Question about "Company" versus "Group" in IFRS filings

[west]

Hey all.  I've been going over a bunch of British and European filings recently, and I'm a little confused by something in some of their financial statements.  You'll occassionally see balance sheets split in two, with one half being attributable to the "Group" and the other half being attributed to the "Company".  Does anyone know what this is about and where I can read about why it exists?  I'm guessing it has something to do with separating the core business from the rest of the businesses the top-level company might be involved in.  But I'd prefer not to assume.

 

Also, some of the Statements of Changes in Equity have label of "Attributable to owners of the parent".  I'm guessing this means, for the "Company" part, that the owner of the parent will primarily be the top-level company/holding company, and that the "owners of the parent" for the "Consolidated" Statement (what I'm guessing is the top-level/holding company level company) is the shareholders?

 

Thanks for your help with this!

[oddballstocks]

You see this in the US as well for banks, there is a bank holding company and then subsidiaries.

 

In my experience most European companies are organized with a holding company and then a subsidiary that conducts business in each country.  So you have the parent only financials and then consolidated financials.

[west]

Ah, so I should read it as the "Company"/"parent" being the top level company/holding company, and then the "Group" as the "Company" with all of its subsidiary financials consolidated into it (when appropriate)?  Looking at some of those filings I was talking about, that seems to make a lot more sense than what I was thinking.

[Palantir]

Is this AWLCF?

[west]

Is this AWLCF?

 

It is a lot of companies :)  But, no, I haven't looked at AWLCF.

[writser]

Ah, so I should read it as the "Company"/"parent" being the top level company/holding company, and then the "Group" as the "Company" with all of its subsidiary financials consolidated into it (when appropriate)?  Looking at some of those filings I was talking about, that seems to make a lot more sense than what I was thinking.

 

Yes, afaik. Basically I always more or less ignore the company level.

[peter1234]

Ah, so I should read it as the "Company"/"parent" being the top level company/holding company, and then the "Group" as the "Company" with all of its subsidiary financials consolidated into it (when appropriate)?  Looking at some of those filings I was talking about, that seems to make a lot more sense than what I was thinking.

 

Yes, afaik. Basically I always more or less ignore the company level.

 

Is there anything that you can learn from or look at the company level numbers?

[oddballstocks]

Ah, so I should read it as the "Company"/"parent" being the top level company/holding company, and then the "Group" as the "Company" with all of its subsidiary financials consolidated into it (when appropriate)?  Looking at some of those filings I was talking about, that seems to make a lot more sense than what I was thinking.

 

Yes, afaik. Basically I always more or less ignore the company level.

 

Yes.  Company level is good to determine the strength of the company.  I'm not sure what is 'good' to look for, but here are some bad things.

 

Avoid companies where significant debt is held at the holdco level if the holdco doesn't have the cash, or might have issues getting cash dividended up to pay.  This is where you can run into problems, holdco's debt is due and for whatever reason can't get to sub-debt in time with the company going bankrupt. 

 

You can also detect if one company is supporting another if you see capital moving up and then back down.

 

In most cases these statements are extremely boring and are ignorable.  It's not uncommon to see a parent statement with a few million in cash, a few hundred thousand in "other assets" and nothing else outside of investments in subsidiaries.

Is there anything that you can learn from or look at the company level numbers?