The Altman Z-Score: Is it possible to predict corporate bankruptcy using a formula?

Wednesday, Apr 13 2011 by
The Altman ZScore Is it possible to predict corporate bankruptcy using a formula

In Brief

The Altman Z-score is a combination of five weighted business ratios that is used to estimate the likelihood of financial distress. If the credit crunch itself wasn’t lesson enough, respected fund manager Anthony Bolton has emphasised the importance of understanding credit risk when investing in equities: “When I analysed the stocks that have lost me the most money, about two-thirds of the time it was due to weak balance sheets. You have to have your eyes open to the fact that if you are buying a company with a weak balance sheet and something changes, then that’s when you are going to be most exposed as a shareholder.”

Background to the Z-Score

The Z-Score was developed in 1968 by Edward I. Altman, an Assistant Professor of Finance at New York University, as a quantitative balance-sheet method of determining a company’s financial health. A Z-score can be calculated for all non-financial companies and the lower the score, the greater the risk of the company falling into financial distress. 

The original research was based on data from publicly held manufacturers (66 firms, half of which had filed for bankruptcy). Altman calculated 22 common financial ratios for all of them and then used multiple discriminant analysis to choose a small number of those ratios that could best distinguish between a bankrupt firm and a healthy one. To test the model, Altman then calculated the Z Scores for new groups of bankrupt and nonbankrupt but sick firms (i.e. with reported deficits) in order to discover how well the Z Score model could distinguish between sick firms and the terminally ill. 

The results indicated that, if the Altman Z-Score is close to or below 3, it is wise to do some serious due diligence before considering investing. The Z-score results usually have the following "Zones" of interpretation:

  1. Z Score above 2.99 -“Safe” Zones. The company is considered ‘Safe’ based on the financial figures only.
  2. 1.8 < Z < 2.99 -“Grey” Zones. There is a good chance of the company going bankrupt within the next 2 years of operations.
  3. Z below 1.80 -“Distress” Zones. The score indicates a high probability of distress within this time period.

The Z-score has subsequently been re-estimated based on other datasets for private manufacturing companies, as well as non-manufacturing / service companies.

Does the Altman Z-Score Work?

In its initial test, the Altman Z-Score was found to…

Unlock this article instantly by logging into your account

Don’t have an account? Register for free and we’ll get out your way


As per our Terms of Use, Stockopedia is a financial news & data site, discussion forum and content aggregator. Our site should be used for educational & informational purposes only. We do not provide investment advice, recommendations or views as to whether an investment or strategy is suited to the investment needs of a specific individual. You should make your own decisions and seek independent professional advice before doing so. Remember: Shares can go down as well as up. Past performance is not a guide to future performance & investors may not get back the amount invested. ?>

Do you like this Post?
20 thumbs up
0 thumbs down
Share this post with friends

11 Comments on this Article show/hide all

dangersimpson 29th Oct '12 1 of 11


I've noticed that a number of companies seem to score low on the Altman z-score when the have negative working capital. The reason is T1 = Working Capital / Total Assets will be negative and therefore significantly reduce the z-score.

This seems to make companies that seem pretty safe to me - e.g. Cineworld (LON:CINE) as high bankruptcy risk simply because they tend to collect the money from consumers significantly before they pay suppliers and hence have negative working capital. Personally I really like businesses like this because they don't raise equity capital from me or bank debt that could be pulled to finance their working capital and I struggle to see how this massively increases their financial risk profile unless their negative WC was because they are refusing to pay suppliers on time.

Not read Altman's book so does he cover companies with negative WC. Intuitively it would seem to make more sense to use the absolute values of WC & Net Assets so:

T1 = |Working Capital| / |Total Assets|

Or am I missing something obvious here?



| Link | Share | 1 reply
Murakami 29th Oct '12 2 of 11

In reply to post #68989

Hi DM, thanks for a great comment. As I'm sure you know, negative working capital means that current liabilities exceed current assets. The reason it's used in the Altman calculation is that this fact is a strong indicator that the company could be in serious financial trouble. As you say, this is ambiguous though, as it can also be a sign of managerial or business efficiency - for example, it might be a business with low inventory and accounts receivable (which means they operate on effectively a cash basis).

Altman generally works well, in aggregate, but no statistical indicator will ever get it right 100% of the time. Financials is one known limitation and, although there is a more generic Z2 score, the original Z-Score was originally designed for "industrial companies" which typically don't have the kind of financial profile you describe. That's why we provide the popups for the Piotroski, Altman & Beneish "red flags" so users can look into specific company factors that might lead someone to draw a different conclusion.

We are not aware of any reliable adjustment factor that has been applied to weed out "good" negative working capital companies but we'll look into this further. We're also planning to implement the Distance to Default, which will be another bankruptcy risk indicator to use alongside the Altman score.

p.s. This short-selling screen is an illustration of how well it works at a portfolio level, though, notwithstanding these limitations, although its performance on the downside is eclipsed by this one

| Link | Share
Murakami 29th Oct '12 3 of 11

It's also interesting to note this blog which - in discussing this very issue - argues that an alternative, fairly obvious way of screening for solvency risk is by looking for companies that show:

1. High operating risk: The top two deciles of standard deviation of EBIT or EBITDA margin over the last 5 or 10 years (pick your horizon)
2. High financial leverage: The top two deciles of financial leverage, by total debt to market equity or interest coverage. Normalized decile scores by sector.

We're actually working on an Earnings Variability indicator so we'll look at adding that too as a tracked screen to see how it compares.

| Link | Share
Murakami 29th Oct '12 4 of 11

p.s. We've also added a summary article on these points to the Help & FAQ section - thank for raising it:

| Link | Share
RodinsGormlessBugger 3rd Aug '16 5 of 11

The link to Taffler's UK-specific score is broken. I had a quick search on the EFMA website, but can't see where the link should be redirected to.

| Link | Share
Munday 27th Mar 6 of 11

I cannot find the reason for Sylvania platinum to have such a low Z score. Maybe miners are rated differently to other stocks?

| Link | Share | 2 replies
HumourMe 27th Mar 7 of 11

In reply to post #462433

I cannot find the reason for Sylvania platinum to have such a low Z score. Maybe miners are rated differently to other stocks?

If you click on the blue label you get a pop up box. If you then click on details you will be enlightened. This is much easier than seeking enlightenment the Buddhist way ...

| Link | Share
Gromley 27th Mar 8 of 11

In reply to post #462433

Hi Munday - there is an oddity (error?) with the way the SLP balance sheet is shown on Stockopedia - I've raised this with the Stocko team.

Basically the liabilities are showing as negative due to a single negative line item.

As a result it fails one of the Z-score tests "Does firm value compare favourably to its liabilities?" ( Market Value of Equity/Book Value of Total Liabilities > 1.439 ) by virtue of liabilities being negative.

The true Z-score is probably nowhere near as low as shown, although the three tests it is showing as passes are all relatively close which I think would still mean that the score would be quite low.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
Munday 27th Mar 9 of 11

In reply to post #462453

Thank you Gromley ,much appreciated. I obviously didn’t dig deep enough.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
JohnEustace 31st Mar 10 of 11

In reply to post #462458

SharePad calculates the Altman Z for SLP as being 4.4

| Link | Share | 1 reply
wilkonz 1st Apr 11 of 11

In reply to post #464153

Thanks JohnEustace. I've ignored the Stockopedia Altman Z on Sylvania Platinum (LON:SLP) and bought two tranches recently. In the latest Investors Chronicle Simon Thompson has just raised his target price to 35 pence in line with the increasing values of platinum, rhodium and palladium.

| Link | Share

Please subscribe to submit a comment

About Stockopedia Features

Stockopedia Features

Stockopedia Features covers in-depth stories on strategies, companies and themes that are relevant to online investors. Investing is hard work. We don't try to over-simplify complex concepts - we prefer to try to help you navigate the detail.  more »

Stock Picking Tutorial Centre

Let’s get you setup so you get the most out of our service
Done, Let's add some stocks
Brilliant - You've created a folio! Now let's add some stocks to it.

  • Apple (AAPL)

  • Shell (RDSA)

  • Twitter (TWTR)

  • Volkswagon AG (VOK)

  • McDonalds (MCD)

  • Vodafone (VOD)

  • Barratt Homes (BDEV)

  • Microsoft (MSFT)

  • Tesco (TSCO)
Save and show me my analysis