WGU Financial-Management - WGU Financial Management VBC1

The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) is widely used to estimate the cost of common equity because of its clear risk–return framework. However, a major limitation is that it relies on several simplifying assumptions that may not hold in real-world markets. CAPM assumes investors are rational, markets are frictionless, all investors have the same expectations, and that a single factor—systematic risk measured by beta—fully explains expected returns. In reality, markets are affected by taxes, transaction costs, information asymmetry, and multiple sources of risk. Empirical evidence also suggests that factors such as firm size, value characteristics, and momentum can influence returns beyond beta alone. Because of these limitations, CAPM may underestimate or overestimate the true cost of equity for certain firms. Financial managers therefore often supplement CAPM with other models or judgment when estimating required returns. Option C correctly captures this fundamental limitation recognized in financial management theory.

Preferred stock is distinguished by its fixed or stated dividend, which is typically paid before any dividends are distributed to common shareholders. This feature makes preferred stock resemble debt in terms of predictable income, while still being classified as equity on the balance sheet. Unlike common stockholders, preferred shareholders generally do not have voting rights and have limited potential for capital appreciation. However, they enjoy priority over common stockholders in dividend payments and, in liquidation, over residual equity claims. From a financial management standpoint, preferred stock provides firms with a flexible financing option that does not increase leverage in the same way as debt while offering investors relatively stable income. Option C correctly identifies the defining characteristic of preferred stock.

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 Gordon growth model values a stock assuming dividends grow at a constant rate indefinitely. The formula is:

Stock Value = D₁ ÷ (r − g),

where D₁ is the expected dividend next year, r is the required rate of return, and g is the growth rate. Substituting the values:

$2 ÷ (0.10 − 0.05) = $2 ÷ 0.05 = $40.

This model is widely used in valuation for mature companies with stable dividend growth. It highlights the sensitivity of stock value to growth expectations and required returns. Option C correctly applies the Gordon growth model formula.

Dividend policy carries important signaling effects in financial markets. Investors often view dividends as a signal of management’s confidence in the firm’s future cash flows. When a company lowers its dividend, shareholders may interpret the action as a sign of financial distress, declining profitability, or uncertainty about future earnings. This negative perception can result in a decline in the firm’s stock price and reduced investor confidence. While dividend reductions may free up cash for reinvestment and improve long-term financial flexibility, the short-term market reaction is often unfavorable. Financial management literature stresses that dividend changes should be made cautiously and clearly communicated to avoid misinterpretation. Option D correctly identifies this key drawback.

The quick ratio, also known as the acid-test ratio, measures a firm’s ability to meet short-term obligations using its most liquid assets. It is calculated as:

(Cash + Accounts Receivable + Marketable Securities) ÷ Current Liabilities.

For Whole Pine Inc., quick assets include cash of $2,000 and accounts receivable of $500, totaling $2,500. Inventory is excluded because it is less liquid and may not be easily converted into cash. Current liabilities consist of accounts payable of $1,000. Dividing $2,500 by $1,000 yields a quick ratio of 2.50. This indicates that the firm has $2.50 in highly liquid assets for every $1.00 of short-term obligations, suggesting strong short-term liquidity. Option C correctly reflects this calculation and interpretation.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) often seek the lowest-cost and most flexible sources of long-term financing. The global bond market expands their choices beyond domestic lenders and investors, enabling firms to issue debt in multiple countries, currencies, and structures (fixed vs. floating rates, maturities, secured vs. unsecured, and different covenant packages). This broad access can reduce the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) if foreign markets provide lower yields, deeper investor demand, or better terms for the issuer’s credit profile. Global issuance can also support operational needs: an MNC earning revenues in euros or yen may issue bonds in those currencies to create a natural hedge, matching debt service with foreign-currency cash inflows and reducing exchange-rate exposure. However, the global bond market does not remove currency risk automatically (so B is incorrect), nor does it guarantee fixed interest rates (D is incorrect). While domestic issuance remains important, global markets increase strategic flexibility, allowing firms to optimize capital structure, diversify funding sources, manage refinancing risk, and tailor financing to geographic cash flows—core themes in international financial management.

Tax expense reported on the income statement is calculated using accrual accounting, which recognizes revenues and expenses when they are earned or incurred, not necessarily when cash is paid. In contrast, actual taxes paid are based on tax laws and cash payments made to tax authorities. Differences arise due to temporary and permanent timing differences between financial reporting rules and tax regulations. Examples include depreciation methods, revenue recognition timing, loss carryforwards, and deferred tax assets or liabilities. These differences cause tax expense to diverge from cash taxes paid in a given period. Financial managers and analysts must understand this distinction to accurately assess cash flows, particularly when forecasting free cash flow or valuing firms. Option A correctly explains this discrepancy, whereas the other options either deny the existence of differences or incorrectly characterize tax expense accounting.

The initial investment for a capital project includes all costs required to acquire and prepare an asset for use. These costs typically include purchase price, delivery, installation, testing, and any necessary setup expenses. Financial management texts clearly distinguish these capitalized costs from expenses such as depreciation, which is an accounting allocation over time, and salvage value, which is considered at the end of a project’s life. Market research is usually treated as a separate operating or planning expense unless directly attributable to asset acquisition. Option B correctly identifies delivery and installation as part of the initial investment.