Introductory videos, explaining the AnRep3D graphs

Currently we have a lot of posts discussing all kinds of examples of AnRep3D graphs. Most of them hold links to real 3D-graphs, to be shown in the browser. Yet it would be good to have a little more guidance about the structure and meaning of the graphs. That’s why we prepared a couple of introductory videos, explaining the principle of these 3D graphs.

The videos will be found on Youtube, in the AnRep3D channel, but the links are also presented below.

After the introduction we will present some other videos, showing the structure of the input-file, the use of the generator and the “interior” of an AnRep3D graph file.

For more information visit our website: https://AnRep3D.com where the free demo-package can be found as well.

Advertisements
Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ten years of Amazon (with reference Alphabet/Google) Part II

In the previous post I couldn’t tell everything, because the total message would have been too long and therfore confusing. Two things were different:

  • A long period of time (10 years) was taken for Amazon, but for Google (later Alphabet) which served as a reference, only the first and the last year in the series were added.
  • Instead of the usual set Revenue, (net) Profit, Equity and (total) Assets series(abbreviated as RPEA), I decided to take another set of values: Revenue, Profit before taxation, Equiy and (total) Liabilities.

The graph is repeated below. The picture is only a screenshot, but if it’s clicked the full 3D-graph will appear. (it’s HTML5/Javascript with WebGL, so enable both Javascript and WebGL in your browser).

Amazon - ten years

Manipulating the 3D-graph: Double-click the screenshot first.

Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out. This time you will really need it! Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.

Last time I already warned that the graph isn’t just a simple bar-graph, as all sizes do have a meaning. The bottom-view shows the changing width and depth, representing the equity and total liabilities trhoughout the years. See picture below, to the right.

Ten years Amazon - bottomIt illustrates a couple of things. At the start (2007 – 2014) the equity doesn’t grow as fast as the liabilities, which suggests than Amazon issues less shares than bonds or loans – as the former will be part of the equity, whereas the latter two count for liabilities. To make this very clear, I zoomed in on 2016, where Alphabet is shown together with Amazon. See picture below (In the screenshots I drew a couple of arrows, to provide some guidance on the interpretation of the graph for this position):

Amazon Alphabet 2016

 

For Amazon the equity is rather small, compared to the liabilities. For Alphabet the equity is even larger than the liabilities. Of course the companies are in very diferent industries and we know from the past that “fysical” industries need more capital to generate revenue than the more “service” based ones. Although AWS is about services, Amazon’s 2016 annual report service shows than the product-based revenue is still 70% of the total – the other 30% being service-related.

Amazon and AlphabethIn a similar screenshot however (t0 the right 2014 – 2016), we can see that Amazon nearly doubled its Equity, without really increasing its liabilities!

 

 

 

Another screenshot shows revenue and profit (this time before taxation). Again I added some arrows with explanatory texts.

Amazon Alphabet Revenue Profit

Here we see that the profit increases more than the revenue (in a relative sense) although  it’s still less impressive than Alphabet’s profit. Maybe it shows the impact of the Amazon transforming from a product-based to a service-based company. At the same time we can see there was a profit most of the time. Only 2014 shows a thin red roof indicating a loss.

It might be a good exercise to double click the screenshots and try and manipulate the real 3D-graph in such a way that the image of the screensot is obtained (more or less, because I cropped the screenshots before publishing them). The instructions for manipulation, like zooming, turning and tilting are at the beginning of this post, below the first screenshot!Amazon Input-file

Finally I want to share the numbers I used to generate the 3D-graph. As you will know, the AnRep3D-generator converts a set of numbers into a 3D-graph like the ones shown behind the screenshots. Of course all the values can be found in the annual reports, using the links I gave in the previous post, but it’s good to share the final input-file as well. The input-files also shows the parameter-line, which is an important addition.

Do you want to generate such a 3D-graph yourself?  Use our free demo. It is a fully functional generator, only limited to the creation of graphs for one company and one year. Visit our website anrep3d.com  for more information.

If you want to create more complex graphs, please contact us for a licence (info@anrep3d.com). It’s quite affordable and again: sometimes it can even be free for colleges or universities (including universities of applied sciences).

Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ten years of Amazon – using Alphabet/Google as a reference

Again, I would like to show you the 3D-graph first, but this time several things will be different. So let me start with an explanation. Firstly, the graph is showing Amazon over a period of ten years (2007 – 2016). Looking at the result I was quite surprised about the perspective. The graph is really deep (litterally).

Apart from this, I used another company as a reference for start and end only. It could have been any large company, but Google (2006), later becoming Alphabet (2016) is often referred to when talking  about the new Tech Giants. Only two years would do, so all the other values (2007 – 2015) were put in as zeroes. And then there is another change, since I was tired of showing the same Revenue, (net) Profit, Equity and (total) Assets series – abbreviated as RPEA.

The generator likes all kinds of food and creates nice graphs if the combinations make sense. So why not take Revenue, Profit before taxation, Equiy and (total) Liabilities? In previous posts, I already explained that instead of Profit also gross margin, EBIT or EBIDTA can be used. And Revenue can be replaced by them as well, as long as the second value is a part of it: e.g. EBITDA and net Profit.

Replacing Total Assets with Liabilities however, is a bit odd. We know Equity cannot exceed Total Assets, as it is a part of it (after subtracting the Liabilities). Yet the Equity can be higher than the Liabilities, although I didn’t expect it to happen very often. And then Google/Alphabet turned out to be an example! The “building” is perpendicular to the normal direction! Fortunately (for our graph, that is) Amazon had Liabilities higher than its Equity throughout the years.

Amazon - ten years

Don’t forget how to manipulate the 3D-graph (it’s HTML5/Javascript with WebGL, so enable both Javascript and WebGL in your browser). Double-click the screenshot first.

Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out. This time you will really need it! Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.

Don’t think the Amazon-series is a simple bar-graph! Height, width and depth all have their own meaning (representing Revenue, Equity and Liabilities). And then green “roof” means a Profit (this time “before taxation”) but a red “roof” shows the extra Costs paid to obtain the Revenue. In other words: it’s a loss.

I would love to tell you more, but let’s keep it for the next post. Please double-click the screenshots to see the actual 3D-graph in your browser. Next time I will tell about the value and explain the structure of these graphs in more detail.

The sources were: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=97664&p=irol-reportsannual and http://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReportArchive/g/NASDAQ_GOOG_2007.pdf  https://abc.xyz/investor/pdf/20161231_alphabet_10K.pdf

Do you want to generate such a 3D-graph yourself?  Use our free demo. It is a fully functional generator, only limited to the creation of graphs for one company and one year. Or visit our website (anrep3d.com)  for more information.

If you want to create more complex graphs, please contact us for a licence for your company (info@anrep3d.com). It’s quite affordable (only one needed per legal entity) and again: sometimes it can even be free for colleges or universities / universities of applied sciences.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mergers and Acquisitions: AB Inbev – SAB Miller

Let’s take the same approach as we did last time: first a couple of screenshots of 3D-graph will be shown (double click them to get the actual 3D-graph in your browser). Then some explanation and comments will be given. Of course it can be a bit confusing for first-time visitors. If you don’t understand what you are looking at, please read the text underneath.

Only one comment upfront: the values for 2016 are for SAB Miller and AB Inbev separately. To the right, their summed values created an artificially combined company. In 2017 AB Inbev had incorporated SAB Miller and for this reason the new company is placed to the right, in line with the artificial combination. AB Inbev SAB Miller front AB Inbev SAB Miller

Double-click a screenshot to see the live 3D-graph in your browser.

For manipulation: Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out.
Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.AB Inbev SAB Miller bottom

AB Inbev SAB Miller rearAlso a warning: SAB Miller had a broken book-year, so it’s not completely right to sum the values for AB Inbev and SAB Miller (as the periods are different, because AB Inbev has a bookyear equal to the calendar year). Yet the difference is only a shift of one quarter.

Now the graph itself. If you double-clicked one of the screenshots, you were able to see the real 3D graph from all angles and distances and we will discuss what could be observed.

The first screenshot offered a front-view and showed that the width of the SAB Miller “building” was much smaller than AB Inbev’s, meaning that the equity of the latter was much higher (in 2016). SABMiller’s building was not as tall as AB Inbev’s, showing its revenue was lower. Yet the thickness of the green roof was more or less the same. This means the absolute value of the profit was about the same, while the relative profit (percentage of the total revenue) was higher, as it has to be compared to a smaller amount of revenue.

The second screenshot mainly shows that SAB Miller’s building is not as deep as AB Inbev’s. This shows a difference in total assets: for AB Inbev the value is probably five times higher. The real 3D graph can be turned and tilted immediately and a screenshot presents only one point of view.

Only the third screenshot shows the ratio of equity to assets. The equity of SAB Miller is about half its total assets in 2016 (rectangle to the top, left). For AB Inbev it’s more like four times. And because the difference between total assets and equity is total liabilties, AB Inbev had a larger gearing than AB Inbev.

In all three screenshots, a third building was present to the right for 2016. It is the artificial combination ofAB Inbev and SAB Miller, obtained by summation of their equities, total assets, revenues and profits. Not realistic of course, but the combined company could not really be expected to be larger. In 2017 the combined company is a fact and is called AB Inbev! But it’s not the same AB Inbev as it was in 2016 and therefore it is presented in the same lane as the combined building in 2016.

Screenshot four is taken from the rear and shows the new AB Inbev in front. It’s not as large as the combined, hypothetical company. Actually it looks a lot like the old AB Inbev, because it was forced to divest some parts. Yet the profit is higher! Of course the graph doesn’t tell why the profit is higher. Maybe it would be better to use the profit before taxes or the EBITDA instead of the net profit (as long as it is done the same way for all the “buildings” in the graph of course).

The main objective of this graph is to present a large number of companies and spot the ones with very good ratios or offer an opportunity to detect anomalies at a glance. After that, some digging in the annual report would be wise. The reports used were downloaded from the AB Inbev-site. The SAB Miller reports are also available at the AB Inbev site.

Do you want to create this kind of graph yourself?  Our free demo is a fully functional generator, only limited to the creation of graphs for one company and one year. Visit our website for more information.

If you want to create complex graphs like these, please contact us for a license at: info@anrep3d.com It’s quite affordable and sometimes even free for colleges or universities (including universities of applied sciences)!

Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Broadcom, Qualcomm, NXP Semiconductors: survival of the smallest?

This time I will do it the other way round: first I present the 3D graph, output  of the AnRep3D-generator. Then I will give an explanation.

Broadcom-Qualcomm-NXP_SC

 

 

Double-click the screenshot to see the real 3D-graph and manipulate it as you like: Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out. Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.

What do we see? Three companies in two years. Every “building” has sizes related to values from the annual report: total height is revenue with the height (thickness) of the roof representing profit (or loss if it’s red instead of green). Then the width represents the equity and the depth the total assets. So if a building is taller than another, this means the revenue was higher (than for another year or another company). A deep, narrow building means a lot of debt and so on.

Now why are Broadcom, Qualcomm and NXP semiconductors in the graph? Well, that’s simple: Qualcomm wants to buy NXP semiconductors and Broadcom wants to buy Qualcomm. So we are looking at a cascade of potential take-overs.

I expected NXP to be the smallest, looking at equity and total assets. Then Qualcomm would be larger but Broadcom had to be the richest party with the highest equity. Like in nature the smaller fish is eaten by a larger one, which in turn will be eaten by a really large one.

As we can see Qualcomm is larger than NXP indeed: both equity and total assets are twice as high. But for Broadcom it’s different. It wasn’t larger than Qualcomm in 2016 and in 2015 it was even smaller than NXP! Actually the 2016 company is not the same one as in 2015, because it’s just Avago, using the name of the company it took over. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcom  and https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-27/avago-said-near-deal-to-buy-wireless-chipmaker-broadcom Still the new Avago-Broadcom combination shows about the same level of total assets, a lower equity and even a loss in 2016 where the others show a profit.

Also remarkable, is NXP having a high profit in 2015, but a lower profit with much higher revenue in 2016. Let me warn you about the broken bookyear for Broadcom and Qualcomm. Only for NXP Semiconductions the bookyear is from January 1 to December 31. Another warning: I am merely showing the power of the AnRep3D graphs and not giving any advice. Please read the original annual reports:

Broadcom: http://investors.broadcom.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=203541&p=irol-reportsother

Qualcomm: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/QCOM/6048346403x0x915400/CD71F5A8-BEAA-4EEE-B385-2CD75B48B9D3/2016_Annual_Report_Form_10-K.pdf

NXP Semiconductors: http://investors.nxp.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=209114&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=2241494 (the real Annual Report could not be found at the NXP site, but Google offers the pdf somehow – yet the numbers in the abstract are ok).

The input-file I used (values taken from the annual reports over 2016):

Broadcom-Qualcomm-NXP_Sc input

 

 

 

If you want to create graphs like this yourself, you can obtain a license. However, the demo (fully functional but limited to one company and one year) is free. Visit our website for more information: https://anrep3d.com

Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

David and Goliath: Royal Dutch Shell taking over BG-group

To be honest, I was a little bit disappointed when I saw the 3D-graph I generated for Royal Dutch Shell and BG-group. As discussed in the previous post, this acquisition was completed and the 2016 Annual Report presented the consolidated numbers. Unlike some other mergers & acquisitions this one was not too recent and not too old either.

Why should I be disappointed then? Well, it turns out BG-group was much, much smaller than Royal Dutch Shell. Of course I knew, and although I saw the numbers I didn’t fully realise that the BG-group’s revenue was only about 6% of the revenue of Royal Dutch Shell. Maybe the profit was misleading me, because in 2015 the profit of the BG-group was about 77% of Shell’s profit, so almost the same in absolute values. But then equity and total assets were very different again – BG showing only 1/5th or 1/6th of Shell’s values. Last time I presented a piece of a spreadsheet, now the format of the input-file is below:

input-file Shell BG

 

 

 

 

A warning first: there is a risk whem looking at the graph. It is a 3D-graph, but it doesn’t mean the volume is meaningful. The three dimensions should be compared separately between the companies, although the relative sizes can be compared within one “building”.

E.g. the shape of the floor indicates a kind of gearing ratio (here Equity/Total Assets, but Equity could be replaced by Liabilities easily to get other ratios – of course then then those values have to be replaced for all companies and all years). A company about ten times smaller than another would be smaller in all three dimensions, but this doesn’t mean it’s 1000 times smaller as the volume would suggest.

Talking about ratios: if we havShell BG bottome a look at the shape of the bottoms for both (2015 taken), it seems to be very similar for both.

 

 

Shell BG front

Looking at the front-side, we see a huge difference between the revenue-levels.

 

 

 

However, the profit (the green roof) is more or less of the same size in 2015. This means the absolute values of the profits of both companies were not very different! profit Shell BGIn this graph (just double-click one of the pictures to see the real 3D-graph), the four values of both companies were added for the years before the year of the acquisition. This means the sum of the revenue, the sum of the profit, the sum of the equity and the sum of the total assets was taken for 2014 and 2015. Formally the same was done for 2016, but then Royal Dutch Shell published the consolidated values and the values for the BG-group became all zero, so for 2016 the combination is equal to Royal Dutch Shell.

Of course we cannot simply add the values, because mergers and acquisitions usually lead to an outflow of money to shareholders. Apart from this, it was the period in which the oil-price dropped and put a lot of pressure at the results. Still it’s interesting to show a combined set of values. And although Royal Dutch Shell is more like Goliath, with BG-group being more like David, the profit was an interesting part of the comparison.

Do you want to create this kind of graphs yourself? It’s easy with the free demo-package. It contains a generator, a manual and a couple of examples of input- and output-files (3D-graphs in 3D format). Visiting our website is a more lazy option and of course the pictures above are clickable. Double clicking will bring up the real 3D-graph in your browser (webGL and Javascript need to be enabled). Do you want a licence for the generator with full functionality? Please contact us – the current price is shown at our website. Are you a professor at a university (or a university of applied sciences)? Please contact us: we do offer some free licenses for educational purposes.

Manipulating the graphs is easy: Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out. Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.
Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mergers and Acquisitions: Royal Dutch Shell and BG-group

A couple of weeks without a post to this blog: I think I have to explain something. Apart for a storm hitting Almere and causing some damage, I also had to spend my time on something else.

Some of you may know that my previous company, including its product VRBI, was transferred to one of my sons. VRBI basically offers a generator able to create 3D scatter-plots (showing balls in their x-, y- and z-position in a cube). My son graduated on the subject recently, working on his own company with VRBI very seriously. However, his problem was that VRBI was “invented” to solve problems I noticed and as a result I am the one able to come up with all kinds of applications. He was trying to convert numbers from a report into graphs, but it turned out the authors had provided two-dimensional information only, because they had to present 2-D graphs (they should have used VRBI in the first place of course). As a result hardly any usable information was left.

So he asked me to provide some real 3-D examples and of course this meant I had to look for data-sets with x, y and z-values. I found some interesting examples and created graphs (one even as 4D, with the size of the balls, being determined by the fourth value. Working on those graphs, I encountered a problem existing for years: some data need to be shifted and ask for a threshold-value like in Excel. I couldn’t stand it any more and added the functionality, but it took some time. If you are interested in VRBI, please have a look at scientassist.com or vrbi.eu (same site). For once I present a VRBI-graph instead of an AnRep3D example.

3D-graph of stock-funds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beware! This is not an AnRep3D graph, although the principle is the same.  Double click the screenshot to open the real 3D-graph first and manipulate its position:

Clicking the right mouse-button, moving the mouse up and down will zoom the graph in and out. Clicking left and moving the mouse will tilt the graph in different directions (or move the observer’s viewpoint around a fixed graph – it’s relative of course). Double clicking in the graph translates it and moves the centre at the same time. As a result the way the graph tilts will change. Just try it. If you don’t know how to get the normal position back, just refresh the graph.

The previous text wasn’t AnRep3D at all of course, so now it’s time to go on with examples of the power of the AnRep3D generator.

Last time, I discussed the possibility to visualise mergers and acquisitions. More illustrations are necessary and that’s why I colleded a couple of examples. Wikipedia provides some, but then not all mergers or acquisitions are completed yet (Bayer Monsanto is still going on, as is AT&T Time Warner at this moment). Even if they were completed, this doesn’t mean a consolidated Annual Report is available yet. E.g. Anheuser-Busch InBev acquired SAB Miller, but this was completed at the end of 2016, which means the 2017 annual report will show the consolidated results. This annual report will be available shortly, probably next month, but not right now!

That’s why I had to look at more historical events. Useful examples are Heinz taking over Kraft, Dell acquiring EMC corporation and Royal Dutch Shell acquiring BG-Group. The latter completed at the start of February 2016 and therefore the 2016 Annual Report shows the consolidated numbers of the combination (although the BG-part was left out for January, but the statement says it’s not substantial). Let’s start with this one, which I watched closely as I worked with Shell at the time. This means only I’m very interested – my numbers will be taken from the Annual Reports only. Be aware: don’t draw conclusions using this blog as I am merely illustrating the power of AnRep3D, without giving any guidance on numbers. So please have a look at the annual reports yourself if you want to know more. The links used are:

2016 RD Shell http://reports.shell.com/annual-report/2016/servicepages/disclaimer.php Provides access to P&L and Balance sheet
2015 RD Shell http://reports.shell.com/annual-report/2015/servicepages/disclaimer.php Provides access to P&L and Balance sheet
BG group 2015 https://www.shell.com/investors/financial-reporting/pre-combination-bg-group-publications/_jcr_content/par/textimage.stream/1465198077682/f7a5adacb4a76d474248cbe47d20afebdf0f1ce1c82fd5c7ff7d0620350b88cf/bg-group-2015-annual-report.pdf Shows the complete pdf
BG group 2014 https://www.shell.com/investors/financial-reporting/pre-combination-bg-group-publications/_jcr_content/par/textimage.stream/1455269757014/cfa2bef64c5007c2b28848b8cb39e736b1daa45875781366f9378dc29b74ec6d/bg-group-2014-annual-report.pdf Shows the complete pdf

The table I distilled from those sources is shown below.

Table with Annual Report values Shell BG

The 2016-line provides consolidated data for the combination, but it is interesting to just sum the values for previous years. Of course the acquisition had to be paid for and money went out to the shareholders. As a result 2016 is not a simple addition. Then this was also the period in which the oil-price collapsed, so a very complex situation. Looking at the graph without any knowledge won’t help, but understanding the market the graph will be interesting.

It will be the next blog where the derived 3D-graph can be obtained. For now it’s only the raw set of input-values. Until then: please try and use the free demo-generator to generate a “building” for one company in one year (or a series of graphs, as the demo only accepts on company/year combination, but the number of graphs to be created is unlimited. The demo-generator is free and apart from the volume restriction, it’s fully functional! For more information visit our website: https://anrep3d.com or read some of the other posts at this blog-site.

Posted in Visualising Financial Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment