An investor should caution that ratio analysis has its own limitations. Ratios should be used with extreme care and judgment as they suffer from certain serious drawbacks. Some of them are listed below:
Rations can sometimes be misleading if an analyst does not know the reliability and soundness of the figures from which they are computed and the financial position of the business at other times of the year. A business enterprise for example may have an acceptable current ratio of 3:1 but a larger part of accounts receivables comprising a great portion of the current assets may be uncollectible and of no value. When these are deducted the ratio might be 2:1
It is difficult to decide on the proper basis for comparison. Ratios of companies have meaning only when they are compared with some standards. Normally, it is suggested that ratios should be compared with industry averages. In India, for example, no systematic and comprehensive industry ratios are complied.
The comparison is rendered difficult because of differences in situations of 2 companies are never the same. Similarly the factors influencing the performance of a company in one year may change in another year. Thus, the comparison of the ratios of two companies becomes difficult and meaningless when they are operation in different situations.
Changes in the price level make the interpretations of the ratios Invalid. The interpretation and comparison of ratios are also rendered invalid by the changing value of money. The accounting figures presented in the financial statements are expressed in monetary unit which is assumed to remain constant. In fact, prices change over years and as a result. Assets acquired at different dates will be expressed at different values in the balance sheet. This makes comparison meaningless.
For e.g. two firms may be similar in every respect except the age of the plant and machinery. If one firm purchased its plant and machinery at a time when prices were very low and the other purchased when prices were high, the equal rates of return on investment of the two firms cannot be interpreted to mean that the firms are equally profitable. The return of the first firm is overstated because its plant and machinery have a low book value.
The differences in the definitions of items, accounting, policies in the balance sheet and the income statement make the interpretation of ratios difficult. In practice difference exists as to the meanings and accounting policies with reference to stock valuation, depreciation, operation profit, current assets etc. Should intangible assets be excluded to calculate the rate of return on investment? If intangible assets have to be included, how will they be valued? Similarly, profit means different things to different people.
Ratios are not reliable in some cases as they many be influenced by window / dressing in the balance sheet.
The ratios calculated at a point of time are less informative and defective as they suffer from short-term changes. The trend analysis is static to an extent. The balance sheet prepared at different points of time is static in nature. They do not reveal the changes which have taken place between dates of two balance sheets. The statements of changes in financial position reveal this information, bur these statements are not available to outside analysts.
The ratios are generally calculated from past financial statements and thus are no indicator of future. The basis to calculate ratios are historical financial statements. The financial analyst is more interested in what happens in future.
While the ratios indicate what happened in the past Art outside analyst has to rely on the past ratios which may not necessarily reflect the firm’s financial position and performance in future.
