Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Going Concern: En analys av indikatorer till företags fortlevnadsbedömning
University West, Department of Economics and IT, Division of Business Administration.
University West, Department of Economics and IT, Division of Business Administration.
2017 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
Going Concern : An analysis of indicators related to firms going concern assessment (English)
Abstract [sv]

Fortlevnadsprincipen är ett centralt antagande för användare av årsredovisningar. Antagandet om fortlevnadsprincipen ingår i revisorernas granskning av företagens årsredovisningar. I revisionsberättelsen kan revisorn ge företaget en going concern varning (GCvarning) om det finns betydande tvivel angående företags fortlevnadsförmåga. Standarden ISA 570 fungerar som en guide för revisorer om hur fortlevnadsförmågan skall bedömas men det är i slutändan upp till revisorns subjektiva bedömning. Vid fortlevnadsbedömningen kan två typer av fel ske. Typ-I fel innebär att företaget tilldelas en GCvarning utan att företaget upplöses under kommande verksamhetsår. Typ-II fel uppstår när ett företag upphör existera utan att revisorn har tilldelat företaget en GC-varning. TypII felen uppstår vid cirka 80 procent av alla konkurser och revisorsprofessionen har på grund av detta ifrågasatts. Studien genomfördes med syftet att få kunskap om företag som gått i konkurs men inte blivit tilldelade GC-varning och närmare undersöka vilka faktorer i årsredovisningarna som skulle kunna indikera att problem fanns. Olika studier menar att de traditionella nyckeltalen inte räcker för en korrekt fortlevnadsbedömning. Andra studier menar att alternativa nyckeltal som likviditetskvot, soliditetskvot, nettokassaflöde, kapitaltillskott och kassaflödesmönster är bättre indikatorer. Empirin bestod av 86 årsredovisningar från svenska bolag inom byggbranschen som har gått i konkurs. Av årsredovisningarna beräknades de fem indikatorerna och sammanställdes kvantitativt. Resultatet av de sammanställda indikatorerna analyserades kvalitativt för att bedöma deras individuella konkursindikativa förmåga. Varken likviditetskoten, solididitetskvoten, nettokassaflöde kapitaltillskott eller kassaflödesmönster kunde felfritt indikera konkurs för de 86 bolagen. Studien fann att likviditetskvoten var den konkursindikator som var mest lämpad vilken med kompletteringar eventuellt skulle kunna indikera felfritt.

Abstract [en]

The going-concern principle is a key assumption for users of the annual reports. The going concern assumption is a specific part of the auditors' review of the annual reports. In the audit report, the auditor can issue the company a going concern warning (GC warning) if there are significant doubts regarding the company's ability to persist during the next fiscal year. The standard ISA 570 works as a guide for the auditors going concern assessment but ultimately it's the auditors' subjective assessment that determines whether a GC warning is issued or not. During the going concern assessment two different types of errors might occur. Type-I error occurs when a company is issued a GC warning without the company dissolving the forthcoming fiscal year. Type-II errors occurs when a company dissolves without having been issued a GC warning and type-II errors occur at approximately 80 percent of all bankruptcies. Due to a high rate of type-II errors the auditor profession has been called into question. Hence the purpose of this thesis is to acquire knowledge about companies which have gone bankrupt without receiving a GC warning and examine possible indicators of bankruptcy in the annual reports. Different studies have found that traditional key performance indicators (KPI) isn't sufficient enough to be used during a going concern assessment. Other studies have found that liquidity ratio, equity ratio, net cash flow, capital injection and cash flow patterns (CFP) is a better indicator of going concern. The empirical material consisted of 86 annual reports from/of bankrupt Swedish companies from/of the construction industry. The 86 annual reports were used to calculate the five indicators and compiled quantitatively. The compiled result of the indicators were individually analysed qualitatively to assess their ability to predict bankruptcies. Neither liquidity ratio, equity ratio, net cash flow, capital injection nor cash flow patterns worked as a flawless bankruptcy indicator for the 86 studied companies. Of the five indicators the liquidity ratio was found to be the best indicator and with additional complements might work flawlessly.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. , 34 p.
Keyword [en]
GC-warning, Going concern warning, Bankruptcy indicators, Type-II errors
Keyword [sv]
GC-varning, fortlevnadsvarning, konkursindikatorer, typ-II fel
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-11211Local ID: EXC504OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hv-11211DiVA: diva2:1121627
Subject / course
Business administration
Educational program
Ekonomprogrammet
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2017-07-12 Created: 2017-07-12 Last updated: 2017-07-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

By organisation
Division of Business Administration
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 11 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf