Source: https://www.dnb.co.in/media/press-release/456
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:52:33+00:00

Document:
Optimism amongst CFOs in the services sector is the lowest in 17 quarters.
Mumbai, May 08, 2018: Dun & Bradstreet, the world’s leading provider of global business information, knowledge and insight conducted a pan India survey of Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) in which they were asked about their confidence in the overall financial and macro-economic conditions for Q2 2018 (Apr-Jun of the calendar year 2018), as compared to the same quarter of the previous year. The survey reveals how optimistic the CFOs are with respect to the overall financial health of their respective companies, the business risk environment and the macroeconomic scenario in the country.
§ The Composite CFO Optimism Index declined by 17.8%, on a q-o-q basis, to 96.2 during Q2 2018 – lowest in 4 years.
§ Optimism levels dipped both for the financial performance of the company and macroeconomic scenario.
§ 61% of CFOs have indicated domestic macroeconomic scenario to be favorable in Q2 2018, barring Q1 2017, it is the lowest since Q3 2014.
§ Optimism levels for the financial performance of the company is the lowest in 17 quarters.
§ Optimism level amongst CFOs in the services sector is the lowest in 17 quarters.
§ 31% of CFOs expect the level of financial risks on company’s balance sheet to increase, highest in 17 quarters.
§ 35% of CFOs indicated the need for raising long-term funds - highest in 3 years.
§ 26% of CFOs in the industrial sector have indicated a need for raising short-term funds - lowest since Q2 2012.
§ Only 36% of CFOs expect availability of funds in the market to increase - lowest in four-and-a-half years.
§ 25% of CFOs expect the cost of raising funds to increase - highest in 4 years.
§ 47% of CFOs have indicated an increase in close monitoring of strategic accounts in the next six months, highest since Q2 2017.
§ Since Q2 2017, CFOs have stated that Reducing cost has been their top priority and Dividend declaration as their least priority.

References: § 61

§ 31

§ 35

§ 26

§ 25

§ 47