Do My Liberty ACCT 370 Course for Me

Part 1 starts the project in week one: the company's background, its industry and three years of balance sheets, income statements and cash flow statements for it and its competitors, laid out on separate tabs.

Part 2 in week three adds ratio analysis across liquidity, solvency, profitability and efficiency, with each ratio computed by a formula that reads from the Part 1 tabs and a short note on which company leads.

Part 3 in week five adds horizontal analysis, trends within each company over time, and vertical analysis, each line as a share of revenue or assets, which makes companies of different sizes comparable.

Part 4 in week seven adds projected statements for the chosen company, driven by an assumptions tab based on its history and management's guidance.

Week eight's report gathers it all into a judgment, while the lone group discussion sits near the start.

Each workbook part is worth 50 points, the report 200 and the forum 65 in total.

Read as a sequence, the four parts move from description to judgment: what the company reported, how it compares, how it is changing and where it is heading.

Because each part builds on the one before, a mistake in Part 1, such as a misread line item, would carry through every ratio and projection, which is why the first part gets the most careful checking.

The work begins with the company. A few candidates with clear rivals and complete filings are proposed, you email your instructor for approval, and the approved company's 10-K statements are downloaded for three years along with those of two or three competitors.

Before any ratio is computed, the competitors' statements are standardized: the same line items, in the same order, on every tab. That one step is what makes the later comparisons honest.

Ratios, trends and common-size figures are then built with formulas, never typed values, and each group of results gets a one-line comment, for instance that the company's inventory turns faster than its rival's because of a different store format.

Projections sit on their own tab, with each assumption, revenue growth, margins, capital spending, written out and tied to the history from Part 3.

The report leads with the conclusion and proves it with the workbook, adding market research from reputable sources.

You receive each part in time to read it before uploading.

Where the competitors report different fiscal year ends, the statements are aligned and the difference is noted, so ratios compare like periods.

An analyst does the ACCT 370 coursework, usually someone from equity or credit research, corporate financial planning or audit, often with CFA study or a CPA.

They build comparison workbooks every week, which is why the formulas are clean and the tabs are easy to follow.

Formulas and claims get a second check, and a single analyst covers the whole project so report and workbook agree.

Your details stay with the coordinator. Before an exam, a short explanation of any chapter, such as how to adjust for an operating lease or read a deferred tax asset, can be sent.

Their models have been reviewed by portfolio managers and credit committees, which trains a habit of labeling every input and source.

They also keep a log of every source used, so the report's references match the figures in the workbook exactly.

Choosing a company with poor data is the most expensive mistake, because every later part depends on it.

Workbooks lose points when ratios are typed rather than calculated, when competitors' statements are not standardized, or when the numbers come without comment.

Projections lose points when assumptions are not stated or bear no relation to the company's past.

The forum loses points when replies are short; this course asks for long replies with peer-reviewed sources.

The report loses points when it walks through every ratio before saying anything, instead of leading with a conclusion.

Most students run short of time in the closing week.

Vertical analysis also confuses students who compare raw dollars across companies of different sizes, which is exactly what common-size statements are meant to avoid.

The forum's long replies also need peer-reviewed sources, which takes more searching than students expect.

Reports also slip when they ignore the cash flow statement, even though it is often where weak earnings quality shows first.

Workbook parts arrive several days before their deadlines in weeks one, three, five and seven, each building on the last.

Your thread is ready early in week two; replies wait for classmates.

Expect the report before the final exam week ends.

The report is the largest line, the four workbook parts together the next, and the forum the smallest; a mid-term order covers only what remains, built on your submitted parts.

Joining after Part 1 is common; send the approved company and the submitted workbook, and the next part picks up from there.

Ordering the report by week six gives it time for market research and a careful second read.

The forum can be ordered on its own if you want to keep the project, since it is a single exchange early in the term.