Financial-Management WGU Financial Management VBC1 Questions and Answers

Asset tangibility directly affects a firm’s ability to obtain debt financing because lenders prefer collateral-backed loans. Firms with higher tangible assets face lower borrowing constraints and typically carry higher leverage. This relationship is well documented in capital structure research and financial management textbooks. Tangible assets reduce credit risk and expected losses in default, allowing firms to raise debt more easily and at lower cost. Option B correctly captures this core capital structure relationship.

This question applies the Gordon growth (constant growth dividend discount) model, which values a stock as the present value of an infinite stream of dividends growing at a constant rate. The model assumes that dividends grow steadily and that the required rate of return exceeds the growth rate, ensuring a finite value. The formula is:

Stock Value = D₁ ÷ (r − g),

where D₁ is the dividend expected next year, r is the required rate of return, and g is the growth rate. If the current dividend is $5, the next dividend equals $5 × (1 + 0.03) = $5.15. Substituting into the formula gives:

$5.15 ÷ (0.09 − 0.03) = $5.15 ÷ 0.06 = $85.83.

This valuation approach is commonly used for mature firms with stable dividend policies and predictable growth. Financial managers and analysts rely on this model to estimate intrinsic stock value and assess whether a stock is overvalued or undervalued relative to its market price.

The firm’s overarching financial objective is typically framed as maximizing long-term shareholder value, not just short-term profits. Actions that reduce environmental harm can support this objective by lowering the probability of costly future liabilities (fines, cleanup costs, lawsuits), reducing regulatory risk, and protecting the firm’s “license to operate” granted by the community and government. In financial management terms, managers consider not only immediate cash outflows (the pollution-control investment) but also the present value of avoided future cash outflows and the stability of future cash inflows. A public hearing also reflects stakeholder orientation: communities, regulators, customers, and employees affect the firm’s risk profile and operating continuity. Protecting the river can strengthen corporate reputation, reduce political and legal pressure, and improve long-run competitive position—all of which can raise the expected future free cash flows or lower the firm’s perceived risk (and therefore its required return). Option C best captures the standard finance view that ethical and socially responsible decisions can align with value maximization when they manage risk and support sustainable, long-term performance.

No single model perfectly estimates the cost of common equity under all conditions. CAPM focuses on systematic risk, the Gordon growth model emphasizes dividends and growth, and other approaches may rely on market comparables. Each method has strengths and weaknesses depending on firm characteristics and market conditions. Financial management best practice therefore recommends using multiple approaches and comparing results to arrive at a more reliable estimate. This triangulation reduces model-specific bias and highlights potential inconsistencies in assumptions. Managers then apply judgment to select a reasonable cost of equity that reflects risk, growth prospects, and investor expectations. Option A correctly reflects this practical, widely accepted approach.

When sales grow and cost of goods sold (COGS) is assumed to be a spontaneous account, COGS increases proportionally with sales. In the current year, Kretsmart’s gross margin ratio is calculated as Gross Margin ÷ Sales = $55 ÷ $100 =55%, while COGS represents45%of sales.

Sales are projected to grow by 10% per year for two years. Therefore, projected sales for Year 2 are:

$100 × 1.10 × 1.10 =$121.00.

Since COGS remains 45% of sales, projected COGS for Year 2 equals:

$121.00 × 0.45 =$54.45.

Gross margin is then calculated as:

$121.00 − $54.45 =$66.55.

Financial management forecasting techniques commonly use percentage-of-sales assumptions for spontaneous accounts such as COGS, inventory, and receivables. This method allows managers to project future income statements consistently with expected growth. Option B ($66.55) correctly reflects the projected gross margin for Year 2 under these assumptions.

Junk bonds, also known as high-yield bonds, are issued by firms with lower credit ratings and therefore higher default risk. To compensate investors for this additional risk, these bonds offer higher interest rates than investment-grade bonds. From a financial management and portfolio perspective, investors may include junk bonds to enhance portfolio returns, particularly when they believe default risk is overstated or when economic conditions are favorable. Junk bonds do not guarantee returns and are not backed by government guarantees, making options A and D incorrect. They also do not consistently outperform equities, especially during periods of financial stress. Option B accurately reflects the risk–return tradeoff that underpins investment decisions in capital market theory: higher expected returns are associated with higher risk.

Under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, senior executives—specifically the CEO and CFO—are required to certify that the company’s financial statements fairly present the firm’s financial condition and results of operations. This requirement increases executive accountability and ensures that financial reporting integrity is taken seriously at the highest level of management. False certification can result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Financial management texts emphasize that this provision aligns executive incentives with shareholder interests by making leaders directly responsible for financial transparency and accuracy. Option C correctly states this executive requirement.

Total asset turnover measures how efficiently a firm uses its assets to generate revenue. It is calculated as Sales ÷ Total Assets. For Whole Pine Inc., sales for 20X3 are $10,000 and total assets are $8,000. Dividing $10,000 by $8,000 yields a total asset turnover of 1.25. This means the company generates $1.25 in sales for every $1.00 invested in assets. From a financial management perspective, this ratio is a key indicator of operating efficiency and is commonly compared across firms within the same industry or across time. A higher turnover suggests more efficient use of assets, while a lower turnover may indicate underutilized capacity or inefficient asset deployment. Asset turnover is also a component of the DuPont analysis, linking operational efficiency to return on equity. Option B correctly reflects both the calculation and interpretation consistent with standard financial analysis practice.

Return on assets (ROA) measures how effectively a firm uses its assets to generate profits and is calculated as Net Income ÷ Total Assets. To find net income, the formula is rearranged:

Net Income = ROA × Total Assets.

With an ROA of 10% (0.10) and total assets of $500 million, net income equals $50 million. ROA is a critical profitability metric in financial statement analysis because it links income to the asset base, allowing comparisons across firms and industries regardless of size. A higher ROA indicates more efficient asset utilization. Option C correctly applies the ROA formula and reflects standard financial analysis practice.

The data show that Freedom Rock Bicycles has gross margins comparable to or slightly above the industry but significantly lower operating margins. This indicates that the problem is not production efficiency or cost of goods sold, but rather operating expenses such as selling, general, and administrative costs or fixed overhead. Additionally, asset turnover is roughly in line with industry averages, suggesting that asset utilization is not the primary issue. From a financial management perspective, when gross margin is healthy but operating margin lags, the logical focus is on controlling non-production costs and evaluating fixed cost structures. Reducing unnecessary overhead, improving operating efficiency, or restructuring fixed expenses can directly improve operating margin and overall profitability. Option C best reflects this targeted, ratio-driven recommendation. The other options either misdiagnose the problem or focus on areas already performing adequately relative to peers.

Projected sales for 20X4 equal $500,000 × 1.20 = $600,000. With the inventory-to-sales ratio expected to remain constant at 25%, projected inventory equals 25% of projected sales. Thus, inventory = 0.25 × $600,000 = $150,000. This approach reflects common financial planning techniques where balance sheet items are forecast using stable ratios tied to sales growth. Such pro forma analysis helps managers anticipate future asset needs and financing requirements. Option D correctly applies the inventory-to-sales ratio to projected sales.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is a self-regulatory organization responsible for overseeing brokerage firms and registered securities representatives in the United States. Its primary mission is to protect investors and ensure market integrity by enforcing rules governing ethical conduct, disclosure, trading practices, and licensing. FINRA operates under the oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), creating a regulatory structure that combines federal authority with industry expertise. Unlike the FDIC, FINRA does not insure deposits, and unlike the Federal Reserve, it does not manage monetary policy or issue currency. Financial management texts emphasize FINRA’s role in supervising broker-dealers, administering qualification exams, and resolving disputes through arbitration and mediation. Option A correctly identifies FINRA’s core responsibility.

A major advantage of the Gordon growth model is that it explicitly incorporates expectations about future dividend growth. By linking the stock’s value to anticipated dividends and their growth rate, the model aligns valuation with investors’ forward-looking expectations rather than solely historical data. This forward-looking nature is consistent with modern financial management principles, which emphasize expected future cash flows as the primary driver of value. Unlike CAPM, which focuses on risk via beta, the Gordon growth model directly reflects dividend policy and growth prospects. For mature firms with stable growth, this provides a practical and intuitive estimate of the cost of equity. Option C correctly identifies this strength of the model.

The payback period measures how long it takes for a project’s cumulative cash inflows to recover the initial investment. It is a simple capital budgeting technique commonly used as a preliminary screening tool. Although it does not account for the time value of money or cash flows beyond the cutoff period, it is useful for assessing liquidity and risk exposure.

Cumulative cash flows are calculated as follows:

End of Year 1: $125,000

End of Year 2: $250,000

End of Year 3: $390,000

End of Year 4: $530,000

The initial investment of $410,000 is recovered sometime during Year 4. Because the question instructs to round up, the payback period is reported as 4 years. Financial management textbooks emphasize that while payback should not be used alone to accept or reject projects, it provides insight into how quickly invested capital is recovered, which is especially relevant for projects with uncertainty or liquidity constraints.