This paper analyzes Target Corporation's financial health from 2004 to 2006 using three key metrics — working capital, current ratio, and asset turnover — and benchmarks the results against Walmart. The analysis finds that while Target's working capital and current ratio were inconsistent across the period, its asset turnover improved steadily. However, all three measures trail Walmart's figures significantly. The paper concludes that although Target is a fundamentally sound company, Walmart presents a superior investment opportunity based on consistently stronger financial ratios across the same period.
Working capital — defined as current assets minus current liabilities — is a fundamental measure of a company's short-term financial health. Target's working capital for the three years under review was as follows: in 2004 it was $4,638 million; in 2005 it was $13,922 − $8,220 = $5,702 million; and in 2006 it was $14,405 − $9,588 = $4,817 million. These figures indicate that Target's working capital totals were inconsistent across the period, rising sharply in 2005 before falling back in 2006.
Overall, Target is a healthy company. It has strong liquidity and its operations indicate good efficiency that is improving over time. These characteristics make Target a reasonable investment candidate. However, it is important to consider the investment alternatives — in particular, companies that are close competitors. A comparable company for Target is Walmart. Walmart's working capital is much larger in absolute terms, though this difference is largely a function of the companies' different sizes and is therefore not directly comparable across the two firms.
The current ratio, which divides current assets by current liabilities, is a better measure for comparing firms of different sizes. Target's current ratios were as follows: 2004: 1.55; 2005: 13,922 ÷ 8,220 = 1.69; 2006: 14,405 ÷ 9,588 = 1.50. These results were inconsistent across the three-year window.
Walmart's current ratios for 2004, 2005, and 2006 were 1.70, 1.69, and 1.62, respectively. While Walmart's ratio declined over the period, it was generally stronger than Target's. Target's current ratio was the weaker of the two in most years, suggesting that Walmart maintained somewhat better short-term liquidity throughout the period.
Asset turnover measures how efficiently a company uses its assets to generate revenue. Target's asset turnover improved steadily over the three years: 2004: $42,025 ÷ $29,841.5 = 1.41; 2005: $46,839 ÷ $31,854.5 = 1.47; 2006: $52,620 ÷ $33,644 = 1.56.
Walmart's asset turnover figures over the same period were considerably higher, though declining: 2004: $256,329 ÷ $99,152.5 = 2.58; 2005: $281,488 ÷ $112,979.5 = 2.49; 2006: $308,945 ÷ $129,170.5 = 2.39. Target's figures showed improvement across all three years, but remained well below Walmart's. Thus, even though Walmart's numbers were declining, they remained substantially stronger than Target's throughout the period.
"Final verdict favoring Walmart over Target"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.