It’s often useful to understand how a company makes financing decisions, and where funds for investment originate. While financing decisions may not be a good indicator of likely growth or profit, they may be an effective indicator of company health. One way to segment this analysis is Internal funds Net equity issues Net borrowing Gather the data The data for this type of analysis is available on http://finance.yahoo.com. After searching for your desired company, click “Cash Flow” under “Financials”. Using that I found the cash flow details for Google and Microsoft. Net borrowing is listed directly. Net equity issues are listed as “Sale Purchase of Stock”. In order to get the amount of investment that came from internal funds (plowback), I take the “Total Cash Flows From Investing Activities” and subtract away Dividends, Sale Purchase of Stock and Net Borrowings. I can then get the proportions by dividing each of these by the total investing amount. I used the standard three years shown on the cash flow statement for this analysis. Microsoft funding sources Period Ending 29-Jun-10 29-Jun-11 29-Jun-12 Internal funds -18% 43% 62% Net equity issues 79% 62% 13% Net borrowing -2% -41% 0% Google funding sources Period Ending 30-Dec-10 30-Dec-11 30-Dec-12 Internal funds 125% 104% 110% Net equity issues 8% 0% 0% Net borrowing -32% -4% -10%   Review Based on the last three years it is observed that Microsoft much more frequently resorts to issuing stock and borrowing than Google. Also, the majority of the investment made by Google is from internal funds, even to the extent of investing savings from previous periods. They even purchased back some stock in one period to achieve a net positive equity issue. Here’s the original spreadsheet if you want to see how I arrived at the numbers above: Sources of funds for Google and...

According to the morningstar website, both Microsoft and Google have high bond ratings, with Microsoft slightly higher. Microsoft Google Morningstar Credit Rating AAA AA Amt Outstanding $16.9 Bil $3.0 Bil Debt/Assets 10.58% 5.31% Based on the ratings, the bond market appears to favor more experienced borrowers, since from a debt load perspective, Google has better standing. Google’s entire bond issue is encompassed in just three bonds with the longest maturation in 2021. It’s also interesting that all three mature on May 19. Duration Duration is calculated the weighted average of the present values of all future cash flows. It can be represented by the following equation (ref), where PV is the present value.   Calculations like this are easily done in Excel. For this exercise I chose bonds that mature in 2016 and payout semi-annually for both Google and Microsoft. Microsoft bond duration Microsoft Coupn 2.500% Par $1,000.00 Maturity 2/8/2016 Frequency semi-annual Discount rate 2.38% 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 8/8/2013 2/8/2014 8/8/2014 2/8/2015 8/8/2015 2/8/2016 Payment $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 $1,025.00 PV(Ct) $24.42 $23.85 $23.30 $22.76 $22.23 $890.09 $1,006.64 PV(Ct)/PV 0.0243 0.0237 0.0231 0.0226 0.0221 0.8842 Duration 0.0121 0.0237 0.0347 0.0452 0.0552 2.6527 2.8236 Google bond duration Google Coupon 2.125% Par $1,000.00 Maturity 5/19/2016 Frequency semi-annual Discount rate 2.04% 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 11/19/2013 5/19/2014 11/19/2014 5/19/2015 11/19/2015 5/19/2016 Payment $21.25 $21.25 $21.25 $21.25 $21.25 $1,021.25 PV(Ct) $20.83 $20.41 $20.00 $19.60 $19.21 $904.71 $1,004.75 PV(Ct)/PV 0.0207 0.0203 0.0199 0.0195 0.0191 0.9004 0.0104 0.0203 0.0299 0.0390 0.0478 2.7013 2.8486 Based on the data above, the duration for the Google bond is higher than for the Microsoft bond, however the difference is slight. You can download the original spreadsheet...