TrendCap by 15RockWorking Capital · DIO / DSO / DPO · Peer Margin Benchmarking

Find where to investigate cash-cycle and margin gaps.

For finance and operations leaders at manufacturers, distributors, retailers and service operators.

Analyst-reviewed research, a sourced decision brief and an editable workbook. Scope, fee and delivery schedule agreed before work starts.

Three things you take away

01A peer comparison on a consistent accounting basis
02Cash-cycle scenarios with transparent assumptions
03A ranked list of margin and operating questions

Working Capital & Margin Diagnostic Scope

Request a peer working capital & margin benchmark

Select your diagnostic focus. An optional revenue band can help us identify relevant peers.

Open the scope request form directly

Loading inquiry form…

Can be run outside-in from public figures or under mutual NDA with your summary trial balance.

Prefer direct email or a mutual NDA first? Email hello@15rock.com

See the work

From a business question to a decision.

Explore this ungated example. It shows the structure of the analysis and the limits of what it can establish.

Illustrative · fictional operating company and figures

Where should a distributor investigate cash tied up in operations?

The question. A distributor wants to understand whether inventory, collections or supplier terms merit investigation before setting an improvement target.

The analysis. Compare inventory days, receivable days and payable days with a relevant peer reference. Convert selected changes into separate modeled cash effects.

01 / Cash-cycle comparison (days)
Measure	Current	Peer	Change
Inventory (DIO)	60	50	10 fewer
Receivables (DSO)	50	45	5 fewer
Payables (DPO)	40	45	5 more
Cash cycle	70	50	20 fewer

02 / Modeled cash release

Inventory: CA$2.0M
Receivables: CA$1.5M
Payables: CA$1.0M
Combined scenario: CA$4.5M

Modeled balance-sheet release, not achieved savings or annual profit.

03 / Separate margin bridge: questions to investigate

Starting margin
8.0%
Pricing hypothesis
+1.2 pp
Mix hypothesis
+0.8 pp
Overhead hypothesis
+1.5 pp
Reference margin
11.5%

A 3.5-percentage-point (350-basis-point) gap. The illustrative bridge is separate from the cash-release model.

What this example finds: The example cash cycle is 70 days versus a 50-day reference. The selected scenario models CA$4.5M of cash release; a separate margin bridge explores a 350-basis-point gap.
The decision it supports: Prioritize stock policy, overdue receivables and supplier-term reviews. Validate operational feasibility and accounting comparability before adopting any target.

Read assumptions, calculations and evidence gaps

Annual revenue CA$109.5M and cost of goods sold CA$73M; a 365-day year and constant activity levels.
Inventory: 10 fewer days × CA$73M / 365 = CA$2.0M. Receivables: 5 fewer days × CA$109.5M / 365 = CA$1.5M.
Payables: 5 additional days × CA$73M / 365 = CA$1.0M, using cost of goods sold as a proxy for purchases.
CA$2.0M + CA$1.5M + CA$1.0M = CA$4.5M modeled cash release. This is a balance-sheet scenario, not annual profit or achieved savings.
The separate margin bridge is 8.0% + 1.2 + 0.8 + 1.5 percentage points = 11.5%. These are illustrative investigation hypotheses, not validated causal effects.
Peer mix, seasonality, lease treatment, factoring, inventory valuation, supplier resilience and customer service can change the interpretation.

Your research package

What you receive, and how your team can use it.

Compare operating performance on a consistent basis, with business-mix differences, accounting adjustments and evidence gaps made explicit.

Normalized peer comparison: An agreed peer cohort, multi-year cash-cycle and margin measures, and adjustments for business mix and accounting differences.
Cash-release scenarios: Editable inventory, receivable and payable-day calculations with denominators, sensitivities and feasibility questions stated.
Margin bridge: A view of the gap to selected peers and the pricing, mix, cost and overhead questions that could explain it.
Prioritized investigation brief: A ranked list of hypotheses, supporting evidence, data gaps and suggested owners for follow-up; no automatic savings commitment.

Practical uses

Focus a finance and operations review
Challenge the comparability of peer targets
Prioritize the next data requests

Explore another illustrative workbook extract and delivery details

Working capital & margin example · Company A vs. 10-peer industrial cohortIllustrative

Illustrative working capital and EBITDA margin benchmark against a normalized peer cohort
Diagnostic metric	Company ANormalized	Peer median10-firm cohort	Best-performing quartileDirection by metric	Cash / EBITDA opportunity
Days Inventory Outstanding (DIO)	94 days	68 days	56 days	CA$11.4M–CA$16.6M modeled cash release at peer range
Days Sales Outstanding (DSO)	49 days	46 days	39 days	In line with median; 2 key accounts lag
Days Payable Outstanding (DPO)	34 days	45 days	52 days	CA$4.8M–CA$7.9M modeled cash release from payable days
Gross margin (FIFO-adjusted)	28.4%	31.9%	34.6%	350 bps below peer median; markdown & freight mix
SG&A ex-distribution (% rev)	19.2%	16.8%	15.1%	2 peers capitalize field ops · adjusted
Fictional company and figures. Best-performing quartile means lower DIO, DSO and SG&A, and higher DPO and gross margin. Modelled cash release is an estimate, not achieved savings.

Company A is a separate fictional example from the distributor above. Basis: CA$159.5M annual cost of goods sold, a 365-day year and constant activity. Inventory: (94 − 68) to (94 − 56) days × CA$159.5M / 365 = CA$11.4M–CA$16.6M. Payables: (45 − 34) to (52 − 34) days × CA$159.5M / 365 = CA$4.8M–CA$7.9M, using cost of goods sold as a proxy for purchases. Amounts round to one decimal place. These independent scenarios require operational validation. A delivered workbook records peer accounting adjustments and the model workings.

Deliverables: Peer performance diagnostic brief, working-capital cash-release model (DIO / DSO / DPO), normalized EBITDA margin bridge, and prioritized value-creation levers.
Spreadsheet model: Unlocked Excel workbook with multi-year peer trends, footnote adjustments, median vs. top-quartile cash-release calculators, and sensitivity tables.
Evidence base: Audited peer financial statements, segment and inventory footnotes, MD&A disclosures, credit and trade filings, and your company’s summary financials.

Generated warehouse scene with organized components and cartons, illustrating inventory and operating activity. — Illustrative industry context · AI-generated supporting image. The analysis above is a worked example, not a client result.

Understanding the example

An operating-company illustration, with the limits visible.

The distributor above is fictional. It shows how a peer benchmark can become a testable investigation plan; it is not a client case study.

No cash release or margin improvement is presented as achieved. Company-specific targets require a suitable peer set, reconciled data and operational validation.

research deliveries: 300+
sectors covered worldwide: 20+

Coverage across North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific

Used by a global advisory firm, a Canadian pension investor, corporate strategy teams, and mid-market operators across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.

01 · Cash Conversion Cycle
Model potential cash release across inventory, receivables and payables
02 · Normalized EBITDA Bridge
Compare gross margin, COGS, and SG&A on a common basis
03 · Operational Value Levers
Tie financial gaps to SKU velocity, markdowns, and terms
04 · Zero ERP Disruption
Outside-in baseline from summary financials before ERP extracts

Start with the question

Bring the decision. We will help define the scope.

What to bring

Your company or business unit, sector, approximate scale and the cash-cycle or margin question you want to understand.

Detailed financial records, ageing schedules and a complete peer list are optional at inquiry. We agree the data needed after reviewing the question.

How the engagement works

0115Rock + Your team
Select the 8–15 peer cohort (direct competitors and operating-model peers) and confirm the financial metrics and reporting period.
02AI research agents
Extract multi-year income statement, balance sheet, cash flow, and footnote schedules across the entire peer group.
0315Rock analysts
Normalize accounting policies (inventory valuation, freight, D&A, one-time items), compute median and quartile gaps, and size cash and EBITDA levers.
04Your finance team
Walk through the diagnostic brief and live Excel model to prioritize 90-day working-capital and margin initiatives.

Working Capital & Margin Diagnostic Scope

Request a peer working capital & margin benchmark

Select your diagnostic focus. An optional revenue band can help us identify relevant peers.

Open the scope request form directly

Loading inquiry form…

Can be run outside-in from public figures or under mutual NDA with your summary trial balance.

Prefer direct email or a mutual NDA first? Email hello@15rock.com

How to start

One question, a fixed fee, a first read in days.

Your question: One live question, with the decision it serves.
What comes back: A reviewed answer with a point of view (a ranked shortlist, a diagnostic or a plan), with every source and anything unverified flagged.
The fee: The fee is fixed and agreed before work starts.
The timing: A first read in days, not weeks, then the reviewed brief on the date we agree.

We can provide regular research updates after the first project.

Request a scope

Frequently asked questions

We are a private company. How can you benchmark us against peers?

You share your summary income statement and balance sheet under mutual NDA (or redacted figures), and we normalize your numbers against a curated cohort of public and disclosing industry peers in your revenue band and operating model.

How do you handle accounting differences like LIFO vs. FIFO or outbound freight in SG&A vs. COGS?

Our AI agents extract the inventory, revenue-recognition, and cost-of-sales footnotes from every peer’s annual report, and our analysts reclassify the line items onto a common basis. Where a peer does not disclose a breakdown, we flag it explicitly rather than blending incompatible numbers.

Can this benchmark be used to prepare for a refinancing, lender presentation, or exit?

Yes. A scoped benchmark can help finance and operations teams test cash-release hypotheses before a credit renewal, budget cycle or sale preparation. Any modeled improvement remains subject to implementation and validation.

What if we want to turn the diagnostic into a full value creation plan?

Every benchmark includes sized improvement hypotheses. If your team wants to take the top levers further, we can immediately extend the work into a scoped Value Creation Plan with initiative owners, milestones, and sensitivity ranges.

Other TrendCap research programs