Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 62

Performance Analysis of Top Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide with reference to Oil
Prices

Indrani Hazarika

Business Faculty, Higher Colleges of Technology; Dubai Women’s Campus, UAE

indrani.hazarika@hct.ac.ae

Abstract

Oil and gas industries is one of the largest industries worldwide and is involved in the exploration,

extraction, refining, transport and marketing of oil and gas products. The present study has been

undertaken to analyze the profitability, liquidity, financial health and efficiency of top five oil and gas

companies worldwide based on revenue, net income and market value as per the values stated in the

2014 Financial Times, Global 500 list and principal operations with reference to crude oil prices from

2007 to 2014. Simple linear regression analysis has been employed to determine the statistical

significance and degree of dependence between fluctuating crude oil prices and financial

performance indicators. The present study revealed that fluctuating oil prices do not significantly

impact the profitability, liquidity, efficiency and financial health of top oil and gas companies.

Keywords: Market Value, Efficiency, Liquidity, Profitability and Fluctuating

Introduction:

Oil and gas industries is one of the largest industries worldwide and is involved in the exploration,

extraction, refining, transport and marketing of oil and gas products. Many industries are heavily

dependent on oil and gas products in the form of energy, fuel or raw materials for chemical products.

The present study has been undertaken to analyze the financial performance of top five
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 63

oil and gas companies based on revenue, net income and market value as per the values stated in

the 2014 Financial Times, Global 500 list and principal operations with reference to crude oil

prices from 2007 to 2014. (Refer Fig1, 2, 3 and 4). Like prices of other commodities the crude

oil price experiences wide fluctuations in times of shortage or oversupply. The history of oil

prices (Fig 5) dates back to 152 years of economic and political events that shaped the price,

wars, economy, domestic policy, OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) and

price controls.

Fig.1 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Revenue

Revenue in billions in US Dollars

600 476.9 468 400.7 390.2 373
500
400 235.9 211.8
300 171.6 159.8 158
200
100
0

Source: Statista: 2015

Fig.2 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Net Income

Net Income in billions in US Dollar

40 35.5 32.6
35
24.8
30 21.4 21.4
25 17.3 16.6
20
15 11.6 10.9 10
10
5
0

Source: Statista: 2015

Fig.3 2014 Top 10 Oil and Gas Companies Worldwide based on Market Value
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 64

Market Value in billions in US Dollar

450 422.1
400
350 239
300 227 220.9
250
200 156 147.8
150 96.7
91.3 91.2 90
100
50
0

Source: Statista: 2015

Fig.4 2013 Principal operations of the major oil companies (1,000 b/d)

1000 billion barrel per day

15,000 13,239
10,000
6,170 5,413 4,303 4,161
5,000
0
Exxon Royal Dutch, Total SA, France Chevron,USA British
Mobil,USA Shell, UK Petroleum

Source: OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin 2014

Fig.5 2014 Trend of Crude Oil Price from 1970 to 2014

US Crude Oil First Purchase Price (Dollars Per Barrel)

120

100
80
60
40
20
2000

0
1972

2014
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998

2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
1970

Source: US Energy Information Administration

 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 65

1. Literature Review

Strong (1991) considers the world major oil companies and analyses the ability of oil equities

portfolios to hedge oil price risk and constructs portfolios aimed at maximizing sensitivity to oil price

changes and at diversifying away other risk. Huang et.al (1996) states that at the micro level, changes

in the price of oil, a key factor in the production process, affect financial performance or cash flows

of firms, in turn influencing firms' dividend payments, retained earnings, and equity prices. Sadorsky

(1999) documents the fact that if the volatility of either demand shocks or supply shocks increases,

this will yield higher volatility in both aggregate stock market returns and oil prices. Aleisa et al.

(2003) also examines the equity returns of firms operating in oil exploration, refinery and marketing.

Giovannini, Grasso, Lanza and Manera (2004) investigates the correlations of volatilities in the stock

price returns and their determinants for the most important integrated oil companies, namely Bp

(BP), Chevron-Texaco (CVX), Eni (ENI), Exxon-Mobil (XOM), Royal Dutch (RD) and Total-Fina

Elf (TFE). They measure the actual co-risk in stock returns and their determinants “within” and

“between” the different oil companies. Hammoudeh et al. (2004) use univariate and multivariate

GARCH to examine volatility persistence in the crude oil market and its effect on the equity return

volatility of the S&P oil sector indices. Lanza et al. (2004) investigates the correlations of volatilities

in the stock price returns and their determinants for the most important integrated oil companies.

Boyer and Filion (2007) analyze the factors that explain the Canadian oil and gas company stock

returns. Kilian and Park (2009) examines the different shocks' impact on the U.S. stock market.

Elyasini, Mansur, Odusami (2011) examine the impact of changes in the oil returns and oil return

volatility on excess stock returns and return volatilities of thirteen U.S. industries using the GARCH

(1,1) technique. They find strong evidence in support of the view that oil price fluctuations constitute

a systematic asset price risk at the

 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 66

industry level as nine of the thirteen sectors analyzed includes oil related industry (Oil Extraction

and Petroleum Refinery) which shows statistically significant relationships between oil-futures

return distribution and industry excess return. Ready (2013) develops a novel method for

classifying oil price changes as supply or demand driven and documents several new facts about

the relation between oil prices and stock returns.

2. Research Objective: The present study is undertaken to analyze the financial performance in

terms of profitability, efficiency, liquidity and financial health of top five oil and gas companies

worldwide based on revenues, net income, market value and principal operations with reference

to crude oil prices.

3. Financial Performance Indicators: The following ratios have been analyzed with

reference to the top oil and gas companies worldwide from 2007 to 2014. (Refer Table I)

3.1 Profitability Ratios- A class of financial metrics that are used to assess a business's ability to

generate earnings as compared to its expenses and other relevant costs incurred during a specific

period of time.

3.1.1 Return on Assets (ROA) - ROA gives an idea as to how efficient management is at

using its assets to generate earning (Ref Fig 6 and Appendix I)

3.1.2 Return on Equity (ROE) - ROE measures a corporation's profitability by revealing how

much profit a company generates with the money shareholders have invested (Ref Fig 7 and

Appendix II)

3.1.3 Return on Capital (ROC): ROC measures the return that an investment generates for

capital contributors, i.e. bondholders and stockholders. (Ref Appendix III)

3.2 Efficiency Ratio: Efficiency Ratios are used to analyze how well a company uses its assets

and liabilities internally.

 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 67

3.2.1 Asset Turnover Ratio (ATR): The Asset Turnover ratio is an indicator of the efficiency

with which a company is deploying its assets and a higher ratio is recommended (Refer

Appendix IV).

3.2.2 Inventory Turnover Ratios (ITR): The inventory turnover ratio is a common measure of

the firm’s operational efficiency in the management of its asset. (Refer Appendix V).

3.2.3 Receivables Turnover Ratios (RTR): Accounts receivable turnover ratio is an efficiency

measurement that helps management analyze its receivable. A low turnover ratio represents an

opportunity to collect excessively old accounts receivable that are unnecessarily tying up

working capital. (Refer Appendix VI).

3.3 Liquidity Ratio (LR): Liquidity ratios are the ratios that measure the ability of a company to

meet its short term debt obligations.

3.3.1 Current Ratio (CER): The current ratio is a liquidity and efficiency ratio that measures a

firm's ability to pay off its short-term liabilities with its current assets. A current ratio between 1

and 1.5 is considered standard. (Refer Appendix VII).

3.4. Debt Equity Ratio (DER): The debt-to-equity ratio is a financial ratio indicating the relative

proportion of shareholders' equity and debt used to finance a company's assets. A ratio of 0.3 or

lower is considered healthy by many analysts. (Refer Appendix VIII)

3.5 First purchase price: The price for domestic crude oil reported by the company that owns

the crude oil the first time it is removed from the lease boundary
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 68

Table 1

Ranking based on Financial Performance Indicators

Ranks ROA ROE ROC ATR CER DER

I Exxon Exxon Exxon Sinopec Gazprom BP
Mobil Mobil Mobil

II Chevron Chevron Chevron Exxon Chevron Petro China

Mobil

III Gazprom RDS RDS RDS BP Gazprom

IV Petro Gazprom Gazprom BP RDS RDS

China

V RDS BP Petro Chevron Exxon Chevron

China Mobil

VI BP Petro BP Petro Petro Exxon Mobil

China China China
VII Sinopec Sinopec Sinopec Gazprom Sinopec Sinopec

Fig.6 Average Return on Assets of Top Oil and Gas Companies

Average ROA in Percentage

15.00% 12.74%
10.98% 10.06% 8.18%
10.00% 5.75% 7.30%
5.00%
0.81%
0.00%
British Chevron Gazprom Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro China
Petroleum Dutch Mobil
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 69

Fig.7 Average Return on Equity of Top Oil and Gas Companies

30.00% 19.70% 15.13% 15.44% 25.88%

20.00%
14.59% 13.83%
10.00%
2.04%
0.00%
British Chevron Gazprom Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro China
Petroleum Dutch Mobil

4. Research Methodology:
The study is based on the financial performance of top 5 oil and gas companies worldwide based

on revenue, net income and market value with reference to profitability, efficiency, financial

health and liquidity from 2007 to 2014 considering global crisis and post global crisis period.

The present study also analyses the impact of U.S. crude oil First Purchase Price (Dollars per

Barrel) on performance indicators.

4.1 Research Questions: The research question addressed in the present study is whether

fluctuating oil prices impact the profitability, efficiency, liquidity and financial health of top oil

and gas companies’ worldwide.

4.2 Sample Design: For the present study financial data of the top oil and gas companies

worldwide namely British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Gazprom,

Sinopec and Petro China has been collected from the company websites, annual reports and

Morning Star, Inc (http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios). The crude oil price has been

collected from the Independent Data Analysis of U.S. Energy Information Administration.

4.3. Data Analysis: The financial data of the oil and gas companies has been analyzed with the

help of Data Analysis in Excel using Significance F and R square in simple regression analysis
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 70

where the independent variable is the crude oil price and financial performance indicators are
dependent variables. The following model is repeatedly used for the study to establish the relation
between the dependent variables and single independent variable for five observations in the oil and
gas companies. Equation: = 0 + 1 1 + µ where β0 is the intercept and independent variable X is
the crude oil price and dependent variable Y represents the financial indicators: ATR, ITR, RTR,
DER and ROA and µ represent the estimated standard deviation of the error term µ.

5. Findings: The correlation coefficient as shown in Table II between the independent variable

crude oil and dependent variables for oil and gas companies’ worldwide are all less than 0.5

except for the efficiency ratios in British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell, Gazprom, Petro China

and Sinopec.

5.1. Regression Output:

The regression results in Table III shows that R Squared is less than 0.2 (95% Confidence

Level) for all dependent variables except for the efficiency ratios of British Petroleum, Royal

Dutch Shell, Petro China and Sinopec where the value of p is equal or less than 0.05 which is

statistically significant. Around 60 % changes in the efficiency ratios of these companies are

brought by the independent variable.

Existing literature on oil price shocks and returns states that there is no evidence of the oil price risk

in the U.S. and Japan, Hamao (1988). Huang et al. (1996) find evidence that oil futures returns

positively lead individual oil company and petroleum industry stock returns. Giovannini,, Grasso,

Lanza and Manera (2004) found that the correlation of shocks to the volatilities in STOCK equations

are the highest for British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Total Fina and Royal Dutch Shell.

Boyer and Fillion (2007) states that stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 71

are sensitive to five market based and fundamental factors and one of the market based factors is

the oil prices. Overall they find that Canadian oil and gas company stock returns are positively

associated with the appreciation of crude oil and natural gas prices.

Conclusion:

The present study analyzed the financial data with reference to profitability, liquidity, financial

health and efficiency of top oil and gas worldwide companies based on market value, net income

and revenue. Existing literature on oil and gas companies find that stock prices are positively

associated with the appreciation of crude oil prices. But in the present study it is revealed that

fluctuating oil prices do not significantly impact the profitability, liquidity, efficiency and

financial health of top oil and gas companies.

Table 1I
Correlation Coefficient between crude oil price and Financial Performance Indicators
Name of ROA ROE ROC ATO ITO ART CR DER
Company

British 0.06 0.10 0.07 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.4

Petroleum

Chevron 0.4 0.3 0.2 -0.02 0.17 0.5 0.18 -0.02

Gazprom 0.01 -0.05 0.02 0.6 NA 0.05 0.4 -0.7
Royal Dutch 0.01 -0.05 -0.05 0.6 0.8 0.5 -0.2 -0.17
Shell

Sinopec -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 0.7 0.7 0.6 -0.3 0.3

Exxon Mobil 0.17 0.2 0.16 0.07 0.4 0.2 -0.2 -0.3
Petro China -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 0.8 0.8 -0.3 -0.4 0.3
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 72

Table III
Regression Results between crude oil price and Financial Performance Indicator
Oil ATR ITR RTR DER ROA
Company
R2 p R2 p R2 P R2 p R2 p
BP 0.6 0.03 0.5 0.05 0.4 0.08 0.03 0.6 0.06 0.5
Chevron 0.04 0.63 0.2 0.2 0.27 0.2 0.03 0.68 0.36 0.15
Gazprom 0.33 0.17 NA NA 0.01 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.002 0.9
Royal 0.60 0.03 0.65 0.02 0.53 0.06 0.4 0.12 0.23 0.2
Dutch
Shell
Sinopec 0.3 0.13 0.56 0.04 0.32 0.18 0.15 0.3 0.17 0.3
Exxon 0.07 0.5 0.3 0.16 0.08 0.5 0.18 0.3 0.25 0.2
Mobil
Petro 0.70 0.01 0.63 0.03 0.004 0.8 0.03 0.7 0.06 0.5
China

References:

Aleisa, E., Dibooglu, S., & Hammoudeh, S. (2003). Relationships among U.S. oil prices and
oil industry equity indices. International Review of Economics and Finance, 15, 1-29.
Boyer, M., & Filion, D. (2007). Common and fundamental factors in stock returns of Canadian
oil and gas companies. Energy Economics, 428- 453.
Giovannini, M., Grasso, M., Lanza, A., & Manera, M. (April 2004). Conditional Correlation in
the Returns on Oil Companies Stock Prices and their Determinants. International Energy
Markets.
Hamao, Y. (1988). An empirical examination of the arbitrage pricing theory using Japanese
Data. Japan and the World Economy, 1, 3-56.
Hammoudeh, S., Dibooglu, S., & Aleisa, E. (2004). Relationships among US oil prices and oil
industry equity indices. International Review of Economics and Finance, 13, 427 - 453.
Huang, R., Masulis, R., & Stoll, H. (1996). Energy shocks and financial markets. Journal
of Futures Market, 16, 1-27.
Kilian, L., & Park, C. (2009). The impact of oil prices shocks and the US stock market. 50(4),
1267- 1287.
Lanza, A., Manera, M., Grasso, M., & Giovannini, M. (2004). Long run models of oil stock
prices. Environmental Modelling and Software , forthcoming.
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 73

Sadorsky, P. (1999). Oil prices shocks and the stock market activity. Energy Economics, 21, 449-
469.
Sadorsky, P. (2001). Risk factors in stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies. Energy
Economics, 23, 17-28.
Strong, J. (1991). Using oil share portfolios to hedge oil price risk. Quarterly Review
of Economics and Business, 31, 48-63.
Appendixes:

Appendix 1
Return on Assets of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British Royal Exxon Petro
Year Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch Sinopec Mobil China
2007 9.19% 13.28% 10.30% 12.41% 5.71% 17.61% 15.09%
2008 9.11% 15.44% 10.64% 9.52% -21.74% 19.24% 10.15%
2009 7.14% 6.44% 10.04% 4.36% 5.54% 8.36% 7.82%
2010 -1.46% 10.89% 11.01% 6.55% 9.48% 11.37% 9.01%
2011 9.09% 13.64% 12.98% 9.26% 3.23% 12.96% 7.44%
2012 3.90% 11.83% 10.30% 7.54% -4.55% 13.50% 5.64%
2013 7.74% 8.88% 8.93% 4.56% 5.62% 9.57% 5.75%
2014 1.28% 7.40% 6.29% 4.19% 3.20% 9.34% 4.57%
Average 5.75% 10.98% 10.06% 7.30% 0.81% 12.74% 8.18%

Appendix II
Return on Equity of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
British Royal Exxon Petro
YEAR Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch Sinopec Mobil China
2007 23.39% 25.60% 15.39% 27.28% 8.26% 34.47% 22.08%
2008 22.88% 29.23% 17.37% 20.92% -36.54% 38.53% 15.01%
2009 17.19% 11.74% 15.70% 9.49% 11.16% 17.25% 12.62%
2010 -3.78% 19.31% 16.73% 14.15% 17.02% 23.67% 15.68%
2011 24.90% 23.75% 19.06% 19.47% 5.39% 27.26% 13.70%
2012 10.08% 20.30% 14.92% 14.86% -9% 28.03% 11.16%
2013 18.93% 15% 12.86% 8.88% 12.17% 19.17% 11.18%
2014 3.14% 12.65% 9.03% 8.45% 7.84% 18.67% 9.20%
Average 14.59% 19.70% 15.13% 15.44% 2.04% 25.88% 13.83%
Appendix III
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 74

Return on Capital of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch Mobil China
2007 18.50% 23.05% 13.22% 24.05% 7.40% 32.24% 20.30%
2008 17.76% 26.61% 13.78% 18.53% -23.73% 35.99% 13.56%
2009 13.29% 10.61% 13% 7.98% 7.92% 16.19% 10.52%
2010 -2.11% 17.40% 13.76% 11.46% 13.17% 21.72% 12.29%
2011 17.93% 21.68% 16.09% 16.01% 4.89% 24.74% 11.07%
2012 7.61% 18.68% 12.83% 12.72% -4.86% 25.84% 9.10%
2013 14.90% 13.46% 11.16% 7.46% 8.83% 17.42% 9.40%
2014 2.76% 10.92% 11.14% 7.36% 5.49% 16.34% 5.99%
Average 11.33% 17.88% 13.12% 13.2% 2.39% 23.81% 11.53%

Appendix IV
Asset Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch Mobil China
2007 1.27 1.57 0.38 1.41 1.9 1.75 0.87
2008 1.58 1.76 0.47 1.66 2.15 2.03 0.95
2009 1.05 1.05 0.39 0.99 1.8 1.35 0.77
2010 1.19 1.17 0.41 1.23 2.47 1.43 0.94
2011 1.37 1.29 0.46 1.45 3.02 1.54 1.12
2012 1.31 1.09 0.41 1.37 2.6 1.45 1.07
2013 1.31 0.94 0.41 1.28 2.89 1.29 1
2014 1.22 0.82 0.4 1.21 1.87 1.18 0.91
Average 1.28 1.21 0.41 1.33 2.33 1.50 0.95
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 75

Appendix V
Inventory Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Gazprom Dutch Mobil China
2007 10 30.42 - 10.91 11.26 21.36 4.76
2008 13.7 31.79 - 15.64 14.15 25.41 6.28
2009 9.68 18.98 - 9.77 7.91 16.02 4.79
2010 11.5 24.62 - 10.84 11.97 19.06 6.37
2011 11.94 27.17 - 13.60 16.07 21.91 7.74
2012 12.22 24.09 3.56 13.25 12.21 20.54 7.12
2013 11.41 21.51 2.9 12.55 11.48 18.56 6.64
2014 12.99 18.58 2.59 14.38 14.78 16.26 7.6
Average 11.68 24.64 3.01 12.62 12.47 19.89 6.41

Appendix VI
Receivable Turnover Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Gazprom Royal Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Dutch Sinopec Mobil China
2007 8.63 11.02 8.44 9.71 30.68 13.15 62.11
2008 12.52 14.26 9.37 7.37 52.77 17.31 60.09
2009 9.09 10.23 7.6 4.03 97.16 13.4 44.76
2010 9.16 10.66 9.06 5.84 187.08 12.79 39.72
2011 9.65 11.92 9.89 6.48 912.76 13.72 40.55
2012 11.17 11.31 8 8.05 809.74 14.39 37.12
2013 12.04 10.74 7.47 11.59 874.49 16.12 35.15
2014 10.12 11.05 4.18 8.84 22.15 8.5 24.15
Average 10.29 11.39 8 7.74 373.35 13.67 42.9
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 76

Appendix VII:
Current Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Gazprom Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Dutch Mobil China
2007 1.02 1.17 1.44 1.22 1.08 1.47 1.17
2008 0.95 1.14 1.63 1.1 0.49 1.47 0.85
2009 1.14 1.42 1.61 1.14 0.63 1.06 0.76
2010 1.17 1.68 1.85 1.12 0.81 0.94 0.67
2011 1.16 1.58 1.71 1.17 0.79 0.94 0.68
2012 1.43 1.63 1.62 1.18 0.68 1.01 0.72
2013 1.33 1.52 2.06 1.11 0.8 0.83 0.67
2014 1.37 1.32 2.24 1.16 0.6 0.82 0.76
Average 1.19 1.43 1.76 1.15 0.73 1.06 0.78

Appendix VIII
Debt Equity Ratio of the Top Oil and Gas Companies world wide
YEAR British Gazprom Royal Sinopec Exxon Petro
Petroleum Chevron Dutch Mobil China
2007 0.17 0.08 0.25 0.1 0.03 0.06 0.06
2008 0.19 0.07 0.2 0.11 0.03 0.06 0.04
2009 0.25 0.11 0.22 0.23 0.02 0.06 0.15
2010 0.32 0.11 0.18 0.23 0.01 0.08 0.2
2011 0.32 0.08 0.16 0.18 0.01 0.06 0.19
2012 0.33 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.08 0.05 0.29
2013 0.32 0.13 0.16 0.2 0.04 0.04 0.27
2014 0.41 0.16 0.21 0.22 0.03 0.07 0.45
Average 0.28 0.10 0.19 0.17 0.03 0.06 0.2
Biography and Author Information

Name: Dr. Indrani Hazarika

Email: indrani.hazarika@hct.ac.ae

Educational Background
 Doctor of Philosophy: Obtained Ph.D in the area of taxation from Gauhati University,
Guwahati, India in 2003.
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 77

Thesis titled “An analytical study on the flexibility of Indian Tax Structure with special reference to
Direct Tax

 Master Degree: Discipline Commerce with specialization in Finance, Accountancy and Taxation
from Gauhati University, Guwahati in 1996.
 Major Field of Study:- Accounting and Finance
Professional Qualification
 Qualified as a Chartered Accountant from “ The Institute of Chartered Accountants of
India” in 2006
 Obtained the IFRS Certification from ICAI in 2013.
 Presently undergoing SAP Certification

She is currently working as a BUSINESS FACULTY at Higher Colleges of Technology

(HCT), Dubai Women’s Campus and she is also the Chair of Accounting Curriculum
Committee at HCT. Prior to joining at HCT she was the MANAGER Training and Research
in Dubai Gold and Commodities Exchange. Before relocating to Dubai she served as a
FACULTY of MBA, BBA & Commerce in JVIMS, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India from 1999 to
2006 and was also a visiting faculty at All India Management Association (AIMA), Jamnagar
Centre. Prior to joining Gauhati Commerce College as a LECTURER she was a Research
Scholar in Gauhati University, to carry out her research work and received UGC grant for
doing research. Few of her publications include [1] “Performance
rd
Metrics versus Wealth Metrics of Dubai Telecommunication Sector” at 23 IBIMA
Conference-Vision 2020: Sustainable Growth, Economic Development, and Global
Competitiveness ISBN- 978-0-9860419-2-1, May 2014, [2] “Can the Method of Levy,
Assessment and Collection of Tax Deter Tax Evasion?” Shadow 2009 / The Shadow economy, Tax

Evasion and Social Norms International Conference | July 23–26, 2009 | University of Muenster,
Germany | Conference Proceedings’, [3] “Corporate Social Responsibility: - An inevitable
tool for business sustainability and growth” “Business Assam” Quarterly Journal of Assam
Chambers of Commerce (India) April 2013. Her current and previous research interests
include Oil Prices causes and effects on Airline Industry and Oil Companies, IFRS, Audit
Reengineering, Profitability Analysis of Banks, Revenue Recognition Principles with
 Journal of Energy and Economic Development, 1(1), 62-78, August 2015 78

reference to Real Estate Companies, Fair Value Accounting, Tax Evasion, Financial
Reporting, Earnings Quality, Cost Control and Cost Reduction, EVA and MVA.

CA, Dr. Indrani Hazarika is a member of the following

[1] Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Dubai Chapter
[2] Member of the review committee of IBIMA (International Business Information
Management Association)
[3] Member of the review committee of the Asia Pacific Studies Journal

Award Distinction and Fellowships

st
 Awarded Gold Medal for securing 1 position in the University in Master Degree in
Commerce
 Awarded Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) by University Grants Commission
(Supreme body for management of Indian Universities) on the basis of National
Eligibility Test for carrying out Research Work and Lectureship