【摘要】：BE公司作為AG銀行的重要客戶，其貸前盡職報(bào)告存在著對(duì)企業(yè)財(cái)務(wù)狀況闡述不準(zhǔn)確，財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)欠準(zhǔn)確，財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)運(yùn)用缺乏合理性，表達(dá)方式上存在簡(jiǎn)單羅列，沒(méi)有企業(yè)財(cái)務(wù)分析診斷，企業(yè)非財(cái)務(wù)因素分析部分陳述內(nèi)容欠缺邏輯性、內(nèi)容不夠全面，，整個(gè)報(bào)告最后沒(méi)有明確的初步信貸結(jié)論，原報(bào)告只拘于形式未能切實(shí)為信用審批的準(zhǔn)確判斷提供有力依據(jù)。本文從銀行視角出發(fā)，對(duì)BE企業(yè)的貸前盡職報(bào)告進(jìn)行改進(jìn)，力爭(zhēng)形成AG銀行對(duì)企業(yè)貸前盡職報(bào)告模板，切實(shí)為AG銀行提供企業(yè)貸款審批決策的重要依據(jù)。 本文研究采用了訪談方式調(diào)查、了解BE公司貸前盡職調(diào)查報(bào)告的現(xiàn)狀，現(xiàn)狀主要存在六個(gè)主要問(wèn)題：第一，財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)使用方面，指標(biāo)使用前沒(méi)有針對(duì)性說(shuō)明，沒(méi)有闡明所運(yùn)用財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)反映企業(yè)的什么財(cái)務(wù)狀況，財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)只是堆砌，沒(méi)有針對(duì)性。第二，報(bào)告的格式方面，原報(bào)告中營(yíng)運(yùn)能力分析與償債能力及盈利能力分析的數(shù)據(jù)是“同級(jí)”并列的。第三，財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)選擇方面，對(duì)于長(zhǎng)短期貸款考查的財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)欠合理。償債能力指標(biāo)使用有反映長(zhǎng)期償債能力的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債率與反映短期償債能力的流動(dòng)比與速動(dòng)比，兩者一起運(yùn)用缺乏關(guān)聯(lián)性。原報(bào)告只分析資產(chǎn)負(fù)債率沒(méi)有分析利潤(rùn)保障倍數(shù)，只分析靜態(tài)償債能力流動(dòng)比與速動(dòng)比，沒(méi)有分析動(dòng)態(tài)周期。第四，報(bào)告表達(dá)方式方面：原報(bào)告沒(méi)有進(jìn)行會(huì)計(jì)分析，報(bào)告中只進(jìn)行合并財(cái)務(wù)簡(jiǎn)表的列舉與主要會(huì)計(jì)科目變化的重復(fù)羅列，報(bào)告中沒(méi)有企業(yè)的財(cái)務(wù)診斷結(jié)論分析。第五，報(bào)告的非財(cái)務(wù)內(nèi)容方面，原報(bào)告所陳述企業(yè)的非財(cái)務(wù)要素欠缺不夠全面，使報(bào)告閱讀者難以全面掌握企業(yè)的信息要素。第六，報(bào)告非財(cái)務(wù)分析方面，原報(bào)告分析的非財(cái)務(wù)因素部分存在層次不清晰、邏輯混亂、內(nèi)容主次不分等問(wèn)題。 針對(duì)BE公司貸前盡職調(diào)查報(bào)告存在的缺陷，主要從財(cái)務(wù)因素分析方面和非財(cái)務(wù)因素分析方面進(jìn)行了分析與改進(jìn)。財(cái)務(wù)因素分析方面主要從企業(yè)資產(chǎn)質(zhì)量情況分析方面、“獲利能力”分析方面、成長(zhǎng)能力分析方面、現(xiàn)金流分析方面進(jìn)行改進(jìn)；非財(cái)務(wù)因素分析方面主要從企業(yè)管理基本情況分析方面、行業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分析方面、經(jīng)營(yíng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分析方面、資信分析方面、擔(dān)保情況分析方面進(jìn)行改進(jìn)。改進(jìn)后的報(bào)告內(nèi)達(dá)到貸前盡職調(diào)查報(bào)告應(yīng)當(dāng)具備的真實(shí)性、客觀性、邏輯性、全面性的基本特性。本文運(yùn)用問(wèn)卷調(diào)查方法對(duì)改進(jìn)前后的貸前盡職調(diào)查報(bào)告進(jìn)行了比較分析，調(diào)查結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)，改進(jìn)后的企業(yè)貸前盡職調(diào)查報(bào)告能真實(shí)反映企業(yè)的生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)現(xiàn)狀及發(fā)展情況，能客觀披露企業(yè)存在或隱藏的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)點(diǎn)，切實(shí)達(dá)到為信用貸款審查的準(zhǔn)確判斷提供重要依據(jù)的目的。
[Abstract]:BE Company, as an important customer of AG Bank, has some problems in its pre-credit due diligence reports, such as inaccuracy of financial situation, inaccurate financial data, lack of rationality in the application of financial indicators, and simple listing of expression methods. Without the financial analysis and diagnosis of the enterprise, the non-financial factor analysis part of the enterprise is not logical and comprehensive enough. At the end of the whole report, there is no clear preliminary credit conclusion. The original report only in the form of failure to provide an effective basis for the accurate judgment of credit approval. From the perspective of bank, this paper improves the pre-credit due diligence report of BE enterprise, and tries to form the template of AG bank's pre-credit due diligence report, which can provide the important basis for enterprise loan approval decision for AG bank. This paper adopts interview to investigate the current situation of BE's pre-loan due diligence report. There are six main problems in the present situation: first, the use of financial indicators, indicators before the use of no targeted explanation, Financial indicators are not used to reflect the financial situation of the enterprise, financial indicators are stacked, not targeted. Second, the format of the report, the original report analysis of operating capacity and solvency and profitability analysis of the data is "at the same level" juxtaposed. Third, the selection of financial indicators, for short-term loan examination of the financial indicators are unreasonable. There is a lack of correlation between the liquidity ratio and the quick ratio of assets and liabilities which reflect the long-term solvency and the short-term solvency. The original report only analyzed the asset-liability ratio, not the profit guarantee multiple, but also the static solvency flow ratio and the fast moving ratio, and did not analyze the dynamic cycle. Fourth, the expression of the report: the original report did not carry out accounting analysis, the report only listed the consolidated financial summary statement and repeated list of changes in the main accounting accounts, the report did not have the financial diagnosis of the analysis of the enterprise. Fifth, the non-financial content of the report, the original report stated that the non-financial elements of the enterprise is not comprehensive enough, so it is difficult for the readers of the report to grasp the information elements of the enterprise. Sixthly, the non-financial factors of the original report are not clear, the logic is confused, and the content is not divided into the main and the secondary. Aiming at the defects of BE's due diligence report before loan, this paper analyzes and improves the financial factor analysis and non-financial factor analysis. Financial factor analysis mainly from enterprise asset quality analysis, "profitability" analysis, growth ability analysis, cash flow analysis to improve; The analysis of non-financial factors mainly includes basic situation analysis of enterprise management, industry risk analysis, management risk analysis, credit analysis and guarantee situation analysis. The improved report should meet the basic characteristics of truthfulness, objectivity, logicality and comprehensiveness of the pre-credit due diligence report. This paper makes a comparative analysis of the pre-loan due diligence report before and after the improvement by using the method of questionnaire. The results show that the improved pre-loan due diligence report can truly reflect the present situation and development of the enterprise's production and operation. It can objectively disclose the risk points that exist or hide in the enterprise, so as to provide an important basis for the accurate judgment of credit loan examination.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華南理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：F275;F830.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 邢小娜;;淺析非財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)在財(cái)務(wù)分析中的應(yīng)用[J];財(cái)經(jīng)界(學(xué)術(shù)版);2009年07期

2 金范哲;;淺析國(guó)有商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理問(wèn)題[J];財(cái)經(jīng)界(學(xué)術(shù)版);2010年02期

3 張宇;;我國(guó)商業(yè)銀行信用評(píng)估的行為決策框架與錨定效應(yīng)分析[J];財(cái)經(jīng)科學(xué);2011年05期

4 邵希娟;羅簫娜;;財(cái)務(wù)分析指標(biāo)層級(jí)歸屬及其相對(duì)性探討[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2009年23期

5 閆鈺煒;;信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理中財(cái)務(wù)預(yù)警模型應(yīng)用研究[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2011年05期

6 邵希娟;田洪紅;;試析杜邦分析法的改進(jìn)與應(yīng)用[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2007年36期

7 邵希娟;羅簫娜;;談財(cái)務(wù)分析指標(biāo)的運(yùn)用[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2008年31期

8 劉薇;;我國(guó)商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)防范對(duì)策[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2011年06期

9 錢(qián)光明;陳德艷;;非財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)對(duì)我國(guó)上市公司財(cái)務(wù)預(yù)警的影響[J];遼寧石油化工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年02期

10 趙曦;;對(duì)商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理中貸前控制的研究[J];北方經(jīng)貿(mào);2010年10期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 荀昱;我國(guó)商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)識(shí)別研究[D];北京林業(yè)大學(xué);2005年

2 楊劍濤;商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的貸前控制[D];對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2006年

3 段素芳;商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理中的非財(cái)務(wù)因素分析[D];對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2007年

4 張新杰;商業(yè)銀行對(duì)集團(tuán)背景下的上市公司的信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)識(shí)別與防范[D];青島科技大學(xué);2008年

5 劉莎莎;我國(guó)商業(yè)銀行信貸風(fēng)險(xiǎn)識(shí)別和預(yù)警研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：2343539