Welcome to the CRA REGULAR (NON-TRADING) Model

PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY

Latest updated CRA models can be downloaded from ftp://10.31.0.37/CRA REVISED folder

1 This Model is applicable for Total Exposure above Rs.5.00 Cr in Non-Trading sector2 Select the appropriate 'ACTIVITY STATUS' CODE & 'TYPE OF UNIT' status and QUARTERS (for growth in sales) through DROP-DOWNS in the INPUT sheet34 Feed the TNW of the unit in the appropriate cell5 Yor are also required to feed DSCR, D/E RATIO in case the term loan is proposed6 If any particular parameter is not applicable OR available, leave the related cell blank; pls DO NOT feed '0.00/NA' wherever the parameter is not applicable 7 DO NOT put (%) sign with input data 8 Security details are to be filled in in the INPUT sheet for Facility Rating9 Select appropriate Value Statements through Drop Downs in the 'V STMT' sheet

10 Scoring for FINANCIAL FLEXIBILITY, GROUP / FOREX RISK, QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS, EXTERNAL RATING, FINANCIAL STATEMENT QUALITY etc. has been given through VALUE STATEMENT sheet

11 Facility Rating for up to 8 Facilities can be done at a time for which you are required to input the required Facility in the INPUT sheet12 First select the FACILITY TO BE RATED, INDUSTRY, GEOGRAPHY and NATURE OF LOAN before selecting appropriate drop down in the facility rating sheet13 Please select the TENOR OF FACILITY in the Facility Rating sheet wherever applicable14 This model is updated as per CRMD Circular No CRMD/BS/249 dated 09/01/2010

This is strictly for Internal Circulation, should NOT be parted with any outsider

For any Query / Suggestion, please contact-

VIKRAM PRIYAVRATManager & Credit Analyst, CPC, LHO, BhopalCall at: 9406904853 / 0755-2575708Date: 01/12/2011ORemail at : vikram.p@sbi.co.in

You need to feed the required ratios/value (IN NUMBERS ONLY) manually in the INPUT sheet as this programme is kept independent of CMA

Disclaimer: Please refer to Bank's latest CRA circular instructions in case of any discrepancy.

Latest updated CRA models can be downloaded from ftp://10.31.0.37/CRA REVISED folder

Select the appropriate 'ACTIVITY STATUS' CODE & 'TYPE OF UNIT' status and QUARTERS (for growth in sales) through DROP-DOWNS in the INPUT sheet

If any particular parameter is not applicable OR available, leave the related cell blank; pls DO NOT feed '0.00/NA' wherever the parameter is not applicable

Scoring for FINANCIAL FLEXIBILITY, GROUP / FOREX RISK, QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS, EXTERNAL RATING, FINANCIAL STATEMENT QUALITY

Facility Rating for up to 8 Facilities can be done at a time for which you are required to input the required Facility in the INPUT sheetFirst select the FACILITY TO BE RATED, INDUSTRY, GEOGRAPHY and NATURE OF LOAN before selecting appropriate drop down in the facility rating sheetPlease select the TENOR OF FACILITY in the Facility Rating sheet wherever applicable

This is strictly for Internal Circulation, should NOT be parted with any outsider

) manually in the INPUT sheet as this programme is kept independent of CMA

: Please refer to Bank's latest CRA circular instructions in case of any discrepancy.

INPUT FORMName of the Unit: ABC LTDModel REGULAR (NON-TRADING)Based on Audited 31-Mar-11Activity Status

3

Type of Unit Existing Financials reflects => 3 years working

Parameters

Prv-to-Prv Yr Prev. Yr 31-Mar-11 31-Mar-11 Next YearTOL/TNWCurrent RatioROCE (%)Retained Profit/TA (%)PBDIT/InterestPAT/Net Sale (%)Net Cash Accrual/Total Debt (%)

Previous year Current yearMar Qtr June Qtr Mar Qtr June Qtr

G.Avg.DSCR

Debt / Equity TNW

It is an Unit where Audited financial statements reflect minimum 12 months of working (NOT for Takeover and New Connection)

Previous Years data for Averaging purpose

Projections made during last sanction

Data for which the CRA is to be carried out

Estimates for Current / Next Year

Net Sales in last 2 qtrs PY & CY (Chronological order)

(Inventory/N.Sales)+ (Receivable/G.sales) in days

Select the options 1/2/3 carefully!

Select the correct Type of Unit

Pls enter TNW here

VALUE STATEMENTS: NON-TRADING SECTOR: REGULAR MODELUNIT ABC LTD Year 31-Mar-11 Score

BUSINESS & INDUSTRY RISK

2

The industry outlook (CRMD Industry approach) is "MODERATELY POSITIVE")1.5

High Degree of cyclicality0.25

NA

NA

1

The business environment in which the company operates, is excellent

0.5

1.25

The effect can be contained to the large extent

0.75

1.5

i) Competition & Market Risk

On the whole, the combination of the relevant listed factors makes the industry somewhat competitive

ii) Industry Outlook

iii) Industry Cyclicality

iv) Regulatory Risks (for C&I)

iv) Regulatory Risks (for SSI & AGL)

The industry enjoys a favorable regulatory environment. / Effect of regulatory risks can be contained. / Regulatory & legislative issues creates some vulnerability but potential impact on the company not significant as the issues can be tackled appropriately. / There have been no stoppages of work on account of labour unrest

v) Business Environment

vi) Technology & Vulnerability to technological change

The existing technology is proven and sufficient. / The industry is vulnerable to technological change to some extent but its impact is contained

vii) Vulnerability to Macro-economic environment

viii) Access to resources / Input profile

Raw material generally available at more or less steady price. / Raw Material has few other usage but supply is adequate

Not applicable for SSI or AGL customers!

2

1

0.5

The R&D efforts are average and product innovation observed sometimes

0.25

0.5

At present partial compliance but firm steps initiated for full compliance

1

Management Risk

2

NA

NA

ix) User / Product profile

Product is distinctive and of wide acceptance/uses. / No complaints about their rejection from the market. / The delivery schedules of products adhered to without fail

x) Capacity utilization & Flexibility in operation

Optimum capacity utilization; it propels to achieve high growth targets. / Flexibility built up in the manufacturing facilities to shift between he products to maintain optimum capacity utilization

xi) Consistence in quality

Record of the unit in maintaining the quality of its products is good. / Only a few cases of sales rejection on account of poor quality. / There is no ISO certification

xii) Research & Development / Innovation

xiii) Distribution Network

Wide distribution network for the company's products traded in. / It has affective policy in place to withdraw defective products, if any, from the market. / Although the company does not have a wide distribution network, the sales are increasing year after year. / The new unit proposes wide distribution network for its products. / The new company proposes adequate distribution network for marketing and sale of its products. / The management of the company is optimistic about the gradual increase in sales year later year on account of uniqueness of its products and its quality even without a wide distribution network

xiv) Compliance of Environmental Regulations

i) Integrity (Unlisted Company)

The integrity and character of the Management is beyond reproach. / No fraudulent deals/transactions. / No unsatisfactory feature of the unit has come to light. /No adverse features revealed in any audit report

i) Integrity (Listed Company)

Not applicable for Listed Companies!

2

1.5

0.5

1

0.25

1

Achieves both sales and profit projections within negative variance of 10%

1

The potential to manage change is put in into action to a great extent0.5

0.75

Full compliance after the expiry of the stipulated period and after follow up

1

UNIT ABC LTD Year 31-Mar-11 Score

NA NA

NA

NA

(ii) Track Record / Conduct of account / Payment

Maintains financial discipline, is regular in submission of financial statements and there are very few occasions of irregularity in the account. / Hardly any instance of cheque return or invocation of guarantee. / The record of meeting commitments to lenders and creditors is excellent. / The unit has rarely defaulted on this score

iii) Managerial competence/Commitment/Expertise

The management is competent. / The unit has professionals in the key areas, under the overall control of the management, who function independently. / The projects undertaken are executed in time

iv) Structure & Systems

Although budgeting, costing, MIS are in place, proper implementation efforts are lacking

v) Experience in Industry

The management has a very good experience in the trade (> =5 years) and /or it is a family business

(vi) Strategic Initiatives

The management has visions and is also capable of taking initiatives but the necessary thrust is lacking

vii) Length of Relationship with the Bank

Dealing with the Bank for more than 2 years and conduct is satisfactory. / New unit but belonging to a Group which has dealings with the Bank for more than 2 years, and a Group Company has offered its guarantee

(viii) Credibility: Ability to achieve sales/profit projections

(ix) Ability to manage change

x) Succession Plan

Succession plan is in place/the number of key persons are just adequate to run the operations of the Company but in the event of one or two leaving the company would materially affect its operations to some extent

xi) Adherence to the covenants of sanction

Country RiskCash Flow or asset ( %) outside India

Change in rating due to country risk

NA

NA

Forex Risk NA NA

Excellent (Success record) >=90% 10

SatisfactorySatisfactory

ABC LTD For the year 31-Mar-11Qualitative Factors ( -ve)

A Contingent Liabilities

a Claims against disputed tax liabilities/Excise Duties 0.00 0.0 0

b Claims against the Company not acknowledged as debts.0.00 0.0 0

c

0.00 0.0 0

d 0.00 0.0 0

e 0.00 0.0 0

f 0.00 0.0 0

B 0.00 0.0 0

C

0.00 0.0 0

D Any other factor 0.00 0.0 0

Aggregate amount assessed to be at default 0.00

TNW of the Unit as per latest balance sheet 0.00

Impact on TNW of the Unit #DIV/0!

Negative Score #DIV/0!

Name of Rating Agency NA

Long Term Rating NA

Additional Score under New CRA Model

Group Risk

Financial Flexibility

Financial statement quality

Amt. as per Balance Sheet

Probability of invocation (%)

Amount assessed to be at default

Pending legal issues like suit filed against the Company and the financial impact on the borrowing company.

Notices issued by Regulatory authorities like Income Tax & Lock out/strike/unrest in the factory in the last two years and Corporate guarantees given with or without Bank’s Auditors qualifying remarks having impact on Accounting policies(i) valuation of inventory(ii) capitalization,(iii) depreciation and(iv) revaluation

Not applicable for SSI or AGL customers!

Not applicable for Listed Companies!

AWeight

Sl.No.Parameters(maximum Marks in brackets) For the Year 31-Mar-11(I) (a) TOL/TNW-Latest Ratio 6

10 3 30 30(b) TOL/TNW-Average of last 3 years 2(c) Industry Comparison NA

(ii) (a) Current Ratio-Latest Ratio 00 1.5 15 0(b) Current Ration-Average of last 3 years NA

(c) Industry Comparison NA(iii) (a) ROCE %-latest Ratio 0

0 2 20 0(b) ROCE %- Average of last 3 years NA(iv) a) Retained Profit / Total Assets (%) 0

0 1 10 0b) Retained Profit / Total Assets (Moving Avg) NA(v) (a) PBDIT/Intt.-Latest Ratio 0

0 2 20 0(b) PBDIT/Intt-Average of last 3 years NA(vi) (a) PAT/Net Sales-Latest Ratio 0

0 2 20 0(b) PAT/Net Sales-Avg. of last 3 years NA(vii) (a) Net Cash Accrrual / Total Debt (%) 0

0 1.5 15 0(b) Net Cash Accrrual / Total Debt (Moving Avg) NA(viii) Average YoY Growth in Net Sales in last 2 qtrs (%) 0 NA 1 10 NA(ix) Financial Flexibility 5 10 0.5 5 5.00(xi) (A) Gross Avg.DSCR for all TLs NA

NA 2 20 #VALUE!(B-1) Inventory/N. Sales)+(Rec./G.sales) in days NA(B-2) (Inv/NS)+(Rec.+GS) average of last 3 years NAMark under sub-parameter (B) NA

(xi) Group Risk 0 NA 0.5 5 NA(xii) Forex Risk 0 NA 0.5 5 NA(xiii) Future Prospects(FP) Projected ratios 20 6 2 20 12

Total Score out of 175 195 #VALUE!Total score normalised 195 #VALUE!Total Score normalised to 65(Existing) / 25(New) 65 65 #VALUE!Qualitative factors (-ve mark) / (+ve mark) #DIV/0!Total financial score 65 #VALUE!

B Business Risk1 Competetion & Market Risk 2.00 2.50 2.502 Industry Outlook 1.50 2.50 2.503 Industry Cyclicality 0.25 1.00 1.004 Regulatory Risks (for C&I) NA 1.504 Regulatory Risks (for SSI & AGL) 1.00 1.50 1.505 Business Environment 0.50 0.50 0.506 Technology & Vulnerability to technological change 1.25 1.50 1.507 Vulnerability to Macro-economic environment 0.75 1.00 1.008 Access to resources / Input profile 1.50 2.00 2.009 User / Product profile 2.00 2.00 2.00

10 Capacity utilization & Flexibility in operation 1.00 1.00 1.0011 Consistance in quality 0.50 1.00 1.0012 Research & Development / Innovation 0.25 1.00 1.0013 Distribution Network 0.50 0.50 0.5014 Compliance of Environmental Regulations 1.00 2.00 2.00

Total Score (BR) 14.00 20.00 20.00 14.00Normalized score (20 for Existing & 30 for New) 20.00 14.00

C Management Risk(MR)1 Integrity (for Unlisted Companies) 2.00 2.00 2.001 Integrity (for Listed Companies) NA 2.002 Track Record / Conduct of account / Payment record 2.00 2.00 2.003 Managerial competence/ Commitment/ Expertise 1.50 2.00 2.004 Structure & Systems 0.50 1.00 1.005 Experience in Industry 1.00 1.00 1.006 Strategic Initiatives 0.25 0.50 0.507 Length of Relationship with the Bank 1.00 1.50 1.508 Credibility: Ability to achieve sales/profit projections 1.00 1.00 1.009 Ability to manage change 0.50 1.00 1.00

10 Succession Plan 0.75 1.00 1.00

Non- Trading Sector: Regular Model: Financial Risk: CRA of ABC LTD

Marks

Max. Mark

weighed score

11 Adherence to the covenants of sanction 1.00 2.00 2.00Total Score 11.50 15.00 15.00 11.50Normalized score (15 for Existing & 45 for New) 15.00 11.50

D Qualitative Parameter-External Rating 5 5 0Aggregate Risk Score #VALUE!

E Aggregate Risk Score (rounded off) 100 #VALUE!F CRA Rating based on the above score SB #VALUE!G Country Risk

NA

HFinal Borrower Rating after CR #VALUE! SB #VALUE!

I Financial Statement Quality Satisfactory

#VALUE!#VALUE!

BORROWER RATING SUMMARY SECTOR NON-TRADING MODEL REGULAR

ABC LTD As on 31-Mar-2011

[A] FINANCIAL RISK [FR]Weight

Parameters

[i] TOL / TNW 10[a] Latest Ratio 6

30.00 6.00

[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA 2.00 10.00 30 30.00[c] Industry Average 2 NA Normalised

[ii] Current Ratio 10[a] Latest Ratio 6

1.50.00 0.00

[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised 0.00 15 0.00[c] Industry Average 2 NA Normalised

[iii] ROCE 10[a] Latest Ratio 8 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 20 0.00[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised

[iv] Retained Profit / Total Assets (% 10[a] Latest Ratio 8 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 0.00[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised

[v] PBDIT / Interest 10[a] Latest Ratio 8 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 20 0.00[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised

[vi] PAT / NET SALES 10[a] Latest Ratio 8 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 20 0.00[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised

[vii] Net Cash Accrual / Total Debt 10[a] Latest Ratio 8 1.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 0.00[b] Average of last 3 years 2 NA Normalised

[viii] 10 1 NA Normalised NA 10 Narmalised

[ix] Financial Flexibility 10 0.5 10.00 10.00 5 5.00[x] [a] Gross Average DSCR[all loans]

10 2NA NA

NA 20 #VALUE![b] Inventory/NS+Rec./Gross Salesx365 NA NA[c] Average of last 3 years NA NA

[xi] GROUP RISK 10 0.5 NA Normalised 5 Narmalised[xii] 10 0.5 NA Normalised 5 Narmalised[xiii] FUTURE PROSPECTS [Projected Ratios] 10 2 6 6.00 6.00 20 12.00

TOTAL SCORE [FINANCIAL RISK] 195 #VALUE!Total Score normalized to 65 #VALUE!Qualitative Factors [-ve] (-10) 1 #DIV/0! -10 #DIV/0!FINAL SCORE [FINANCIAL RISK] 65 #VALUE!

Max Marks

Company's ratios

Company's Score

Company's total

normalized score

Max. weighted score

Company's weighted score

Average YoY Growth in Net Sales in last 2 qtrs (%)

FOREX RISK

BORROWER RATING SUMMARY SECTOR NON-TRADING MODEL REGULAR

ABC LTD As on 31-Mar-2011

[B] BUSINESS RISK [BR]

Parameters

2.50 2.00

2.50 1.50

High Degree of cyclicality 1.00 0.25

NA 1.50 NA

1.50 1.00

The business environment in which the company operates, is excellent 0.50 0.50

1.50 1.25

The effect can be contained to the large extent

1.00 0.75

2.00 1.50

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

1.00 0.50

The R&D efforts are average and product innovation observed sometimes1.00 0.25

0.50 0.50

At present partial compliance but firm steps initiated for full compliance

2.00 1.00

Maximum Score

Company's Score

i) Competition & Market Risk

On the whole, the combination of the relevant listed factors makes the industry somewhat competitive

ii) Industry Outlook

The industry outlook (CRMD Industry approach) is "MODERATELY POSITIVE")

iii) Industry Cyclicality

iv) Regulatory Risks (for C&I)iv) Regulatory Risks (for SSI / AGL)

The industry enjoys a favorable regulatory environment. / Effect of regulatory risks can be contained. / Regulatory & legislative issues creates some vulnerability but potential impact on the company not significant as the issues can be tackled appropriately. / There have been no stoppages of work on account of labour unrest

v) Business Environment

vi) Technology & Vulnerability to technological change

The existing technology is proven and sufficient. / The industry is vulnerable to technological change to some extent but its impact is contained

vii) Vulnerability to Macro-economic environment

viii) Access to resources / Input profile

Raw material generally available at more or less steady price. / Raw Material has few other usage but supply is adequate

ix) User / Product profile

Product is distinctive and of wide acceptance/uses. / No complaints about their rejection from the market. / The delivery schedules of products adhered to without fail

x) Capacity utilization & Flexibility in operation

Optimum capacity utilization; it propels to achieve high growth targets. / Flexibility built up in the manufacturing facilities to shift between he products to maintain optimum capacity utilization

xi) Consistence in quality

Record of the unit in maintaining the quality of its products is good. / Only a few cases of sales rejection on account of poor quality. / There is no ISO certification

xii) Research & Development / Innovation

xiii) Distribution Network

Wide distribution network for the company's products traded in. / It has affective policy in place to withdraw defective products, if any, from the market. / Although the company does not have a wide distribution network, the sales are increasing year after year. / The new unit proposes wide distribution network for its products. / The new company proposes adequate distribution network for marketing and sale of its products. / The management of the company is optimistic about the gradual increase in sales year later year on account of uniqueness of its products and its quality even without a wide distribution network

xiv) Compliance of Environmental Regulations

Total Score - Business Risk 20.00 14.00Business Risk Score - Normalized 20.00 14.00

[C]ABC LTD

MANAGEMENT RISK [MR] Parameters

2.00 2.00

NA

2.00 NA

2.00 2.00

2.00 1.50

1.00 0.50

1.00 1.00

0.50 0.25

1.50 1.00

Achieves both sales and profit projections within negative variance of 10%

1.00 1.00

The potential to manage change is put in into action to a great extent1.00 0.50

1.00 0.75

Full compliance after the expiry of the stipulated period and after follow up2.00 1.00

Total Score [MR] 15.00 11.50M R Score Normalized 15.00 11.50

[D] Qualitative Parameter [External Rating] 5 0.00

Aggregate Score [ FR + BR + MR + QP] out of 100 ~ [ A+B+C+D ] 100 #VALUE!

Score rounded off #VALUE!CRA Rating based on the above Score SB #VALUE!

Country Risk [CR] NA

FINAL BORROWER RATING AFTER CR. SB #VALUE!

Maximum Score

Company's Score

Integrity (for Unlisted Companies)

The integrity and character of the Management is beyond reproach. / No fraudulent deals/transactions. / No unsatisfactory feature of the unit has come to light. /No adverse features revealed in any audit report

Integrity (for Listed Companies)

Track Record / Conduct of account / Payment record

Maintains financial discipline, is regular in submission of financial statements and there are very few occasions of irregularity in the account. / Hardly any instance of cheque return or invocation of guarantee. / The record of meeting commitments to lenders and creditors is excellent. / The unit has rarely defaulted on this score

Managerial competence/ Commitment/ Expertise

The management is competent. / The unit has professionals in the key areas, under the overall control of the management, who function independently. / The projects undertaken are executed in time

Structure & Systems

Although budgeting, costing, MIS are in place, proper implementation efforts are lacking

Experience in Industry

The management has a very good experience in the trade (> =5 years) and /or it is a family business

Strategic Initiatives

The management has visions and is also capable of taking initiatives but the necessary thrust is lacking

Length of Relationship with the Bank

Dealing with the Bank for more than 2 years and conduct is satisfactory. / New unit but belonging to a Group which has dealings with the Bank for more than 2 years, and a Group Company has offered its guarantee

Credibility: Ability to achieve sales/profit projections

Ability to manage change

Succession Plan

Succession plan is in place/the number of key persons are just adequate to run the operations of the Company but in the event of one or two leaving the company would materially affect its operations to some extent

Adherence to the covenants of sanction

Financial Statement Quality SatisfactoryRisk Score / Rating Transition Matrix Annexed

#VALUE!#VALUE!

NON- TRADING SECTOR: FACILITY RATING Facility rated CC

A) RISK DRIVERS FOR LGD Industry Textiles

Geography Central

ABC LTD Nature of loan Working Capital

(I) Trade Description

3 2.50

(b) Trade Recovery Score Textiles 3 0.63

(II) Geography Central 2 0.40

(iii) Unit Characteristics

4 4.00

The useful life, quality & upkeep good/satisfactory 4 3.00

(IV) Macroeconomic Conditions

(a) GDP Growth Rate1 0.75

Position Neutral. No significant assistance in recovery. 1 0.50

1 0.50

(d) Time Period of Recovery Expected Recovery time >1 year upto 7 years 1 0.50

(V) Total Security Effective Coll Cover EAD Coll / EAD ratio Max. Marks Score

CC 0.00 0.00 0.00 70 0.00B) RISK DRIVERS FOR EAD

Credit Quality of BorrowerWeight (b)

100 0.1 10 #VALUE! #VALUE!

Borrower Rating ParameterCurrent Ratio Max Negative Score Value Statement

0.00 (-5) <1.00 -5

Borrower Rating ParameterDebt / Equity ratio Max Negative Score Value Statement

NA (-2) NA NA

Borrower Rating ParameterGross Avg DSCR Max Negative Score Value Statement

NA (-2) NA NA

Borrower Rating Parameter Tenor of term loanMax Negative Score Value Statement

(-1) NA NATOTAL SCORE OUT OF 100 #VALUE!TOTAL SCORE NORMALISED OUT OF 100 (ROUNDED OFF) 100 #VALUE!FACILITY RATING FR #VALUE!

Type of Guarantee NA NARating of Corporate Guarantor by External Agencies NA

FINAL FACILITY RATING FR #VALUE!a) If Country Risk is not applicable, the assessment would be as per the the table above b) If Country Risk is applicable, upper range of the score corresponding to Final Borrower Rating arrived at -

Max Marks

Co's Score

(a) Trade Characteristics & Distance to Default

Moderate Risk with Adequate Cushion / Moderate Risk (CRMD: Moderately Positive)

(a) Leverage / Enforcement of Collateral

Lowest leverage (sole claimant for Assets in the event of default) /Enforcement of claim not affected by any other party.

(b) Safety, Value & Existence of assets

Small GDP Growth rate over last 3 years. Mild recessionary phase. A few cases of defaults. Moderate recovery reported

(b) Insolvency Legislation in the Jurisdiction

© Impact of systemic / Legal Factors on Recovery

Systemic Factors in the Government/Semi Government by and large favour recovery. Legal System also favours recovery. Govt. Machinery is neutral.

Max marks under Borrower rating (a)

Max marks under Credit Quality of

Borrower (c) = (axb)

Company's Borrower Rating

score (d)

Company's Score

(e) = (dxb)

Co's Score

Co's Score

Co's Score

Co's Score

Pls select all the Drop downs wherever texts or figures are appearing in blue sheds!

after Country Risk Assessment to be reckoned for scoring.

Pls select all the Drop downs wherever texts or figures are appearing in blue sheds!

NON TRADING: REGULAR MODEL

ABC LTD

Financial Ratios : Financial ratios

Prev-to-Prev Yr Prev. Yr 31-Mar-11TOL/TNW NA NA NA NA NACurrent Ratio NA NA NA NA NAROCE NA NA NA NARetained Profit/TA% NA NA NA NAPBDIT/Interest NA NA NA NAPAT/Net Sales(%) NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NAPrevious year Current yearNA NA NA NA

G.Avg.DSCR NA

NA NA NA NA

Debt / Equity NATNW NA

Future prospects (FP) / (Projected ratios)(A) Non-achievement of projected performance

Parameters -ve var. (%) -ve ScoreCurrent Ratio NA NA 0.00 0.00ROCE NA NA 0.00 0.00PBDIT/INT NA NA 0.00 0.00PAT/NS NA NA 0.00 0.00TOL/TNW NA NA 0.00 0.00

(B) Projections for the next year

ParametersCurrent Ratio NA NA At Par 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00ROCE NA NA At Par 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00PBDIT/INT NA NA At Par 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00PAT/NS NA NA At Par 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00TOL/TNW NA NA Better 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00Total Score 0.00 12.00

Note:

Effective Collateral distribution (ECD):EFC EM S-R FA O-CA R Total

Total Coll #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!ECD 100% 30% 20% 15% 8% 20%0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

Average of last 3 years

Industry Ratio

Net Cash Accrual/Total Debt(%)

Net Sales in last 2 qtrs (Chronological order

(Inventory/N.Sales)+ (Receivable/G.sales) in days

Latest year (projected)

Latest year (actual)

Scoring pattern

(0-5)%=0 (6-10)%=0.5

(11-20)%=1 (21-30)%=1.5

>30%=3

Latest year (actual)

Next year (projected)

Future prospects

(P)Scoring pattern $

Positive Score

(Q)

Markes for -ve

variance (R)

Net Marks (Q-R)

(S)

Weight

(T)

Wtd score (SxT)

"Better"=2 "At

par"=1 "Worse"=0

$ The Methodology for scoring under "Better", "At par", or "Worse" scenarios would be the same as indicated for scoring under respective ratios under Financial RisksFor a new Company/firm which is yet to complete a year of commercial production/ operation, as well as in Take-over cases, there would be no scoring on Future Prospects parameter as a whole and the score would be normalized

0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! page: 1FINANCIAL RISK PARAMETERS Working Sheet[i] TOL / TNW [Max. weighted scored : 30]

TABLE - I

Ratio Band Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]<=0.50 6 3 0.00 6 18.00<=1.00 5<=1.50 4<=2.50 3<=3.00 2>3.00 0

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] < [a] 2 3 2 6.00

[b]=[a] or {[a]+[0.25]} 1[b]>{[a]+[0.25]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 3.00 would qualify for getting a score of 2,otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE-III

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]0.00 0.00 [b] < [a] 0.00 2 3 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]+[0.25]} 1[b]>{[a]+[0.25]} 0

TABLE - IVParticulars Weighted Score

Company’s Score from Table I 18.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Industry Comparison from Table III 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 30.00

[ii] CURRENT RATIO [Max. weighted scored : 15]TABLE - I

Ratio Band Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=1.50 6 1.5 0.00 0 0.00>=1.33 5

[a] Latest Ratio

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' TOL/TNW

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Industry Comparison [TOL / TNW]

Industry Ratio

Co.'s latest ratio from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as compared to

industry average. Industry

Ratio

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[d] Summary of Total Score "TOL / TNW"

[a] Latest Ratio

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

>=1.20 4>=1.10 3>=1.00 2< 1.00 0 page: 2

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 0.00 2 1.5 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.05]} 1[b]<{[a]-[0.05]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 1.10 would qualify for getting a score of 2,otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE-III

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]0.00 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 1.5 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.03]} 1[b]<{[a]-[0.03]} 0

TABLE - IV

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Industry Comparison from Table III 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

[iii] Return on Capital Employed [ROCE] (%) [PBDIT/Total Assets] [Max.Weighted Score-20]

TABLE - I

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=20.00 8 2 0.00 0 0.00>=15.00 6>=10.00 5>= 5.00 4>= 3.00 3>= 2.00 2<2.00 0

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 2 NA #VALUE!

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - CURRENT RATIO

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average Industry

Ratio

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Industry Comparison [CURRENT RATIO]

Industry Ratio

Co.'s latest ratio from

Table-I

Company's latest ratio as compared to

industry

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score =

[d] Summary of Total Score "CURRENT RATIO"

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [a]x[b]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - ROCE

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[1%]} 1[b]<{[a]-[1%]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 3.00 would qualify for getting a score of 2,otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

page: 3TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

[iv] Retained Profit / Total Assets (%) [Max.Weighted Score-10]

TABLE - I

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=7.50 8 1 0.00 0 0.00>=5.00 6>=3.00 4>=2.00 2>=1.00 1< 1.00 0

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 1 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.25%]} 1[b]<{[a]-[0.25%]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 2.00% would qualify for getting a score of 2, otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

[v] PBDIT / INTT. [Max.Weighted Score-20]

TABLE - I

[c] Summary of Total Score under ROCE Ratio

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - Retained Profit / Total Assets Ratio

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Summary of Total Score under Retained Profit / Total Assets Ratio

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=8.00 8 2 0.00 0 0.00>=5.00 6>=3.00 4>=2.00 3>=1.00 2< 1.00 0 page: 4

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 2 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.25%]} 1[b]<{[a]-[0.25%]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 2.00 would qualify for getting a score of 2,otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

[vi] PAT / Net Sales [%] [Max.Weighted Score-20]

TABLE - I

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=8.00 8 2 0.00 0 0.00>=6.00 6>=4.00 4>=3.00 3>=2.00 2< 2.00 0

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 2 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.25%]} 1

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - PBDIT / INTT.

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Summary of Total Score under PBDIT / INTT. Ratio

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - PAT / Net Sales.

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[b]<{[a]-[0.25%]} 0Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 3.00% would qualify for getting a score of 2, otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

page: 5

[c] Summary of Total Score under the ratio PAT / Net Sales.

[vii] Net Cash Accruals / Total Debt [%] [Total Weighted Score-15][NCA = PAT-Dividend+Depreciation] / [Total Debt = Total Outside Liabilities]

TABLE - I

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=20% 8 1.5 0.00 0 0.00>=18% 7>=15% 6>=10% 5>=8% 4>= 7% 3>=5% 2>= 4% 1< 4% 0

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA 0.00 [b] > [a] 2 1.5 NA Normalised

[b]=[a] or {[a]-[0.25%]} 1[b]<{[a]-[0.25%]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 5.00% would qualify for getting a score of 2, otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I 0.00Company’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score 0.00

[viii] Average Year to Year Growth in Net Sales in Last Two Quarters [%]

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=15.00% 10 1 NA NA Normalised>=7.50% 8>=3.00% 6>=2.00% 4>=0.00% 2

>=(-5.00%) -2>=(-10%) -4<(-10%) -6

Average year to year growth in Net Sales in Last Two Quarters [%]Previous year Current year Growth%

Mar Qtr 0.00 -- 0.00 -- #DIV/0!June Qtr -- 0.00 -- 0.00 #DIV/0!

Average Growth NA

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - Net Cash Accruals / Total Debt.

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Summary of Total Score under the ratio Net Cash Accruals / Total Debt.

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

Net sales in last 2 qtrs

Company's Score Normalised page: 6

(ix)Financial Flexibility(Success record in % terms vis-à-vis the target set for raising funds/mobilising resources

Marks Company's Ratio

10.00 0.50 10 5.00

7.00

Good >=50% 4.00

2.00

0.00Financial Flexibility: a) Ability to raise Funds through internal sourcesb) Ability to raise resources through external sources viz.Relationship with Bankers,Liquidity back-upsc) Records in raising funds from Capital Marketd) Flexibility to defer its capital expenditure in case of weakening financial position

[Maximum Weighted Score : 20]

Ratio Band Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]>=2.00 10 2.00 NA NA NA>=1.98 9>=1.95 8>=1.92 7>=1.90 6>=1.88 5>=1.85 4>=1.80 3>=1.78 2>=1.75 1<1.75 0

[for a borrower enjoying WC facility only] [Maximum Weighted Score : 20]TABLE - I

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f]<= 90 8 2 NA NA NA<=120 6<=150 4<=180 3<=210 2<=240 1>240 0

page: 7

Ratio Band [%]

Weight [a]

Company's Score from

[b]

Company's Weighted Score = [a]x[b]

Excellent >=90%

Excellent (Success record) >=90%

Very Good >=70%

Satisfactory =>40%

Unsatisfactory <40%

[x] Case I : Gross Average DSCR for All Loans [for a borrower enjoying TL facility only]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

[xi] Case II : (Inventory / Net Sales + Receivables / Gross Sales) x 365 (Days')

[a] Latest Ratio

Ratio Band [%]

Company's Ratio

Company's Score from [b]

Company's Weighted Score = [c]x[e]

TABLE-II

Marks Weight

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g]NA NA [b] < [a] 2 2 NA NA

[b]=[a] or {[a] +[15]} 1[b]>{[a] +[15]} 0

Note: i) If the Company/firm obtains maximum score in Table-I, the score in Table-II will be 2ii)Improvements in the ratio only below the benchmark level of 210 days would qualify for getting a score of 2, otherwise it would be treated at par and get a score of 1.

TABLE - III

Particulars Weighted ScoreCompany’s Score from Table I NACompany’s Score from Table II 0.00Company's Total Weighted Score NA

CASE - III : For a Company having both WC & TL Facilities.[i] Scoring done for TL as under Case-I Score : NA[ii] Scoring done for WC as under Case II Score : NAFinal Score (for both WC & TL- (case-I + case-II)/2) #VALUE!

page: 8

[b] Moving Average of Company's Last 3 Years' - Ratio - (Inv./NS+Rec./GS) x 365 [Days']

Last 3 Years' average

Company's latest ratio

from Table-I

Company's latest ratio as

compared to its 3 years' average

Company's Score from

[d]

Company's

Weighted Score = [e]x[f]

[c] Summary of Total Score under Case = II - (Inv. / NS + Rec. / GS) x 365 [days']

Annexure Name of the unit: ABC LTDRisk Score / Rating Transition Matrix

Prev-to-Prev Yr Prev. Yr 31-Mar-11CRA Rating CRA Rating

#VALUE! SB #VALUE!

Comparison of latest Financial Risk(FR) Score of last 3 years Prev-to-Prev Yr Prev. Yr 31-Mar-11

FR score: FR score: FR score: #VALUE!Out of Out of Out of 65

Comments:

1

2

3

4

5

6

Aggregate Risk Score

Aggregate Risk Score

Aggregate Risk Score

CRA Rating