How does the financial performance of sugar-using firms compare to other agribusinesses? An accounting and economic profit rates analysis

IF 1.5 Q3 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY

Agricultural Finance Review Pub Date : 2023-04-10 DOI:10.1108/afr-08-2022-0103

C. Trejo-Pech, K. DeLong, R. Johansson

{"title":"How does the financial performance of sugar-using firms compare to other agribusinesses? An accounting and economic profit rates analysis","authors":"C. Trejo-Pech, K. DeLong, R. Johansson","doi":"10.1108/afr-08-2022-0103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe United States (US) sugar program protects domestic sugar farmers from unrestricted imports of heavily-subsidized global sugar. Sugar-using firms (SUFs) criticize that program for causing US sugar prices to be higher than world sugar prices. This study examines the financial performance of publicly traded SUFs to determine if they are performing at an economic disadvantage in terms of accounting profitability, risk and economic profitability compared to other industries.Design/methodology/approachFirm-level financial accounting and market data from 2010 to 2019 were utilized to construct financial metrics for publicly traded SUFs, agribusinesses and general US firms. These financial metrics were analyzed to determine how SUFs compare to their agribusiness peer group and general US companies. The comprehensive financial analysis in this study covers: (1) accounting profit rates, (2) drivers of profitability, (3) economic profit rates, (4) trend analysis and (5) peer comparisons. Quantile regression analysis and Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney statistics are employed for statistical comparisons.FindingsRegarding various profitability and risk measures, SUFs outperform their agribusiness peers and the general benchmark of all US firms in terms of accounting profit rates, risk levels and economic profit rates. Furthermore, compared to other US industries using the 17 French and Fama classifications, SUFs have the highest return on investment and economic profit rate―measured by the Economic Value Added® margin―and the second-lowest opportunity cost of capital, measured by the weighted average cost of capital.Originality/valueThis study finds nothing to suggest that the US sugar program hinders the financial success of SUFs, contrary to recent claims by sugar-using firms. Notably in this analysis is the evaluation of economic profit rates and a series of robustness techniques.","PeriodicalId":46748,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Finance Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-08-2022-0103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeThe United States (US) sugar program protects domestic sugar farmers from unrestricted imports of heavily-subsidized global sugar. Sugar-using firms (SUFs) criticize that program for causing US sugar prices to be higher than world sugar prices. This study examines the financial performance of publicly traded SUFs to determine if they are performing at an economic disadvantage in terms of accounting profitability, risk and economic profitability compared to other industries.Design/methodology/approachFirm-level financial accounting and market data from 2010 to 2019 were utilized to construct financial metrics for publicly traded SUFs, agribusinesses and general US firms. These financial metrics were analyzed to determine how SUFs compare to their agribusiness peer group and general US companies. The comprehensive financial analysis in this study covers: (1) accounting profit rates, (2) drivers of profitability, (3) economic profit rates, (4) trend analysis and (5) peer comparisons. Quantile regression analysis and Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney statistics are employed for statistical comparisons.FindingsRegarding various profitability and risk measures, SUFs outperform their agribusiness peers and the general benchmark of all US firms in terms of accounting profit rates, risk levels and economic profit rates. Furthermore, compared to other US industries using the 17 French and Fama classifications, SUFs have the highest return on investment and economic profit rate―measured by the Economic Value Added® margin―and the second-lowest opportunity cost of capital, measured by the weighted average cost of capital.Originality/valueThis study finds nothing to suggest that the US sugar program hinders the financial success of SUFs, contrary to recent claims by sugar-using firms. Notably in this analysis is the evaluation of economic profit rates and a series of robustness techniques.

查看原文本刊更多论文

与其他农业综合企业相比，食糖公司的财务表现如何?会计和经济利润率分析

目的:美国糖业计划保护国内糖农不受高额补贴的全球食糖无限制进口的影响。食糖公司(suf)批评该计划导致美国食糖价格高于世界食糖价格。本研究考察了公开交易的suf的财务绩效，以确定与其他行业相比，它们在会计盈利能力、风险和经济盈利能力方面是否处于经济劣势。设计/方法/方法利用公司层面的财务会计和2010年至2019年的市场数据，为上市的suf、农业综合企业和一般美国公司构建财务指标。对这些财务指标进行了分析，以确定suf与农业综合企业同行和一般美国公司的比较。本研究的综合财务分析包括:(1)会计利润率;(2)盈利能力驱动因素;(3)经济利润率;(4)趋势分析;(5)同业比较。采用分位数回归分析和Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney统计进行统计比较。关于各种盈利能力和风险措施，suf在会计利润率，风险水平和经济利润率方面优于其农业综合企业同行和所有美国公司的一般基准。此外，与使用17个法国和Fama分类的其他美国行业相比，suf具有最高的投资回报率和经济利润率(以经济增加值®利润率衡量)和第二低的资本机会成本(以加权平均资本成本衡量)。原创性/价值这项研究没有发现任何迹象表明美国的糖计划阻碍了suf的经济成功，这与最近使用糖的公司的说法相反。值得注意的是，在这个分析是经济利润率的评估和一系列的稳健性技术。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Agricultural Finance Review AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

18.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Agricultural Finance Review provides a rigorous forum for the publication of theory and empirical work related solely to issues in agricultural and agribusiness finance. Contributions come from academic and industry experts across the world and address a wide range of topics including: Agricultural finance, Agricultural policy related to agricultural finance and risk issues, Agricultural lending and credit issues, Farm credit, Businesses and financial risks affecting agriculture and agribusiness, Agricultural policies affecting farm or agribusiness risks and profitability, Risk management strategies including the use of futures and options, Rural credit in developing economies, Microfinance and microcredit applied to agriculture and rural development, Financial efficiency, Agriculture insurance and reinsurance. Agricultural Finance Review is committed to research addressing (1) factors affecting or influencing the financing of agriculture and agribusiness in both developed and developing nations; (2) the broadest aspect of risk assessment and risk management strategies affecting agriculture; and (3) government policies affecting farm profitability, liquidity, and access to credit.