UMAD47-15-M Managing Finance CW Assessment Brief 2026 | UWE Bristol

Published: 31 Dec, 2025

Category	Assignment	Subject	Finance
University	University of the West of England (UWE Bristol)	Module Title	UMAD47-15-M Managing Finance

Word Count	2000 Words
Assessment Type	Coursework
Assessment Title	Business Report - Financial Analysis of a Business
Academic Year	2026

UMAD47-15-M Assessment Brief

Submission details Module title and code: MANAGING FINANCE UMAD47-15-M
Component and type: Coursework
Assessment title: Business Report - Financial Analysis of a Business
Assessment weighting: 75% of the total module marks
Size or length of assessment: 2000 Maximum word count (no +/- 10% to be used)

Module learning outcomes assessed by this task:

MO1-Critically analyse financial statements and make appropriate recommendations.
MO3- Apply data analysis to complex, incomplete or contradictory information and communicate the outcome effectively.

Completing your assessment

Follow the instructions and advice below to complete your assessment and achieve high marks.

What am I required to do on this assessment?

You are required to write an investigatory business report. This must be carried out by using Ratio Analysis on the latest financial data available for a public listed company (PLC) for the last 5 years. You must calculate the ratios in ONLY ONE of the 3 areas of financial performance given below.

The results must be analysed in detail identifying problems and/or recommending solutions for improvement of results in that area. The report should be predominately analytical rather than descriptive. Please note the following points in this regard.

The data must be the latest and taken from the Annual Reports published by the companies. The absence of the latest data will lead to a failure in this assignment. The relevant pages from the annual reports (financial statements and notes to the accounts) must be provided in the appendix to verify your calculations.
You must use the ratios which were taught in this module. Other ratios can be used as a supplement. You may not be able to calculate all the ratios taught in the module due to the absence of relevant figures in financial statements, therefore, there will be no penalty for that, but a note must be made in this regard in the report. • You should use competitors or industry data in your analysis.
Marks & Spencer Plc is a case study for our class discussion. Students are not allowed to choose this company. A failure to comply with this instruction will lead to a FAIL in the coursework. However, Marks & Spencer data can be used as a comparison to the main company.
A student can choose a company where they are currently working even if it is not a PLC, however, this must be discussed with the module leader first and an email verification from the module leader must be included in the report.
This is an individual piece of work.
Only ONE file (MS Word) must be submitted by merging MS Excel calculations and
extracts (relevant pages only) of the financial statements.
Please read the marking guidelines carefully, which indicate the possible contents and structure for this report.
Where should I start?
Choose a Public Limited Company to analyse as instructed in week 7. Calculate the relevant ratios after learning how to do it in weeks 8 and 9.

How do I achieve high marks in this assessment?

The marking criteria given below also give the characteristics of a report achieving high marks.
What do I need to do to pass?

You need to achieve at least 50% to pass this assessment which you can do by incorporating the first five features of a good financial analysis discussed in the class. You can learn more about these features/characteristics in this video https://youtu.be/m0WMQj47c7Q

The marking criteria given below also give the characteristics of a report achieving high marks.

Are you facing a UMAD47-15-M Managing Finance Assignment?

Hire Assignment Helper Now!

UMAD47-15-M Marking Criteria

The following criteria will be used in evaluating this assessment:

Criteria	Insufficient (0–39%)	Marginal Fail (40–49%)	Adequate (50–59%)	Satisfactory (60–69%)	Good (70–79%)	Outstanding (80–100%)
Executive Summary 10%	You have confused the executive summary with abstracts or introduction. Hence not meeting the guidelines for this part OR this part was not given at all.	Fails to summarise the report in a concise and business style. No data/information has been given from the main body of the report. Either exceeds a page or a full page has not been used.	A good effort to present the information in a consumer manner. However, some of the important data/information has been highlighted. There are a few structural/presentation issues. It either exceeds a page or a full page has not been used.	A good effort to present the information in a concise manner with some data and key points provided. However, some important data/information has not been highlighted.	A good effort to present the information in a concise and clear manner and in a business style. Important data has been highlighted. It gives the reader a good understanding of the report.	Presents the information in a to-the-point, concise and clear manner and in business style. Important data has been highlighted. It gives the reader an excellent understanding of the report.
Introduction, aim and methodology 10%	No relevant background, aim, or objectives. Methodology is unclear or absent.	Weak introduction, missing clarity on background or methodology. Aim and objectives poorly defined.	Adequate background with some clarity on aim and objectives. Methodology mentioned but lacks depth.	Good background, aims, and objectives clearly mentioned. SMART guidelines. Methodology outlined with sub-sections for clarity.	Strong, clear background and SMART objectives. A well-explained methodology using appropriate structure and clear sub-sections.	Exceptional introduction with strong SMART objectives and comprehensive background. Methodology is clear and insightful.
Operating Cash Cycle (OCC) Calculation and data presentation	Incorrect or incomplete data, flawed calculations, or absence of numerical evidence.	Numerical errors, lack of visual aids like graphs or tables. Calculations are either incorrect or incomplete.	Data assembly and OCC calculations are provided but contain errors. Visual aids like graphs are sparse or incorrect.	Mostly accurate data and OCC calculations. Supplementary graphs and tables are included with minor issues.	Accurate OCC calculations and clear data presentation. Well-organized visual aids such as graphs and tables are used.	Precise OCC calculations with comprehensive data, insightful interpretation, and effective use of visual aids like graphs and tables.

Criteria	Insufficient (0–39%)	Marginal Fail (40–49%)	Adequate (50–59%)	Satisfactory (60–69%)	Good (70–79%)	Outstanding (80–100%)
(25%)	Absent or unverified.	Absent or unverified.	Minor issues.	Tables included with reasonable accuracy.	Tables are clear and accurate.	Excellent use of graphs and tables.
Analysis and Discussion (35%)	Limited or no discussion of findings, lacking depth and critical analysis. No connection to literature or theories.	Weak analysis with little connection to the literature. Lacks insight into key concepts.	Descriptive analysis with minimal critical depth. Some attempt to link findings with literature.	Reasonable analysis with clear links to relevant literature. Insights into the impact of interest rates and working capital management are presented with adequate critique.	Strong critical examination of findings with insightful connections to the literature. Conclusions are drawn from data and linked to economic and industry issues.	Exceptional analysis demonstrating deep insight into working capital management. Conclusions and recommendations are logically drawn from both data and theoretical framework.
Presentation (10%)	Poor spelling, grammar and presentation. Wordy, unclear, repetitive or greatly over the word limit.	Poor or careless presentation, errors of spelling or grammar. Minor infringement of word limit.	Presentation and referencing are adequate with some serious errors or omissions. Within the word limit.	Presentation and referencing are adequate with some minor errors or omissions. Within the word limit.	Presentation skills are clearly effective with competent use of visual aids. Written work is within the word limit.	Professionally presented with clear subheadings and sections. Written in a clear, direct, well-explained and easy-to-read style with good spelling, grammar and use of English. Within word limit. Extensive and effective use of visual aids. Includes everything required to assess the work.
Referencing (10%)	Poor referencing, not following Harvard style. Missing or incorrect sources.	Frequent mistakes in Harvard referencing, major omissions in references and appendix materials.	Effort to use Harvard style with occasional mistakes. In-text referencing is inconsistent. Appendix materials present but incomplete.	Mostly correct Harvard referencing with minor issues. Financial statements and relevant documents included in appendix.	Accurate and consistent Harvard referencing. Relevant documents are included in the appendix.	Perfect Harvard referencing with high-quality sources. All financial statements and related documents are clearly included in the appendix.

Buy Custom Answer Of This UMAD47-15-M Assignment & Raise Your Grades

Get A Free Quote

Request Answer of this Assignment

Share this with your Friends

Facebook

Instagram

Struggling with your UMAD47-15-M Managing Finance assignment at UWE Bristol? Get expert guidance from our finance assignment help service to make your studies easier and improve your grades. Our team of skilled writers delivers 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 enhance your work. Choose online assignment help UK today and achieve academic success with reliable support!

Click here to view the list of UWE Bristol assignment samples.