survey participants1 results – general4 2008 comparatives – all generals5 generals by size17...

177
Survey Participants 1 Results – General 4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals 5 Generals By Size 17 Under $10 Million Revenue 18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue 30 Over $25 Million Revenue 42 Results – Subs 54 2008 Comparative Subs – All Trades 55 Subs – By Trade 67 Electrical Contractors 68 Steel Fabricators/Erectors 80 Underground Contractors 92 Mechanical and HVAC Contractors 104 Concrete Contractors 116 Subs – By Size 128 Under $2 Million Revenue 129 $2 to $10 Million Revenue 139 $10 to $25 Million Revenue 151 Over $25 Million Revenue 163 Acknowledgements 175 VonLehman & Company Inc. 2008 Annual Survey of Greater Cincinnati Contractors Table of Contents

Upload: benedict-atkins

Post on 20-Jan-2016

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

Survey Participants 1

Results – General 42008 Comparatives – All Generals 5Generals By Size 17 Under $10 Million Revenue 18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue 30 Over $25 Million Revenue 42

Results – Subs 542008 Comparative Subs – All Trades 55Subs – By Trade 67 Electrical Contractors 68 Steel Fabricators/Erectors 80 Underground Contractors 92 Mechanical and HVAC Contractors 104 Concrete Contractors 116Subs – By Size 128 Under $2 Million Revenue 129 $2 to $10 Million Revenue 139 $10 to $25 Million Revenue 151 Over $25 Million Revenue 163

Acknowledgements 175

VonLehman & Company Inc.2008 Annual Survey of

Greater Cincinnati ContractorsTable of Contents

Page 2: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

2

Survey Participants

Page 3: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

3

Type of Contractor

10%8%

3%

9%

6%

36%

28%

Underground

Electrical

Steel Fab./Erectors

Mechanical & HVAC

Concrete

All Other Trades

Generals

33%

67%

UnionNon-Union

Union vs. Non-Union

Page 4: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

4

Union vs. Non-Union

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Union 39

%

Non-Union 61%

Union 47

%

Non-Union 53%

Union 48

%

Non-Union 52%

Union 4

2%

Non-Union 58%

Union 33

%

Non-Union 67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Page 5: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

5

Results - Generals

Page 6: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

6

2008 Comparative – All Generals

Page 7: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

7

0.6%

3.2%3.1%

2.3%

1.7%

2.9%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Net Earnings to RevenueGenerals (by Size)

Page 8: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

8

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Gross ProfitGenerals (by Size)

Page 9: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

9

Operating Expenses to RevenueGenerals (by Size)

19.4%

8.3%

5.7%

11.2%

4.3%

7.5%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 10: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

10

Operating Income to RevenueGenerals (by Size)

4.6%

3.3%

3.1%

3.7%

1.6%

2.8%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of

net sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 11: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

11

Current RatioGenerals (by Size)

1.5

1.4

1.31.4

1.21.3

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 12: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

12

Age of Accounts Receivable in DaysGenerals (by Size)

64.0

58.0

53.0 58

.7

48.0

46.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 13: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

13

Retainage to Total Accounts ReceivableGenerals (by Size)

13.3%

19.1%

15.2% 16

.3%

14.3%

9.6%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 14: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

14

Cash as a % of Total AssetsGenerals (by Size)

18.8%

24.1%

20.0% 21

.4% 21.6%

24.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 15: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

15

Cost in Excess/Billings in ExcessGenerals (by Size)

99.1%

30.0%

22.2%

50.3%

19.7%

39.7%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Under $10M

$10-$25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 16: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

16

Debt to EquityGenerals (by Size)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 17: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

17

Average Months in BacklogGenerals (by Size)

2.0

7.28.8

5.9

14.2

6.3

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Under $10M

$10-25M

Over $25M

Avg Cinti Genera

l

CFMA Midwest

CFMA BIC < $50M

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 18: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

18

GeneralsBy Size

Page 19: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

19

Under $10 Million Revenue

Page 20: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

20

Net Earnings to RevenueUnder $10M

0.9% 1.3

%

2.8%

5.2%

0.6% 2.2

%2.3

%

3.3%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 21: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

21

Gross ProfitUnder $10M

13.4%

16.7%

19.1%

17.3%

23.9%

18.1%

14.9%

12.9%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 22: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

22

Operating Expenses to RevenueUnder $10M

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 23: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

23

Operating Income to RevenueUnder $10M

2.5%

2.2%

5.9%

6.6%

4.6%

4.4%

3.7%

2.5%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of

net sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 24: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

24

Current RatioUnder $10M

1.6

2.3

1.6 1.8

1.51.8

1.4 1.4

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 25: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

25

Age of Accounts Receivable in DaysUnder $10M

64

48

54

31

64

5259

52

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that receivables

are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 26: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

26

Retainage to Total Accounts Receivable

Under $10M

32.0%

25.0%

13.6%

39.3%

13.3%

24.6%

16.3%

4.7%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 27: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

27

Cash as a % of Total AssetsUnder $10M

17.0%

28.0%

24.5%

32.3%

18.8%

24.1%

21.4% 22

.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 28: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

28

Cost in Excess/Billings in ExcessUnder $10M

19.0%

58.0%

22.6%

0.7%

99.1%

39.9%

50.3% 55

.8%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 29: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

29

Debt to EquityUnder $10M

1.7

0.9

1.8

1.1

1.6

1.4

2.3 2.3

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 30: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

30

Average Months in BacklogUnder $10M

3.9

9.6

6.1

2.3 2.0

4.95.9

9.6

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA Under $10M

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 31: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

31

$10 to $25 MillionRevenue

Page 32: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

32

Net Earnings to Revenue$10 to $25M

0.6%

-0.5%

0.7%

3.0%

3.2%

1.4%

2.3%

3.2%

-0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 33: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

33

Gross Profit$10 to $25M

9.5%

9.1%

9.5% 10

.7% 11.6%

10.1%

14.9%

11.7%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 34: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

34

Operating Expenses to Revenue$10 to $25M

7.4%

8.8%

6.1% 6.6

%

8.3%

7.4%

11.2%

8.4%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 35: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

35

Operating Income to Revenue$10 to $25M

2.1%

0.3%

3.4%

4.1%

3.3%

2.6%

3.7%

3.2%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of

net sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 36: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

36

Current Ratio$10 to $25M

1.2 1.2 1.2

1.4 1.4

1.3

1.4 1.4

1.1

1.2

1.2

1.3

1.3

1.4

1.4

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 37: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

37

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days$10 to $25M

64 65

19

66

5854

59

44

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 38: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

38

Retainage to Total Accounts Receivable

$10 to $25M

19.6%

18.4%

27.9%

17.0%

13.3%

19.2%

16.3%

8.8%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 39: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

39

Cash as a % of Total Assets$10 to $25M

12.0%

11.2%

16.6%

12.5%

24.1%

15.3%

21.4%

24.4%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 40: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

40

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess$10 to $25M

56.3%

85.4%

54.4%

22.6% 30

.0%

49.7%

50.3%

41.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 41: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

41

Debt to Equity$10 to $25M

3.5

5.7

4.95.9

2.5

4.5

2.3

3.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 42: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

42

Average Months in Backlog$10 to $25M

5.9

10.0

5.25.9

7.26.8

5.9

7.6

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA $10-25M

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 43: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

43

Over $25 MillionRevenue

Page 44: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

44

Net Earnings to RevenueOver $25M

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 45: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

45

Gross ProfitOver $25M

13.8%

11.7%

13.5%

9.1%

8.8%

11.4%

14.9%

9.6%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 46: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

46

Operating Expenses to RevenueOver $25M

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 47: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

47

Operating Income to RevenueOver $25M

4.0%

2.8%

4.6%

3.0%

3.1%

3.5% 3.7

%

2.7%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of

net sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 48: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

48

Current RatioOver $25M

1.1

1.4

1.3

1.21.3 1.3

1.4

1.3

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 49: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

49

Age of Accounts Receivable in DaysOver $25M

48.0

72.0

69.0

53.0

53.0 59

.059

.0

48.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 50: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

50

Retainage to Total Accounts Receivable

Over $25M

15.0%

12.0%

15.7%

11.9%

15.2%

14.0%

16.3%

10.4%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 51: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

51

Cash as a % of Total AssetsOver $25M

8.0%

16.0%

14.8%

10.5%

19.9%

13.8%

21.4%

24.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 52: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

52

Cost in Excess/Billings in ExcessOver $25M

13.0%

53.0%

37.7%

47.8%

22.2%

34.7%

50.3%

41.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 53: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

53

Debt to EquityOver $25M

2.6 2.4

2.93.4

2.52.8

2.3

3.1

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 54: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

54

Average Months in BacklogOver $25M

5.8

8.8

5.9

5.1

8.8

6.9

5.9

7.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Year Average

Average Cinti Generals

CFMA over $25M

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 55: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

55

Results – Subs

Page 56: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

56

2008 Comparative – Subs – All Trades

Page 57: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

57

Net Earnings to RevenueSubs (by Trade)

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 58: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

58

Gross ProfitSubs (By Trade)

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 59: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

59

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Subs (By Trade)

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 60: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

60

Operating Income to RevenueSubs (By Trade)

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 61: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

61

Current RatioSubs (By Trade)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 62: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

62

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Subs (By Trade)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that receivables

are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 63: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

63

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Subs (By Trade)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 64: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

64

Cash as a % of Total AssetsSubs (By Trade)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 65: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

65

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

Subs (By Trade)

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 66: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

66

Debt to EquitySubs (By Trade)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 67: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

67

Average Months in BacklogSubs (By Trade)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 68: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

68

Subs – By Trade

Page 69: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

69

Electrical Contractors

Page 70: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

70

Net Earnings to RevenueElectrical Contractors

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 71: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

71

Gross ProfitElectrical Contractors

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 72: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

72

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Electrical Contractors

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 73: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

73

Operating Income to RevenueElectrical Contractors

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 74: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

74

Current RatioElectrical Contractors

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 75: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

75

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Electrical Contractors

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 76: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

76

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Electrical Contractors

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 77: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

77

Cash as a % of Total AssetsElectrical Contractors

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 78: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

78

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

Electrical Contractors

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 79: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

79

Debt to EquityElectrical Contractors

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 80: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

80

Average Months in BacklogElectrical Contractors

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 81: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

81

Steel Fabricators/Erectors

Page 82: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

82

Net Earnings to RevenueSteel Fabricators/Erectors

8.7%

10.8%

4.2%

5.9% 6.3

% 7.2%

0.9%

5.2%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Steel

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 83: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

83

Gross ProfitSteel Fabricators/Erectors

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 84: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

84

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Steel Fabricators/Erectors

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 85: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

85

Operating Income to RevenueSteel Fabricators/Erectors

11.1% 11

.2%

4.2%

7.3% 7.9

% 8.3%

2.5%

5.2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Steel

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 86: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

86

Current RatioSteel Fabricators/Erectors

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 87: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

87

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Steel Fabricators/Erectors

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 88: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

88

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Steel Fabricators/Erectors

12%

22%

11%

26% 27

%

20%

15%

10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Steel

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 89: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

89

Cash as a % of Total AssetsSteel Fabricators/Erectors

1%

7%

14%

1% 4%5%

15%

13%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Steel

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 90: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

90

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

Steel Fabricators/Erectors

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 91: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

91

Debt to EquitySteel Fabricators/Erectors

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 92: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

92

Average Months in BacklogSteel Fabricators/Erectors

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 93: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

93

Underground Contractors

Page 94: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

94

Net Earnings to RevenueUnderground

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 95: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

95

Gross ProfitUnderground

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 96: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

96

Operating Expenses to RevenueUnderground

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 97: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

97

Operating Income to RevenueUnderground

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 98: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

98

Current RatioUnderground

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 99: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

99

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Underground

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 100: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

100

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Underground

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 101: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

101

Cash as a % of Total AssetsUnderground

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 102: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

102

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

Underground

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 103: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

103

Debt to EquityUnderground

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 104: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

104

Average Months in BacklogUnderground

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 105: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

105

Mechanical and HVAC Contractors

Page 106: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

106

Net Earnings to RevenueMechanical and HVAC

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 107: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

107

Gross ProfitMechanical and HVAC

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 108: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

108

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Mechanical and HVAC

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 109: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

109

Operating Income to RevenueMechanical and HVAC

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 110: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

110

Current RatioMechanical and HVAC

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 111: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

111

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Mechanical and HVAC

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 112: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

112

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Mechanical and HVAC

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 113: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

113

Cash as a % of Total AssetsMechanical and HVAC

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 114: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

114

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

Mechanical and HVAC

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Computation: Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 115: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

115

Debt to EquityMechanical and HVAC

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 116: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

116

Average Months in BacklogMechanical and HVAC

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 117: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

117

Concrete Contractors

Page 118: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

118

Net Earnings to RevenueConcrete

7.1%

5.7%

7.9%

3.3%

6.0%

0.9%

6.3%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

20052006

20072008

4 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Concrete

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 119: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

119

Gross ProfitConcrete

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 120: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

120

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Concrete

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 121: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

121

Operating Income to RevenueConcrete

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 122: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

122

Current RatioConcrete

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 123: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

123

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Concrete

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 124: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

124

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Concrete

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 125: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

125

Cash as a % of Total AssetsConcrete

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 126: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

126

Cost in Excess/Billings in ExcessConcrete

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 127: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

127

Debt to EquityConcrete

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 128: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

128

Average Months in BacklogConcrete

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 129: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

129

Subs – By Size

Page 130: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

130

Under $2 Million Revenue

Page 131: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

131

Net Earnings to RevenueUnder $2M

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 132: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

132

Gross ProfitUnder $2M

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 133: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

133

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Under $2M

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 134: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

134

Operating Income to RevenueUnder $2M

7.3% 7.4

%

3.2%

11.3%

-4.0%

5.0%

2.5%

3.8%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Subs <$10M

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 135: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

135

Current RatioUnder $2M

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 136: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

136

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Under $2M

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 137: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

137

Cash as a % of Total AssetsUnder $2M

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 138: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

138

Debt to EquityUnder $2M

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 139: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

139

Average Months in BacklogUnder $2M

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 140: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

140

$2 to $10 Million Revenue

Page 141: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

141

Net Earnings to Revenue$2 to $10M

3.2%

5.3%

4.2%

3.7%

0.9%

3.5%

0.9%

4.1%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Subs <$10M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 142: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

142

Gross Profit$2 to $10M

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 143: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

143

Operating Expenses to Revenue$2 to $10M

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 144: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

144

Operating Income to Revenue$2 to $10M

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 145: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

145

Current Ratio$2 to $10M

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 146: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

146

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

$2 to $10M

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 147: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

147

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable $2 to $10M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 148: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

148

Cash as a % of Total Assets$2 to $10M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 149: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

149

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess$2 to $10M

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 150: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

150

Debt to Equity$2 to $10M

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 151: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

151

Average Months in Backlog$2 to $10M

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 152: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

152

$10 to $25 Million Revenue

Page 153: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

153

Net Earnings to Revenue$10 to $25M

3.8%

4.6%

3.5% 3.6

%

1.6%

3.4%

0.9%

4.8%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Subs $10-25M

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 154: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

154

Gross Profit$10 to $25M

14.5%

15.0%

15.5%

16.0%

16.5%

17.0%

17.5%

18.0%

18.5%

19.0%

19.5%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 155: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

155

Operating Expenses to Revenue$10 to $25M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 156: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

156

Operating Income to Revenue$10 to $25M

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of net

sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 157: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

157

Current Ratio$10 to $25M

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 158: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

158

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

$10 to $25M

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 159: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

159

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable $10 to $25M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 160: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

160

Cash as a % of Total Assets$10 to $25M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 161: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

161

Cost in Excess/Billings in Excess

$10 to $25M

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 162: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

162

Debt to Equity$10 to $25M

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 163: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

163

Average Months in Backlog$10 to $25M

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 164: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

164

Over $25 Million Revenue

Page 165: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

165

Net Earnings to RevenueOver $25M

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing earnings before taxes by revenue

Net EarningsRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows a company’s net income before tax, and is typically one of the most relied upon measures of a company’s profitability by users of the company’s financial statements.

Page 166: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

166

Gross ProfitOver $25M

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Computation:This ratio is computed by dividing gross profit by revenue

Gross ProfitRevenue

Interpretation:This ratio shows the profit generated by jobs, including reductions for not only direct job costs, but indirect job costs as well.

Page 167: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

167

Operating Expenses to Revenue

Over $25M

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Computation:Operating (selling and administrative) expenses divided by revenue

Operating ExpensesRevenue

Interpretation:This graph depicts operating (selling and administrative) expenses as a percentage of net sales. One benchmark for healthy contractors puts the ratio at 6%.

Page 168: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

168

Operating Income to RevenueOver $25M

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

Computation: Operating income divided by revenueOperating Income

RevenueInterpretation:This graph depicts operating income as a percentage of

net sales. A contractor becomes healthier as this ratio becomes higher.

Page 169: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

169

Current RatioOver $25M

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.8

Computation:Total current assets divided by total current liabilities

Current AssetsCurrent Liabilities

Interpretation:This ratio is a rough indication of the company’s ability to service its current obligations. Generally, the higher the current ratio, the greater a company’s ability to pay its current obligations. However, the composition and quality of current assets is a critical factor in the analysis of an individual company’s liquidity.

Page 170: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

170

Age of Accounts Receivable in Days

Over $25M

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Computation:Accounts receivable divided by sales, multiplied 365 days Accounts Receivable x 365

SalesInterpretation:This figure expresses the average time in days that

receivables are outstanding. Generally, the greater number of days outstanding, the greater the probability of delinquencies in accounts receivable. A comparison of a company's daily receivables may indicate the extent of a company's control over credit and collections. The terms offered by a company to its customers, however, may differ from terms within the industry and should be taken into consideration.

Page 171: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

171

Retainage to Total Accounts

Receivable Over $25M

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Computation:A/R retainage divided by total accounts receivable

A/R RetainageTotal Accounts Receivable

Interpretation:This ratio depicts the amount of receivables retained by owners on work performed in hard dollar contracts, compared to total accounts receivable.

Page 172: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

172

Cash as a % of Total AssetsOver $25M

1%

3%

7%

19%

12%

8%

15%

14%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

20042005

20062007

2008

5 Yr. Average

Avg. Cinti S

ubs

CFMA Subs $25-50M

Computation: Cash divided by total assets

CashTotal Assets

Interpretation:This ratio shows how much cash the company keeps on hand, as compared to its total assets.

Page 173: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

173

Cost in Excess/Billings in ExcessOver $25M

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Computation:Cost in excess divided by billings in excess

Cost in ExcessBillings in Excess

Interpretation:This ratio measures the extent to which the company is able to progress bill its open jobs. The lower the ratio, the more quickly the company has been able to bill its customers as work progresses, and the sooner it should be able to collect its receivables.

Page 174: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

174

Debt to EquityOver $25M

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Computation: Total liabilities divided by total net worth

Total LiabilitiesTotal Net Worth

Interpretation:This ratio expresses the relationship between capital contributed by creditors to that contributed by owners. It also expresses the degree of protection provided by the owners for the creditors. The higher the ratio, the greater the risk being assumed by creditors. A lower ratio generally indicates greater long-term financial safety. A common, rule-of-thumb standard for this ratio of 3 to 1 or better is often considered acceptable.

Page 175: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

175

Average Months in BacklogOver $25M

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Computation:Twelve months per year times backlog divided by revenue

Backlog x 12Revenue

Interpretation:This ratio measures the number of months of work that a company has in backlog, based upon its most recent sales experience. Normally, the higher the figure the better, as long as the contractor has adequate resources (working capital and equity) to handle the increased backlog.

Page 176: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

176

•The participants for the survey were selected from several databases listing contractors located in the Greater Cincinnati area. Financial information of 99 contractors is included, 28 of which are general contractors, and 71 that are subcontractors.

•The percentages depicted in all of these graphs are dependent upon how well the specific respondents in each size range or trade type did for the year, and may vary if another survey were performed, depending on the respondents to that survey.

•All Cincinnati averages shown in the survey are based on the weighted average as determined by the number of respondents in each category.

•Each category was deemed to have a population large enough to preserve of anonymity of all respondents involved.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Page 177: Survey Participants1 Results – General4 2008 Comparatives – All Generals5 Generals By Size17 Under $10 Million Revenue18 $10 to $25 Million Revenue30 Over

177

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

•In some instances, respondents that were deemed to be outliers were eliminated from the graphical presentation so as to protect the integrity of the data presented.

•In addition, the results of the survey were compared to the results of the Construction Financial Management Association’s (CFMA) 2008 Construction Industry Annual Financial Survey for the Midwest Region, specific industries and size, as well as the overall best in class.

©2008 by the CONSTRUCTION FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION. All rights reserved. Reprinted with the permission of CFMA.