You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Now that you write about it this way, it starts making perfect sense
Thanks again for your patience with me, Bob!
Hi Bob,
That simple at the end of the day?
Something nags me about the fact that 82% and 80% have been calculated with a different revenue number in the denominator. Had both percentages been calculated using the same "reference point" I would've concurred, but with different denominators? For some reason it seems we're unwittingly oversimplifying the calculation here...
Hi Bob,
Yep, sorry if the term "variance" was misleading. It's meant to mean simple arithmetical difference or "delta" between the numbers, not statistical variance.
As for my end result: I'm attempting to understand how much each of the reasons attributed to a 2% change in margin between two periods.
Perhaps, let me illustrate this point in terms of what I think is an incorrect approach, but that might give you a hint as to what I'm trying to achieve here:
Reason 1 contributes to the overall margin change: 5 / (90.2 - 80.0) * (82% - 80%) = 0.98%
Reason 2 contributes to the overall margin change: 2 / (90.2 - 80.0) * (82% - 80%) = 0.39%
Reason 3 contributes to the overall margin change: 3 / (90.2 - 80.0) * (82% - 80%) = 0.59%
Reason 4 contributes to the overall margin change: 0.2 / (90.2 - 80.0) * (82% - 80%) = 0.04%
The sum of all 4 adds up to 2% of the overall change in margin. But it can't be that simple, can it? For once, margin %'s are calculated using different revenue numbers for two periods in the denominators, so I'm reluctant to think that the calculation is that simple...
I just realized that my numbers in variances don't add up, really sorry for extra confusion that might've caused
Here's a corrected and cleaned up layout of the problem:
Hopefully it all makes much more sense now. In essence, I'm trying to find out ??? numbers expressed as % changes in margin.
Hi Bob,
Sorry for delayed response: I was away for several days.
To your questions: the variances themselves, i.e. volume, mix, price, etc. are not important (or at least that's how I see it) - I could've easily named them x, y and z, etc. It's just that these are typical sources for variance in revenues and costs. My question is more broad and math-related, not economics':
Knowing items that comprise absolute variances for revenues and costs (whatever these items are!), how do I "translate" these items to the % variance in the margin?
In other words, if I know revenue for period 1 and absolute numbers that affect its change to the value in period 2 + the same for costs, how do I bridge costs / revenue ratios for two periods using those absolute variance items? Is there a way to tell that of the 2% variance (82% to 80%), e.g. x contributed, say, 0.4%; y contributed 0.5%, etc. such that the sum of those bridging items adds up to 2%?
Hope that clarifies what I'm trying to achieve here
Thanks again!
Hi Bob,
Let me explain this in a bit more detail. Basically I'm working on an economics problem where I'm calculating a margin % rate (margin / revenue) for two periods:
period 1 = 80 margin / 100 revenue = 80%
period 2 = 90.2 margin / 110 revenue = 82%
Now I know that in absolute terms the margin grew 10.2 from period 1 to period 2 due to: change in price of 4 and costs reduction of 6.2 (that's given).
Same goes for revenues - an increase from 100 to 110 is driven by: change in price of 5, volume of 2 and product mix of 3 (again, that's just given).
Now I need to know how each of above 5 factors (change in price on margin, cost reduction, change in price in revenues, change in sold volumes and product mix) have contributed to the 2% increase in the margin. I.e. how much of those 2% change between 2 periods is, say due to change in price in revenues, or due to a shift in volume, etc.?
Thanks again!
Pages: 1