Hello...I have a paper to write on Hasbro and have to analyze it's liquidity, debt coverage and sustainable growth for the last 10 years and compare to it's competitors, Pacifica and Mattel. Already did Pacifica, just need Mattel's info to be added to the attachment. Please help. References to be in APA format.

Financial Analysis Introduction Hasbro Inc. is currently the second largest toy making company in the United States. The company manufactures and designs various lines of toy products and associated items throughout the world, including electronic, traditional board games and interactive puzzles, CD_ROM games, infant products and plush products. Hasbro also licenses a number of property rights, trade names for the use in connection for the sale to customers for noncompeting toys and nontoy products. Pacifica, Inc. is a holding company. The Company invests in building and operating government infrastructure and information technology project. The Company is also engaged in gas oil and power-related activities as its secondary purpose Hasbro has a very nice balance sheet with total debt ratio of only 1.01 whereas Pacifica has a stable debt ratio of 1.52 as well. The ratio of Hasbro and Pacifica price-to-earnings ratio in multiple to its five-year growth rate is slightly above the average of all stocks. The companies' relatively high gross and pre-tax margins suggest a differentiated product portfolio and tight control on operating costs relative to peers. Furthermore, Hasbro, Inc. currently trades at a higher Price/Book ratio of 5.93 than its peer Pacifica Inc. with a Prince/Book ratio of 4.27. Both Pacifica and Hasbro have a long-standing loyalty in conducting business in a mood which abides by highest ethical and legal standards. Liquidity Ratios (10 years comparison) Current Ratio Current 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 2.53 1.82 2.61 2.39 2.01 2.00 1.97 1.99 1.76 1.84 Pacifica 7.43 6.85 4.81 6.25 6.34 5.88 5.12 4.32 4.11 4.21 Ratio Hasbro vs. Pacifica Current Ratio 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2007 Quick Ratio Quick Ratio 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 2.21 1.56 2.28 2.04 2.01 1.96 1.88 2.02 1.71 1.56 Pacifica 5.42 5.37 4.81 5.33 4.98 4.28 4.01 3.78 3.66 3.71 6 5 4 Hasbro Pacifica 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2007 Cash Ratio Cash Ratio 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 0.83 0.50 0.88 0.68 0.73 0.50 0.48 0.49 0.43 0.30 Pacifica 0.57 0.38 0.2 0.06 0.14 0.32 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.05 Hasbro vs. Pacifica Cash Ratio 1 0.9 0.88 0.8 0.83 0.7 0.68 0.6 0.57 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.73 0.38 0.5 0.2 0.1 0 2015 0.14 0.43 2013 2012 2011 0.3 0.11 0.06 2014 0.49 0.32 0.3 0.2 0.48 Hasbro Pacifica 2010 2009 0.09 2008 0.08 2007 0.05 2007 The current ratio of Hasbro Inc. of 2.53 indicates that the firm's has the ability to meet its liabilities or the claims. Pacifica has a lower cash ratio compared to Hasbro. This means that Hasbro Inc. is in a better position to meet its short term liabilities compared to Pacifica Inc. The statistics indicates that both companies' short-term assets (cash, cash equivalents, marketable securities, receivables and inventory) are readily available to pay off its short-term liabilities (notes payable, current portion of term debt, payables, accrued expenses and taxes) . The liquidity ratios of both companies including the current ratio, quick ratio and the cash ratio of Hasbro and Pacifica are in a better position to meet the current claims. However, Hasbro recorded a higher cash ratio compared to Pacifica Inc. which means that Hasbro is in a better position to meet its short-term liabilities compared to Pacifica Inc. Since both companies have shown a current ratio of more than one in the past several years, it indicates that the companies have more current assets than current liabilities. Hasbro has a very nice balance sheet with total debt ratio of only 1.02 whereas Pacifica has a total debt ratio of 1.04. The ratio of Hasbro's price-to-earnings ratio as well as that of Pacifica are multiple to their ten-year growth rate is slightly above the average of all stocks. The increasing trend for both Hasbro and Pacifica over the 10 years in their liquidity ratios (current ratio, quick ratio and cash ratio) indicates that the companies are doing better year after year and the progress is significantly trending upwards even though Hasbro is in a better position in terms of Liquidity in comparison to Pacifica. Debt and Coverage Hasbro Inc.: Calculating average total liabilities for the year 2015: $4,818,008,000 (total liabilities start of 2015) + $4,713,259,000 (total liabilities end of 2014) 2 = $4,765,634,000 (Average total liabilities) Calculating the cash debt coverage ratio for the current reporting year 2015: $734,796,000 (2015 cash provided by operating activities) $4,765,634,000 (Average total liabilities) = 0.178 (Cash debt coverage ratio) Debt Ratio 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 0.178 Hasbro 2015 0.171 0.154 0.168 0.173 0.15 0.148 0.14 0.14 0.13 9 3 0 0.20 0.20 0.20 9 3 1 0 Pacifica 0.257 0.238 0.210 0.206 0.214 0.23 0.215 9 Hasbro vs. Pacifica Debt Ratio 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2007 In 2014 the cash debt coverage ratio for Hasbro Inc. was 0.171; in 2013 the ratio was 0.154 whereas the cash debt coverage ratio for the year 2012 was 0.168. The debt ratio for Pacifica in 2014 was 0.238 and in 2015 it was 0.257. This indicates that Pacifica ended 2015 in a stronger cash position compared to Hasbro Inc. than in the previous years. This means that Pacifica Inc. Company is in a better financial position to pay its long-term debt obligations compared to Hasbro Inc. Hasbro Inc.'s Operating Income for the year 2015 was $403,000,000 whereas the operating income for Pacifica in 2015 was $986,000,000 and their interest expenses was $24,000,000 and $46,000,000 respectively. Hasbro Inc.'s interest coverage for the year 2015 was 6.82 whereas that of Pacifica was 7.94. This higher ratio compared to the previous years for both companies indicates that the companies' financial strength are growing stronger year in year out. Interest 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 6.87 4.42 6.05 6.67 6.17 5.42 5.05 5.17 4.87 4.42 Pacifica 6.53 5.38 5.21 5.16 4.14 5.32 4.11 3.09 3.08 2.45 Coverage Interest Coverage 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 Pacifica 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Hasbro 2007 The above charts indicate that Hasbro Inc. Company is in a better financial position to easily pay interest expenses on outstanding debt as opposed to their competitors Pacifica Inc. This Interest Coverage is a very vital factor when ranking a company's overage financial strength, which led to Hasbro Inc. to be ranked overall second in performance and Pacifica third on the line. Hasbro Inc. Sustainable Growth Year Dividend Yield 2015 $0.98 3.30% 2014 $0.84 3.00% 2013 $0.72 2.50% 2012 $0.66 2.10% Sustainable Growth in Dividends $3.50 3.3 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.98 $0.50 $0.00 2015 3 2.5 $0.84 2014 2.1 $0.72 2013 Dividend Yield $0.66 2012 Pacifica Inc. Sustainable Growth Hasbro Inc. indicated $117,000,000 in Revenue decline in 2012 but an increase of $48,000 in 2015 whereas Pacifica Inc. recorded a progressive increase from the year 2012 to the current $347,000,000 in 2015S. Hasbro Inc. further indicated $23,000,000 increase in International, 18% Growth in Electronics/Licensing Games, a 5% growth in classic games as well as a 53% increase in other games. However, the company has indicated a slight decline of 3% in puzzles in 2015. Both Hasbro and Pacifica have however showed a progressive increase in dividends over the recent years with 2015 recording the highest dividend per share of $0.98 for Hasbro Inc. and 1.48 for Pacifica. This indicates that Hasbro Inc. dividend per share has strengthened in the year 2015 in comparison to the other years whereas that of Pacifica has remained steadily increasing. I would therefore advice an investor to invest at Pacifica Inc. since their dividend per share is higher. Conclusion Both Hasbro Inc. and Pacifica companies appear to be well advancing in their financial status; for instance, Hasbro Inc. has already pre-announced a good target for the first quarter outcome for of the year 2016. This shows that the company is performing well in the stock markets. Moreover, both companies have a healthy and safe operating environments with superior facilities and services. However, Hasbro Inc is too dependent on movies and entertainment categories only whereas Pacifica is evenly diverse in its operations. Hasbro's movie-related models add jeopardy to the portfolio and did not appear to present the outsized rewards they utilized to present. Therefore, Hasbro Inc ought to innovate and produce other distinct brands that are appropriate for ultimate licensing situations Content Production novelty and create new brands to the market. For this reason, Pacifica Inc appears to hold a higher dividend per share compared to their counterpart Hasbro Inc. As a result of the financial analysis of liquidity, debt and coverage as well as sustainable growth of both companies, an investor should therefore consider investing at Pacifica Inc as opposed to Hasbro Inc due to the higher dividend per share of Pacifica. References Brigham, Eugene, and Joel Houston. 2010. Fundamentals of Financial Management, 12th Edition. Florence, Kentucky: Cengage Learning. HAS 2015 10-K "Selected Financial Data" pg. 22 PACIFICA 2015 10-K "Results of Operations" pg. 25- 28 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 1 Financial Analysis Student`s Name Institution Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 2 Introduction Hasbro Inc. is currently the second toy manufacturing company in the United States. The company manufactures and designs various lines of toy products and outputs and other associated items throughout the world such as electronics, traditional board games and interactive puzzles, CD_ROM games, infant products and plush products. Hasbro also licenses some property rights, trade names for the use in connection with the sale to customers of noncompeting toys and non-toy products. Pacifica, Inc. is a holding company. The Company invests in building and operating government infrastructure and information technology project. The firm also deals with gas oil and power-related activities as its secondary purpose. Mattel is the leading toy maker in the world. Its domain products are Barbie and Polly Pocket dolls. It also deals with fisher - price toys, hot wheels and matchbox cars, American Girl doll and books, Barney, Ferrari and other licensed items; it also has an excellent balance sheet predicting good performance. Hasbro has a good balance sheet with a total debt ratio of only 1.01 whereas Pacifica has a stable debt ratio of 1.52 as well. The ratio of Hasbro and Pacifica price-to-earnings ratio in multiple to its five-year growth rate is slightly above the average of all stocks. The companies' relatively high gross and pre-tax margins Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 3 suggest a differentiated product portfolio and tight control on operating costs relative to peers. Furthermore, Hasbro, Inc. currently trades at a higher Price/Book ratio of 5.93 than its peer Pacifica Inc. with a Prince/Book ratio of 4.27. Both Pacifica and Hasbro have a long-standing loyalty in conducting business in a mood which abides by highest ethical and legal standards. Liquidity Ratios (10 years comparison) Current Ratio Current Ratio 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 2.53 1.82 2.61 2.39 2.01 2.00 1.97 1.99 1.76 1.84 Pacifica 7.43 6.85 4.81 6.25 6.34 5.88 5.12 4.32 4.11 4.21 1.94 2.93 3.22 2.07 3.31 2.3 2.41 1.9 1.6 1.8 0 5 0 Mattel Inc. 9 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 4 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 3.5 3 2.5 2 current ratio 1.5 1 0.5 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2007 2007 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 5 Quick Ratio Quick Ratio 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 2.21 1.56 2.28 2.04 2.01 1.96 1.88 2.02 1.71 1.56 Pacifica 5.42 5.37 4.81 5.33 4.98 4.28 4.01 3.78 3.66 3.71 Mattel Inc. 1.58 2.41 2.68 1.80 2.84 2.05 2.07 1.51 1.38 1.56 6 5 4 Hasbro Pacifica 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2007 Cash Ratio Cash Ratio 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 0.83 0.50 0.88 0.68 0.73 0.50 0.48 0.49 0.43 0.30 Pacifica 0.57 0.38 0.2 0.06 0.14 0.32 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.05 Mattel 0.54 0.89 0.99 0.78 1.32 0.95 1.06 0.49 0.57 0.77 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 6 3 2.5 2 1.5 Quick ratio 1 0.5 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 1 0.9 0.8 0.88 0.83 0.7 0.6 0.68 0.73 0.57 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.38 0.2 0.1 0 2015 0.14 2013 2012 2011 2010 Hasbro Pacifica 0.43 0.3 0.11 0.06 2014 0.49 0.32 0.3 0.2 0.48 2009 0.09 2008 0.08 2007 0.05 2007 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 7 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 cash ratio 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 The current ratio of Hasbro Inc. of 2.53indicates that the firm's has the ability to meet its liabilities or the claims. Pacifica has a lower cash ratio compared to Hasbro. This means that Hasbro Inc. is in a better position to meet its short term liabilities compared to Pacifica Inc. The statistics indicates that both companies' short-term assets (cash, cash equivalents, marketable securities, receivables and inventory) are readily available to pay off its short-term liabilities (notes payable, current portion of term debt, payables, accrued expenses and taxes) . The liquidity ratios of both companies including the current ratio, quick ratio and the cash ratio of Hasbro and Pacifica are in a better position to meet the current claims. However, Hasbro recorded a higher cash ratio compared to Pacifica Inc. which means that Hasbro is in a better position to meet its short-term liabilities compared to Pacifica Inc. Since both companies have shown a current ratio of more than one in the past several years, it indicates that the companies have more current assets than current liabilities. Hasbro has a very nice balance sheet with total debt ratio of only 1.02 whereas Pacifica has a total debt ratio Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 8 of 1.04. The ratio of Hasbro's price-to-earnings ratio as well as that of Pacifica are multiple to theirten-year growth rate is slightly above the average of all stocks. The increasing trend for both Hasbro and Pacifica over the 10 years in their liquidity ratios (current ratio, quick ratio and cash ratio) indicates that the companies are doing better year after year and the progress is significantly trending upwards even though Hasbro is in a better position in terms of Liquidity in comparison to Pacifica. The current ratio for Mattel Inc is 1.94, cash ratio is quick ratio is 1.58 and cash ratio is 0.54. the ratios compared to the other two firms shows that Mattel has poor performance compared to the other Hasbro and Pacifica. It is lowest among the three although an increase in trends of the above ratios shows the firm is improving in performance. Debt and Coverage Hasbro Inc.: Calculating average total liabilities for the year 2015: $4,818,008,000 (total liabilities start of 2015) + $4,713,259,000 (total liabilities end of 2014) 2 = $4,765,634,000 (Average total liabilities) Calculating the cash debt coverage ratio for the current reporting year 2015: $734,796,000 (2015 cash provided by operating activities) $4,765,634,000 (Average total liabilities) = 0.178 (Cash debt coverage ratio) Debt Ratio Hasbro 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 0.178 0.171 0.154 0.168 0.173 0.15 0.148 0.14 0.14 0.13 9 3 0 0 Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Pacifica 0.257 0.238 0.210 9 0.206 0.214 0.23 0.215 Mattel 0.60 0.56 0.50 0.53 0.54 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 0.51 0.47 0.20 0.20 9 9 0.20 3 1 0.55 0.52 0.51 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 2015 2009 2008 2007 2007 In 2014 the cash debt coverage ratio for Hasbro Inc. was 0.171; in 2013 the ratio was 0.154 whereas the cash debt coverage ratio for the year 2012 was 0.168. The debt ratio for Pacifica in 2014 was 0.238 and in 2015 it was 0.257.This indicates that Pacifica ended 2015 in a stronger cash position compared to Hasbro Inc. than in the previous years. This means that Pacifica Inc. Company is in a better financial position to pay its long-term debt obligations compared to Hasbro Inc. Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 10 In 2015, the cash debt ratio for Mattel Inc. Was 0.60. It implies the company ended with a very strong cash position as compared to Hasbro Inc. and Pacifica Inc. the company therefore has a strong financial position. Hasbro Inc.'s Operating Income for the year 2015 was $403,000,000 whereas the operating income for Pacifica in 2015 was $986,000,000 and their interest expenses was $24,000,000 and $46,000,000 respectively. Hasbro Inc.'s interest coverage for the year 2015 was 6.82 whereas that of Pacifica was 7.94. This higher ratio compared to the previous years for both companies indicates that the companies' financial strength are growing stronger year in year out. Mattel has a net operating income of $.369.4 Million in 2015 and its interest expense is $. 85.3 Million. The interest coverage of the company in 2015 6.34. The trend shows an increasing financial strength for the firm yearly. Interest 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Hasbro 6.87 4.42 6.05 6.67 6.17 5.42 5.05 5.17 4.87 4.42 Pacifica 6.53 5.38 5.21 5.16 4.14 5.32 4.11 3.09 3.08 2.45 Coverage Mattel Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 11 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2015 2014 2013 2012 Pacifica 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Hasbro 2007 The above charts indicate that Hasbro Inc. Company is in a better financial position to easily pay interest expenses on outstanding debt as opposed to their competitors Pacifica Inc. This Interest Coverage is a very vital factor when ranking a company's overage financial strength, which led to Hasbro Inc. to be ranked overall second in performance and Pacifica third Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 12 on the line. 16 14 12 10 8 coverage ratio 6 4 2 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Hasbro Inc. Sustainable Growth Year Dividend Yield 2015 $0.98 3.30% Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 13 2014 $0.84 3.00% 2013 $0.72 2.50% 2012 $0.66 2.10% $3.50 $3.00 3.3 3 $2.50 2.5 2.1 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.98 $0.84 $0.50 $0.00 2015 2014 $0.72 2013 Pacifica Inc.Sustainable Growth $0.66 2012 Dividend Yield Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 14 Hasbro Inc. indicated $117,000,000 in Revenue decline in 2012, but an increase of $48,000 in 2015 whereas Pacifica Inc. recorded a progressive increase from the year 2012 to the current $347,000,000 in 2015S. Hasbro Inc. further indicated $23,000,000 increase in International, 18% Growth in Electronics/Licensing Games, a 5% growth in classic games as well as a 53% increase in other games. However, the company has indicated a slight decline of 3% in puzzles in 2015. Both Hasbro and Pacifica have however showed a progressive increase in dividends over the recent years with 2015 recording the highest dividend per share of $0.98 for Hasbro Inc. and 1.48 for Pacifica. It indicates that Hasbro Inc.dividend per share has strengthened in the year 2015 in comparison to the other years whereas that of Pacifica has remained steadily increasing. I would like therefore advice an investor to invest at Pacifica Inc. since their dividend per share is higher. Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 15 Conclusion Both Hasbro Inc. and Pacifica companies appear to be well advancing in their financial status; for instance, Hasbro Inc. has already pre-announced a suitable target for the first quarter outcome for of the year 2016. It shows that the company is performing well in the stock markets. Moreover, both companies have a healthy and safe operating environments with superior facilities and services. However, Hasbro Inc is too dependent on movies and entertainment categories only whereas Pacifica is evenly diverse in its operations. Hasbro's movie-related models added jeopardy to the portfolio and did not appear to present the outsized rewards they utilized to show. Therefore, Hasbro Inc ought to innovate and produce other distinct brands that are appropriate for extreme licensing situations Content Production novelty and create new brands to the market. For this reason, Pacifica Inc appears to hold a higher dividend per share compared to their counterpart Hasbro Inc. on the other hand. Mattel also shows an increase DPS performance. It value as at 2014 was 1.52 which has been increasing as from 2006 in the data provided in the attached excel sheet. Investors can also buy shares and invest in Mattel Inc. Company. As a result of the financial analysis of liquidity, debt and coverage as well as the sustainable growth of both companies, an investor should, therefore, consider investing at Pacifica Inc as opposed to Hasbro Inc due to the higher dividend per share of Pacifica. Running head: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 16 References Amerman, J. W., & Newcomen Society of the United States. (1995). The story of Mattel, Inc: Fifty years of innovation. New York: Newcomen Society of the United States. Brigham, Eugene, and Joel Houston. 2010. Fundamentals of Financial Management, 12th Edition. Florence, Kentucky: Cengage Learning. HAS 2015 10-K "Selected Financial Data" pg. 22 Lee, H. L., & Lee, C.-Y. (2007). Building supply chain excellence in emerging economies. New York: Springer. Oppenheimer, J. (2013). Toy monster: The big, bad world of Mattel. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. PACIFICA 2015 10-K "Results of Operations" pg. 25- 28