Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67813
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-9
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Mangement
Lovely professional University
Mangement
Lovely professional University
Mangement
Lovely professional University
Mangement
Lovely professional University
Mangement
Lovely professional University
In the highly leveraged world of auto manufacturing, taking on debt is usually just part of the game. But Bosch Limited, a leading tier-1 automotive supplier listed on both the NSE and BSE, follows a very different approach. This paper examines the financial strategy of Bosch, exploring how the company structures its capital, prices it, and ultimately translates those choices into real shareholder value. By analysing five years of audited standalone financials (FY 2021-22 to FY 2025-26), we examine whether Bosch’s strictly zero-debt approach holds up against traditional corporate finance theories. To put some hard numbers behind this strategy, we used the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) and the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) to estimate the company's true hurdle rate. The results confirm that Bosch is completely unlevered. With a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.00x, equity carries the entire 100% weight. Plugging in a 7.10% risk-free rate, a beta of 0.85, and a 6.00% equity risk premium, both the cost of equity and the WACC settle right at 12.20%. For a firm with zero debt, the WACC is simply equal to its cost of equity. Does this conservative approach leave value unrealised? To find out, we benchmarked Bosch against two industry peers: Schaeffler India and Samvardhana Motherson International. While Samvardhana Motherson uses debt to lower its nominal WACC via interest tax shields, Bosch clearly prioritizes long-term solvency and operational flexibility. The strategy appears to be paying off. Bosch is generating a Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) of 21.54%. Since that easily clears their 12.20% WACC by 9.34 percentage points, the company is creating a healthy Economic Value Added (EVA) spread. Ultimately, this heavily equity-funded model is consistent with the Pecking Order Theory in action. More importantly, it gives Bosch the financial flexibility to fund its significant pivot toward electric mobility and software-defined vehicles. By avoiding the heavy debt loads that constrain other firms during industry slumps, Bosch has positioned itself to navigate the auto sector's inevitable cyclical downturns without taking on excessive financial risk.
KEYWORDS
This study examined how Bosch handles its capital, its overall cost of funding, and whether it creates real value. The main findings are as follows. Bosch has no interest-bearing borrowings, with a D/E ratio of 0.00x. Its capital base, about INR 29.50 crore in equity share capital and over INR 14,800 crore in reserves, is built purely on equity. Because there is no interest-bearing debt, its WACC is identical to its cost of equity: using a beta of 0.85, a 7.10% risk-free rate and a 6% risk premium gives a WACC of 12.20%. Bosch is consistent with the Pecking Order Theory, relying on internal cash to fund capital expenditure instead of borrowing from banks or issuing equity. Its 21.54% return on capital comfortably exceeds the 12.20% benchmark, leaving a healthy +9.34% spread in economic value.
· Bosch Limited. (2022). Annual report 2021–22: Enabling mobility transformation. Bengaluru: Bosch Limited. · Bosch Limited. (2023). Annual report 2022–23: Innovating for a connected future. Bengaluru: Bosch Limited. · Bosch Limited. (2024). Annual report 2023–24: Powering tomorrow, together. Bengaluru: Bosch Limited. · Bosch Limited. (2025). Standalone and consolidated financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2025. Bengaluru: Bosch Limited. · Bosch Limited. (2026). Annual report 2025–26: Financial statements and statutory reports. Bengaluru: Bosch Limited. · Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2020). Financial management: Theory & practice (16th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. · Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for determining the value of any asset (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. · Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2004). The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(3), 25–46. · Graham, J. R., & Harvey, C. R. (2001). The theory and practice of corporate finance: Evidence from the field. Journal of Financial Economics, 60(2-3), 187–243.
Publication Date
10/12/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
11
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...