In perhaps one of the most rigorous academic research projects ever undertaken to test the validity and effectiveness of a wide universe of financial metrics, Carton and Hofer, 2006 make the following concluding remark, “Very few non-public companies monitor the change in their Altman’s Z-score. However, the findings of this research indicate that this is the single most powerful measure for monitoring shareholder returns for both annual and three year time frames. Since this is a survival measure that is also important to creditors, management should pay particular attention to this financial performance metric”. Indeed, it only makes sense that this important measure once again outperforms every metric that it is compared against for the Z-score touches nearly every critical dimension of financial performance. While leveraging the benefits of this important metric makes perfect sense, it is the notion of capturing its change that is most meaningful. This article examines the challenges associated with capturing change and puts forth one solution to help make the process of measuring change useful from a practical perspective.
This paper offers a fresh perspective from which to gauge the ongoing viability of a firm. While investors, lending institutions and trade creditors share common concern with respect to risk, they differ according to both the time horizon and their interest in the ongoing viability of the firm. Using a synthetic credit score and the time tested Altman’s Z-score, this paper presents both measures along a simple X, Y axis plot that aims to provide a perspective of risk that is both straightforward and intuitive.
This article suggests that the time tested Altman Z-score, originally designed to predict corporate default represents considerable value when used as a corporate performance metric if measured continuously as opposed to one moment in time. Indeed, one could reason that if the measure has merit as a predictor of default, then it only make sense to manage the underlying drivers in order to optimize the ongoing viability of the firm. Used in this manner, this article argues that the Z-score should be considered more often in the corporate performance management setting. In addition, the article highlights the significance of the measure when crafting loan covenants to compliment other measures that are perhaps shorter term in nature. A generic framework is provided that illustrates the relationship of underlying drivers that contribute to the score, representing at least one approach to managing firm viability as a component of corporate strategy.
