivable collection period ranged from 12 to 16 days over the reported timeframe. The period tended to increase slightly during 2012, reaching up to 16 days in some quarters, before stabilizing mostly between 13 and 16 days thereafter. The most recent data points show a slightly reduced period of around 13 days, which may reflect improved collection efficiency or tighter credit terms.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- The average payables payment period displayed a rising trend. Starting at 14 days in the first quarter of 2012, the period lengthened considerably, peaking at 42 days by the end of 2013. This elongation persisted, with fluctuations generally between 30 and 41 days through to early 2016. Such an increase suggests the company extended its payment terms or delayed payments, possibly as a strategic liquidity measure or due to operational factors.
- Working Capital Turnover
- No data was available to analyze working capital turnover for the period.
Turnover Ratios
Average No. Days
Receivables Turnover
Time Warner Cable Inc., receivables turnover calculation (quarterly data)
| Mar 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | Sep 30, 2015 | Jun 30, 2015 | Mar 31, 2015 | Dec 31, 2014 | Sep 30, 2014 | Jun 30, 2014 | Mar 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Sep 30, 2013 | Jun 30, 2013 | Mar 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Sep 30, 2012 | Jun 30, 2012 | Mar 31, 2012 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Receivables, less allowances | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term Activity Ratio | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Receivables turnover1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benchmarks | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Receivables Turnover, Competitors2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Alphabet Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comcast Corp. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meta Platforms Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade Desk Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Walt Disney Co. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
1 Q1 2016 Calculation
Receivables turnover
= (RevenueQ1 2016
+ RevenueQ4 2015
+ RevenueQ3 2015
+ RevenueQ2 2015)
÷ Receivables, less allowances
= ( + + + )
÷ =
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The quarterly financial data presents an overview of revenue, receivables, and receivables turnover over the period from March 31, 2012, to March 31, 2016. Several clear trends and patterns emerge upon analysis.
- Revenue Trends
- Revenue demonstrated a generally upward trajectory throughout the analyzed period. Starting at 5,134 million US dollars in the first quarter of 2012, revenue increased with some fluctuations to reach 6,191 million US dollars by the first quarter of 2016. The growth was relatively steady, with the occasional quarter showing slight declines or plateaus. Notably, from 2014 onward, the revenue remained consistently above 5,700 million, indicating a solid revenue base and growth stability.
- Receivables, Less Allowances
- The balance of receivables, net of allowances, showed significant variability, reflecting changes in the company's credit management and possibly the timing of collections. Starting at 647 million US dollars in March 2012, the receivables rose to a high of 1,029 million by June 2015 before declining again to 846 million by March 2016. This variability suggests fluctuations in the company's outstanding customer payments or adjustments in credit terms or provisions over time. The peaks and troughs in receivables do not entirely parallel the steady revenue growth, implying that the management of collections had differing effectiveness across quarters.
- Receivables Turnover Ratio
- The receivables turnover ratio, which indicates how effectively receivables are being collected, showed noticeable oscillations. Starting at 30.88 times in March 2012, the ratio generally trended downward until it dipped to a low of 22.55 in June 2015. This decline suggests that the company was less efficient in converting receivables into cash during some periods, particularly around 2014 and 2015. However, by March 2016, the ratio improved again to 28.5 times, indicating a recovery in collection efficiency. The inverse relationship between the receivables balance and turnover ratio aligns with expectations. When receivables were higher, the turnover ratio tended to be lower, reflecting slower collection.
In summary, the data reveals a company experiencing steady revenue growth over the analyzed time frame, coupled with fluctuating receivables and periods of varying collection efficiency. The fluctuations in receivables and turnover ratio suggest some challenges or changes in managing credit and collections, which improved toward the end of the period. Monitoring these metrics in conjunction will be important for understanding cash flow dynamics and operational effectiveness going forward.
Payables Turnover
Time Warner Cable Inc., payables turnover calculation (quarterly data)
| Mar 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | Sep 30, 2015 | Jun 30, 2015 | Mar 31, 2015 | Dec 31, 2014 | Sep 30, 2014 | Jun 30, 2014 | Mar 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Sep 30, 2013 | Jun 30, 2013 | Mar 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Sep 30, 2012 | Jun 30, 2012 | Mar 31, 2012 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Programming and content | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accounts payable | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term Activity Ratio | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Payables turnover1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benchmarks | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Payables Turnover, Competitors2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Alphabet Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comcast Corp. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meta Platforms Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Netflix Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade Desk Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
1 Q1 2016 Calculation
Payables turnover
= (Programming and contentQ1 2016
+ Programming and contentQ4 2015
+ Programming and contentQ3 2015
+ Programming and contentQ2 2015)
÷ Accounts payable
= ( + + + )
÷ =
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The financial data reveals several noteworthy trends across the observed periods.
- Programming and Content Expenses
- The expenses related to programming and content display a seasonal pattern with fluctuations around the start and end of calendar years. During 2012, these expenses increased steadily from $2.4 billion to approximately $2.6 billion by the end of the year. A significant drop occurs in the first quarter of 2013, with values nearly halving to around $1.3 billion and remaining relatively stable throughout 2013. From 2014 onwards, the expenses trend upward overall, with quarterly figures consistently ranging between $1.3 billion and $1.5 billion, culminating in a peak of $1.55 billion in the first quarter of 2016. This pattern suggests a change in accounting or reporting approach starting in early 2013 or a major restructuring affecting content costs.
- Accounts Payable
- Accounts payable exhibit notable volatility throughout the observed intervals. Initially, the balance rises from $352 million in the first quarter of 2012 to a peak of $653 million by year-end 2012, followed by a decline and intermittent fluctuations around the $400 million to $650 million range in subsequent years. The last quarter of 2015 shows a surge to $656 million, the highest level in the dataset, before marginally decreasing to $624 million in the first quarter of 2016. Such volatility might reflect cycles in purchasing, payment terms adjustments, or operational timing shifts.
- Payables Turnover Ratio
- The payables turnover ratio has steadily declined over the period, indicating a lengthening in the average time taken to pay suppliers. From a high turnover of 26.34 in March 2012, the ratio gradually falls each quarter, reaching a low of approximately 8.76 by the last quarter of 2013. Although some fluctuations occur afterward, values remain substantially below the initial levels, often hovering between 9 and 12 through early 2016. This decline suggests either more extended credit terms from suppliers or a strategic decision to delay payments, impacting the company's working capital management.
Overall, the data highlights a significant shift in expense recognition or cost structure relating to programming and content beginning in early 2013, combined with oscillations in accounts payable levels and a consistent elongation of payables payment cycles. These patterns may collectively indicate evolving operational strategies, potential renegotiations in supplier agreements, or changes in financial policies affecting cash flow and expense timing.
Working Capital Turnover
Time Warner Cable Inc., working capital turnover calculation (quarterly data)
| Mar 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | Sep 30, 2015 | Jun 30, 2015 | Mar 31, 2015 | Dec 31, 2014 | Sep 30, 2014 | Jun 30, 2014 | Mar 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Sep 30, 2013 | Jun 30, 2013 | Mar 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Sep 30, 2012 | Jun 30, 2012 | Mar 31, 2012 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data (US$ in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current assets | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Less: Current liabilities | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Working capital | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term Activity Ratio | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Working capital turnover1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benchmarks | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Working Capital Turnover, Competitors2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Alphabet Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comcast Corp. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meta Platforms Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Netflix Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade Desk Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Walt Disney Co. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
1 Q1 2016 Calculation
Working capital turnover
= (RevenueQ1 2016
+ RevenueQ4 2015
+ RevenueQ3 2015
+ RevenueQ2 2015)
÷ Working capital
= ( + + + )
÷ =
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The quarterly financial data reveals several notable trends in the company's financial position and operational performance over the period analyzed.
- Working Capital
- The working capital consistently remained negative throughout the entire period, indicating that current liabilities exceeded current assets. Although the magnitude of the negative working capital fluctuated, there was an overall trend of improvement starting from the low point observed around December 2013 to March 2016. Initially, the deficit worsened from approximately -1,696 million USD in March 2012 to a peak negative value close to -3,285 million USD by March 2014. Thereafter, the negative working capital progressively decreased in absolute terms, improving to around -1,234 million USD by March 2016. This suggests a gradual strengthening of short-term liquidity or a reduction in short-term obligations relative to current assets during the latter part of the period.
- Revenue
- Revenue demonstrated a generally stable to moderately increasing trend across the observed quarters. Starting at approximately 5,134 million USD in March 2012, revenue experienced fluctuations but tended to increase steadily towards the end of the period. By March 2016, revenue almost reached 6,191 million USD, representing consistent growth over the four-year horizon. This growth pattern indicates sustained demand or expansion in core business activities, reflecting positively on the company’s operational effectiveness in generating sales.
- Working Capital Turnover
- Values for working capital turnover ratio were not provided, so no specific trend or insight can be derived for this metric. The absence of this data limits the ability to analyze the efficiency of working capital utilization relative to sales revenue.
In summary, the data suggests the company managed to improve its liquidity position by reducing its negative working capital after an initial period of deterioration. Meanwhile, steady revenue growth points to successful efforts in maintaining or expanding market presence. The improvement in working capital alongside higher revenue may contribute to better financial stability and operational resilience going forward.
Average Receivable Collection Period
Time Warner Cable Inc., average receivable collection period calculation (quarterly data)
| Mar 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | Sep 30, 2015 | Jun 30, 2015 | Mar 31, 2015 | Dec 31, 2014 | Sep 30, 2014 | Jun 30, 2014 | Mar 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Sep 30, 2013 | Jun 30, 2013 | Mar 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Sep 30, 2012 | Jun 30, 2012 | Mar 31, 2012 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Receivables turnover | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average receivable collection period1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benchmarks (no. days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average Receivable Collection Period, Competitors2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Alphabet Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comcast Corp. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meta Platforms Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade Desk Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Walt Disney Co. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
1 Q1 2016 Calculation
Average receivable collection period = 365 ÷ Receivables turnover
= 365 ÷ =
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
- Receivables Turnover
- The receivables turnover ratio exhibits a fluctuating pattern across the observed periods. Initially, the ratio starts at 30.88, then declines over the next few quarters, reaching a low point near the end of 2012. Throughout 2013 and 2014, the ratio shows moderate volatility with values mainly ranging between 23 and 26. Notably, there is an uptick toward the end of 2014, reaching approximately 28.37, followed by another dip and subsequent recovery in 2015 and early 2016. By the first quarter of 2016, the ratio returns to a level comparable to the initial measurement, around 28.5. This variation suggests intermittent changes in the effectiveness of receivables management or shifts in sales composition over the periods under review.
- Average Receivable Collection Period
- The average collection period in days moves inversely to the receivables turnover ratio, as expected. Starting at 12 days, the period increases to about 16 days toward the end of 2012, indicating a slower collection process during that time. The period fluctuates moderately around 14 to 16 days in 2013 and 2014, reflecting some inconsistency in collection efficiency. From 2015 onward, there is some improvement, with the collection period reducing to approximately 13 to 14 days by early 2016, signaling enhanced receivables turnover and possibly better credit management or customer payment behavior.
- Overall Insights
- The interplay between receivables turnover and average collection period indicates cyclical adjustments in working capital management. Periods of decreased turnover coincide with longer collection intervals, implying potential challenges in timely cash realization from receivables during those quarters. Conversely, shorter collection periods correspond to higher turnovers, suggesting periods of improved liquidity. These metrics together point to a generally stable yet seasonally variable receivables management performance, with some evidence of recent improvements in efficiency as of the first quarter of 2016.
Average Payables Payment Period
Time Warner Cable Inc., average payables payment period calculation (quarterly data)
| Mar 31, 2016 | Dec 31, 2015 | Sep 30, 2015 | Jun 30, 2015 | Mar 31, 2015 | Dec 31, 2014 | Sep 30, 2014 | Jun 30, 2014 | Mar 31, 2014 | Dec 31, 2013 | Sep 30, 2013 | Jun 30, 2013 | Mar 31, 2013 | Dec 31, 2012 | Sep 30, 2012 | Jun 30, 2012 | Mar 31, 2012 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selected Financial Data | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Payables turnover | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short-term Activity Ratio (no. days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average payables payment period1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benchmarks (no. days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average Payables Payment Period, Competitors2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Alphabet Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comcast Corp. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meta Platforms Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Netflix Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade Desk Inc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Based on: 10-Q (reporting date: 2016-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2015-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2014-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2014-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2013-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2013-03-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2012-12-31), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-09-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-06-30), 10-Q (reporting date: 2012-03-31).
1 Q1 2016 Calculation
Average payables payment period = 365 ÷ Payables turnover
= 365 ÷ =
2 Click competitor name to see calculations.
The analysis of the payables turnover ratio and the average payables payment period over the given quarters reveals a clear inverse relationship between the two metrics, which is consistent with their financial definitions.
- Payables Turnover Ratio
- The payables turnover ratio shows a declining trend from the first quarter of 2012 through the first quarter of 2016. Starting at 26.34 in March 2012, the ratio steadily decreases, reaching a low point of 8.76 in December 2013. Following that, it fluctuates somewhat but remains relatively low compared to early 2012 levels, ending at 9.53 in March 2016. This downward trend implies that the company is turning over its payables less frequently, indicating slower payment cycles over time.
- Average Payables Payment Period
- Correspondingly, the average payables payment period increases notably over the same timeframe. This metric starts at 14 days in March 2012 and rises sharply to 42 days by December 2013. Although some fluctuations occur afterward, the payment period remains elevated, ranging mostly between 30 and 41 days, and concluding at 38 days in March 2016. This indicates that the company is taking longer, on average, to settle its payables compared to earlier periods.
- Overall Trends and Implications
- Aligned with the typical inverse relationship, the decline in payables turnover ratio corresponds with the extended duration in the average payables payment period. The pronounced extension in payment duration especially between 2012 and 2014 suggests a strategic adjustment or a change in the company’s cash flow management, possibly reflecting efforts to conserve cash or renegotiate payment terms with suppliers.
- After the steep changes observed up to 2014, both metrics stabilize somewhat yet indicate longer payables periods and lower turnover compared to the initial period. This persistence suggests that the company has adopted a new baseline for supplier payment management, which could impact supplier relationships and working capital efficiency.