| Category | Assignment | Subject | Financial |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Newcastle University | Module Title | NBS8647 Financial Analysis and Markets |
| This Programme: | MSc in Management and MSc in International Business |
| Module Code: | NBS8647 |
| Module Title: | Financial Analysis and Markets |
| Distributed on: | 23 September 2025 |
| Submission Time and Date: | To be submitted online via the NBS8647 Canvas module page in the ‘Assignments’ section (via Turnitin) by 12 noon (12.00pm) Monday 8th December 2025 |
| Word Limit: | Analyst Report: 2,000 words (+ or – 10%) |
| Weighting | 100% of the grade for the unit. |
|
Submission of Assessment |
Via Turnitin on the module Canvas site using MS Word or PDF document format for the report and MS Excel for the workings submission file. You should use font size 10 – 12 and a standard font. For example, Times New Roman, Arial, or Calibri are all acceptable. |
You are required to complete one summative assessment for this unit, which is an analyst report of 2,000 words (+ or – 10%) and a supporting working data file.
Details of the requirements are as follows:
You are a financial analyst and must produce a report on a listed company of your choice (within the restrictions described below) that covers a range of issues related to the macroeconomic environment and financial conditions in which the company is operating. The purpose of the report is to make a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold an investment in your chosen company, based on these issues explored. Please refer to the required content section for further details.
The word limit does not include the title page, table of contents, list of tables, list of figures, references and appendices.
The report should be submitted in MS Word or PDF Format, and use a standard format such as Times New Roman, Arial, or Calibri using a font size of between 10 and 12.
The report will count for 85% of the grade for this assignment in total.
Workings data file submission – 15% of grade
You should include the workings for any financial ratio analysis and macroeconomic data in a file which should be submitted separately from your main report in Microsoft Excel format.
The workings data file will count for 15% of the total grade for this assignment, and will assess the quality, relevance, and validity of the data sources that you have used in the assignment. Further detail is included later in this brief on the requirements for this part of the assignment.
Rules for selecting your company for the assignment
Potential useful sources of information to select your company includes:
Struggling with your NBS8647 Assignment? Deadlines Are Near?
Request to Buy AnswerPart 1 of report – Perform a Critical evaluation of macroeconomic and industry environment (30% of grade)
In this section of the report, you should collect data on key macroeconomic data (e.g. GDP, inflation, interest rates, exchange rates, or other relevant economic variables) to critically evaluate the current macroeconomic environment for your company and how it has been impacted. You also should use this data and your learnings on the unit to make informed judgements about the future financial and macroeconomic environment and how this has (and will) impact your chosen company. Macroeconomic and relevant market data should be presented in tables or graphs where appropriate.
Part 2 of report - Critical analysis of financial performance (35% of grade)
In this section of the report, you should undertake an analysis of the financial statements for your chosen company over a 3-year period. Your analysis should incorporate a section on the segmental disclosures provided by your company, and there should be sections on relevant ratios including profitability, returns, liquidity and solvency. Your analysis should also compare your company performance to the competitor company you have selected, using tables or figures to present your data visually.
Part 3 of report - Summary of findings and recommendations on chosen company (10% of grade)
As a you are a financial analyst, you should include a recommendation if you would buy, sell or hold a medium to long-term investment in your chosen company based on your findings. You should summarise the key findings from the previous sections and express your recommendations and conclusions.
Presentation marks (quality of writing, structure, citations & referencing) (10% of grade)
This part of the grade relates to the overall quality of presentation, including the structure of the report, the quality of the written content and argument, accurate citations and referencing (in line with academic standards required by NUBS – see pages 8 and 9 of this assignment) and professional presentation of data in tables, and graphs. Note that a report would normally also include a short introduction and executive summary.
Workings submission marks (quality of sources, clear links to report outputs, & evidence of checking the accuracy/validity of data) (15% of grade)
You should submit a separate data workings file which shows the data and sources used in your report. This should include details of the sources used you have used to address Part 1 and Part 2 of your report (i.e. macroeconomic and company financial data). It should also include evidence that you have checked the validity of the data. For example, the checking of the accuracy of any ratios calculated and the source of the data should be clear. If using a database to source figures, you should demonstrate you have checked this data back to the financial statements.
Your workings should be submitted in MS Excel format or similar spreadsheet style software which is separate to the main report.
Note: in our lectures and seminars for the unit, we will use an Excel file to collect data for a UK listed company. You can use this file to submit the workings for your chosen company, or use your own file.
| Criteria | 0 - 29% |
30 – 39%
|
40 – 49%
|
50 – 59%
|
60 – 69%
|
70 – 100%
|
Mark |
|
Part 1 - Critical evaluation of macroeconomic and industry environment (30%)
|
Little or no use of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Current financial and macroeconomic environment not critically evaluated. Little or no predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment. |
Inadequate or little use of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Little critical evaluation of the current financial and macroeconomic environment Poorly informed predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment. |
Insufficient use of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Lack of critical evaluation of the current financial and macroeconomic environment Inadequate evidence of predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment. |
Satisfactory evidence of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Reasonable evidence of critical evaluation of the current financial and macroeconomic environment Satisfactory predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment. |
Good evidence of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Current financial and macroeconomic environment critically evaluated Well informed predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment. |
Very good evidence of relevant statistics, tables, and graphs. Current financial and macroeconomic environment thoroughly and critically evaluated. Very or exceptionally well informed predictions about the future financial and macroeconomic environment |
|
|
|
0-9 |
9-12 |
12-15 |
15-18 |
18-21 |
21-30 |
|
|
Part 2 - Critical analysis of financial performance (35%) |
Little or no use of financial ratios for selected company or comparator companies. Narratives from elsewhere in annual report and other sources not used throughout the report. Little or no evaluation of outputs. |
Poor use of financial ratios for selected company and lack of comparator information and ratios. Report lacking in use of narratives from elsewhere in annual report and does not use other sources. Poor evaluation of outputs with no synthesis or criticality. |
Use of financial ratios for selected company and/or comparator companies is insufficient. Lack of use of narratives from annual report and little or no use of other sources. Evaluation of outputs is inadequate and largely lacks synthesis and/or criticality. |
Satisfactory use of financial ratios for the selected company. Some good use of ratios for comparator companies, although not comprehensive. Narratives from annual report used reasonably with some (but limited) use of other sources. Reasonable evaluation of outputs but may lack some synthesis and/or criticality. |
Good use of financial ratios for the selected company and for comparator companies.
Effective use of narratives from annual report and good use of other sources. Evaluation and synthesis of outputs from analysis is good but may lack some criticality.
|
Very good or excellent use of financial ratios including for comparator companies.
Excellent use of narratives from annual report and excellent use of other sources – all effectively integrated throughout report. Critical evaluation and synthesis of outputs from analysis |
|
|
|
0-10 |
11-14 |
14-17 |
18-21 |
21-24 |
24-35 |
|
|
Part 3 - Summary of findings and conclusions (10%) |
Little or no evidence of findings, synthesis, conclusions or recommendations.
|
Summary of findings is substantively incomplete and lacks synthesis. Poor conclusions and/or recommendations and no logical flow to narrative. |
Summary of findings is unsatisfactory and/or incomplete. Little or no synthesis of findings. Inadequate conclusions and/or recommendations and lack of logical flow. |
Satisfactory summary of findings, likely to lack some or much synthesis. Reasonable conclusions and recommendations but may lack some logical flow. |
Good summary of findings, although could be more clearly linked to the report findings and synthesised more effectively. Good conclusions with some good recommendations supported logical arguments. |
Very good or excellent summary and synthesis of findings. Clear and logical conclusions and recommendations. Very good clear and logical conclusions and recommendations. |
|
|
|
0-3 |
3-4 |
4-5 |
5-6 |
6-7 |
7 - 10 |
|
|
Structure, presentation and appropriate Harvard referencing (10%) |
No attempt to structure or present the work appropriately, and/or writing very unclear No effective use of Harvard referencing anywhere in the document |
Very little attention paid to either presentation or structure of work, and/or writing unclear Limited use of Harvard referencing through much of the work/most of Harvard referencing is incorrectly applied |
Presentation or structure of work unsatisfactory, and/or writing could be significantly clarified/improved Harvard referencing is applied throughout but includes significant errors through the majority of the work. |
Satisfactory presentation and structure of work and/or satisfactory standard of writing Harvard referencing applied however multiple errors throughout the report
|
Good presentation and structure of work and/or good standard of writing Good use of Harvard style referencing throughout most of the document with several errors and incorrect errors
|
Very well or excellently presented and structured piece of work, and excellent standard of writin Highly accurate referencing using the required Harvard style throughout the document with very few errors
|
|
|
Clarity/accuracy of source workings submitted which support the analysis in report and evidence of checking financial and macroeconomic data validity/accuracy (15%) |
. No workings submitted which support the report outputs, use of unreliable sources, and/or no evidence of checking of accuracy of data |
Workings submitted but very unclear sources of data and very unclear calculations and/or unclear links to tables used in report, and little or no evidence of accuracy checking of data |
Workings submitted with some clear links to high quality sources but could be significantly improved and/or more checks of data accuracy data required |
Workings submitted which mostly link to higher quality sources and report outputs - with some evidence of accuracy checking of data |
Workings submitted with good links to sources and links clearly to report outputs - good evidence of accuracy checking of data |
Excellent workings submitted which show sources clearly and links clearly to the report outputs. High quality sources used consistently throughout, and evidence of thorough accuracy checking of data |
|
|
|
0-4 |
5-6 |
6-7 |
7-9 |
9-10 |
10-15 |
|
Hire Experts to solve This NBS8647 Assignment Before Deadline
Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized AssignmentStruggling with NBS8647 Financial Analysis and Markets Assignment? Get expert guidance from Financial Statement Analysis Assignment Help to make your studies easier and boost your grades. Our team of skilled writers provides 100% human-written, unique, and easy-to-understand assignments. We also provide a free list of assignment samples to help you learn effective writing styles and improve your work. Choose Assignment Help today and achieve academic success with trusted support!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content