Worked example · EX:financial-statement-performance-and-returns/beacon-harbor-dupont-comparison

Trace an ROE difference to leverage with DuPont analysis

Extend equal ROA into different ROE by reconciling average positions, equity multipliers, and the three step identity.

Updated Sep 10, 2026 Review due Nov 7, 2026
On this page
  1. Preserve the equal-ROA starting point
  2. Compute and cross-check leverage
  3. Recompose ROE
  4. Run a separately defined debt screen
  5. Interpretation
  6. Common wrong paths
Worked-example setupScope and assumptions
  • Both opening and ending positions satisfy the accounting equation and use aligned definitions.
  • Total equity is positive; preferred equity and noncontrolling interests are excluded.
  • Liabilities are not relabeled debt; the packet does not supply financing cost, maturity, collateral, or covenant data.
  • A separate teaching variant stipulates $80,000 of Beacon ending debt and $100,000 of Harbor ending debt solely to demonstrate a declared debt-to-total-assets definition.
Period
Year 5 ended December 31
Units
Whole USD; ratios in decimal form, percentages, or times as labeled
Rounding
Full precision internally; percentages and multipliers displayed to two decimals

Preserve the equal-ROA starting point

Beacon and Harbor each report 12% ROA. Any ROE difference must therefore enter through the average-equity relationship under the three-step identity.

Compute and cross-check leverage

Measure Beacon Harbor
Average assets $200,000 $200,000
Average liabilities $100,000 $120,000
Average equity $100,000 $80,000
Equity multiplier 2.00 2.50
Average liabilities ÷ equity 1.00 1.50

The accounting equation supplies an independent check:

equity multiplier = 1 + average liabilities / average equity
Beacon: 2.00 = 1 + 1.00
Harbor: 2.50 = 1 + 1.50

The liabilities-to-equity term is deliberately not called debt-to-equity. The packet contains total liabilities, not a defined debt subtotal.

Recompose ROE

Beacon: 0.10 margin × 1.20 turnover × 2.00 multiplier = 0.24 = 24% ROE
Harbor: 0.08 margin × 1.50 turnover × 2.50 multiplier = 0.30 = 30% ROE

Writing the margin as a decimal makes the scale control visible; multiplying the whole number 10 instead of 0.10 would overstate Beacon's result by 100.

Direct calculations agree: $24,000 ÷ $100,000 = 24% for Beacon and $24,000 ÷ $80,000 = 30% for Harbor.

Run a separately defined debt screen

The teaching variant supplies $80,000 of Beacon ending debt and $100,000 of Harbor ending debt. With same-date ending assets, the declared screens are:

Beacon: $80,000 debt / $220,000 assets = 36.36%
Harbor: $100,000 debt / $210,000 assets = 47.62%

Neither numerator is inferred from total liabilities. The ratio describes a date-specific financing share under the supplied debt definition; it does not show maturity, collateral, covenant headroom, cash generation, or repayment capacity. The equity multiplier continues to use average total assets and average total equity, so the two leverage measures must not be substituted for one another.

Interpretation

Harbor's six-percentage-point ROE advantage is leverage amplification in this bounded comparison, not higher ROA. A finance recommendation would require liability composition, interest cost, maturity, liquidity, covenant, collateral, and downside evidence. An accounting review should also reconcile both equity rollforwards and confirm entity scope.

Leverage can amplify positive asset return. It can also amplify losses. The packet contains no forecast or stress case, so “higher ROE” is not a risk- adjusted conclusion.

Common wrong paths

  • Attribute 30% ROE to operations alone: ROA is equal; the multiplier creates the difference.
  • Call every liability debt: use the label supported by the source data.
  • Treat three components as independent controls: operational and financing choices can affect one another across periods.

Use the separate leverage question to test the interpretation with the same controlled source packet.

Verified calculation · performance return analysis

The curriculum loader recomputed this example before it entered the site build. Expand any structured input to inspect the stated facts.

entities
2 fields
Inspect data
{
  "beacon": {
    "defined_debt_at_end": 80000,
    "ending": {
      "total_assets": 220000,
      "total_equity": 110000,
      "total_liabilities": 110000
    },
    "net_income": 24000,
    "net_sales": 240000,
    "opening": {
      "total_assets": 180000,
      "total_equity": 90000,
      "total_liabilities": 90000
    },
    "reported_operating_cash_flow": 30000
  },
  "harbor": {
    "defined_debt_at_end": 100000,
    "ending": {
      "total_assets": 210000,
      "total_equity": 85000,
      "total_liabilities": 125000
    },
    "net_income": 24000,
    "net_sales": 300000,
    "opening": {
      "total_assets": 190000,
      "total_equity": 75000,
      "total_liabilities": 115000
    },
    "reported_operating_cash_flow": 18000
  }
}

Recomputed result

Values recomputed by the curriculum loader
MeasureValue
beacon average liabilities to equity1
beacon debt to total assets0.3636
beacon dupont return on equity0.24
beacon equity multiplier2
beacon leverage identity difference0
beacon return on equity0.24
beacon roe identity difference0
harbor average liabilities to equity1.5
harbor debt to total assets0.4762
harbor dupont return on equity0.3
harbor equity multiplier2.5
harbor leverage identity difference0
harbor return on equity0.3
harbor roe identity difference0