Balatbat, M C A; Lin, C Y and Carmichael, D G (2010) Australian construction growth ratios: Industry and company analyses. International Journal of Construction Management, 10(4), pp. 23-43. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Many investors consider the construction industry risky, with fluctuating rather than stable performance, and greater than average insolvencies. These views may reduce investors' appetite to invest in shares of construction companies. In this light, this paper presents research into and analysis of construction growth, both from an industry and company perspective within Australia. The industry analysis looks at trends in gross value added, profit margin, interest coverage, financial leverage, investment rate, and industry exit and entrance rates. The company analysis looks at annual growth ratios for operating revenue, operating expenses, EBITDA, EBIT, EPS, DPS, total assets, total equity, and net debt, based on construction companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange. The paper's results dispel some common negative views about investment in construction; the paper's analysis shows that investing in construction companies is sound, and just as good as investing in other businesses.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction companies; financial ratios; growth; growth ratios |
| Index terms: | Australia, industry analysis, investor, construction industry, revenue, construction company, profit, insolvency, financial ratio |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, organization, strategic management, liability law, industry analysis, sociology, Geography |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here