Business Valuation Techniques Explained
Business Valuation Techniques Explained
13
BUSINESS VALUATION
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
❑ Conceptual Framework of Valuation
❑ Approaches/ Methods of Valuation
❑ Measuring Cost of Equity
❑ Relative Valuation
❑ Other Approaches to Value Measurement
❑ Arriving at Fair Value
❑ Going concern and Non-Going concern valuation
❑ Valuation of Distressed Companies
❑ Valuation of Start ups
❑ Valuation of Digital Platforms
❑ Valuation of Professional/ Consultancy Firms
❑ Impact of ESG on valuation
While we discussed earlier the topic of Valuation of Securities now we shall discuss the topic of
‘Valuation of Business’ that too in corporate context. Though Corporate Valuation can be carried out
for various purpose but here we shall mainly use the same for the Mergers and Acquisitions
decisions, the next topic for the discussion.
The basic purpose of any enterprise is to earn profits in order to sustain itself and promote growth.
Managements across the world endeavor in this aspect – be it be a sole proprietorship concern or
a multinational giant having its foothold across geographies.
Corporate valuation can be traced back to centuries ago when the United East India Company
(referred to as ‘Dutch East India Company’ by the Britishers) was the first corporation to be valued
and an IPO was launched. The East India Company too stands as a fine example of a corporatized
way of doing world trade, and perhaps the earliest of institutions to focus on wealth maximization,
albeit in unethical ways. Today, almost every enterprise that generates a positive cash flow and
generates suitable employment opportunities feels the pressing need to ‘value’ itself – be it for going
to the local bank for debt financing, or for assessing an initial public offering.
It is obvious that the more an enterprise grows, the more the number of stakeholders it adds in its
progress to growth. Presentation of annual financial statements in the annual body meeting,
publishing quarterly results for the street – all these become the staple diet for stakeholders who
sow the seeds of capital in the enterprise and in turn, wait for the enterprise to multiply its progressive
potencies. In a relative world, this persisting curiosity of the stakeholders to understand the ‘true
worth’ of their enterprise becomes translated to the concept of ‘valuation’. Add to it, the market
analysts, financial intermediaries, and let’s not forget the academicians, and what we have is a
handful of valuation approaches that have been painstakingly and meticulously crafted for valuing
the correct worth of the enterprise at hand. In a true sense, valuation imbibes both the science and
the art of itself per se. As it stands today, valuation has become an inseparable part of strategic
financial management.
To elaborate, the need of a proper assessment of an enterprise’s value can be typically for:
(a) Information for its internal stakeholders,
(b) Comparison with similar enterprises for understanding management efficiency ,
(c) Future public listing of the enterprise,
(d) Strategic planning, for e.g. finding out the value driver of the enterprise, or for a correct
deployment of surplus cash,
(e) Ball park price (i.e. an approximate price) for acquisition, etc.
From an entity’s point of view, the most significant use of ROI would be to calculate the returns
generated by each individual / incremental investment on a project or different projects. Thus, a
company that has initiated a couple of projects during the year towards new business lines can
implement the ROI concept to calculate the returns on the investment and take further decisions
based on the same. Note that ROI is a historical ratio, so naturally the decision can either only be a
course corrective action, or channeling further investments into the more successful business line.
By now you will appreciate that essentially, we are viewing ROI as a performance measure ratio in
the corporate scenario; which also brings us to an interesting question –how about measuring
returns against the total investments, or simply put, the total ‘assets’ held by the enterprise? After
all, it is imperative that all assets are put forth only for the purpose of wealth maximization and fullest
returns, right? And that’s precisely the concepts seen below.
2.4 Perpetual Growth Rate (Gordon Model)
As discussed in the topic of Cost of Capital at Intermediate Level the Gordon’s model assumes a
perpetual growth in dividend; thereby potential investor eyeing stable inflows will take the latest
Dividend payout and factor it with his expected rate of return.
This model is not widely used by potential investors because of following reasons:
(i) there are more parameters which need to be factored in, and
(ii) dividends rarely grow perpetually at a steady rate.
However, this model is the darling of academicians as it can neatly fit into a ‘constant rate’ model
for deliberation purposes.
2.5 The term ‘TV’ (Terminal Value)
Terminal’ refers to the ‘end’ of something – in the valuation world, to ‘terminate’ would be to exit out
of a particular investment or line of business. So, when an investor decides to pull out and book
profits, he would not only be expecting a fair value of the value created, but also would definitely
look to the ‘horizon’ and evaluate the future cash flows, to incorporate them into his ‘selling price’.
Hence, Terminal Value (TV) is also referred to as the ‘Horizon Value’ that the investor forecasts for
valuing his investment at the exit point. Mostly TV is estimated using a perpetual growth model as
per the Gordon model. We will see the practical usage of TV in the various questions/ illustrations
during the study of this Paper.
Though this method has the advantage of being simplest as it uses historical costs which are easily
available, but it has little relevance as Balance Sheet is not a valuation device. Therefore, this
method offers a lower limit to value the shares of target company.
Further this method ignores the current asset valuation even for intangible assets such as Brand,
Intellectual Property Rights etc.
3.1.2 Net Realizable Value
Also called Liquidation Value or Adjusted Book Value it can be defined as realizable value of all
assets after deduction of liquidation expenses and paying off liabilities. Though in some case
liquidation expenses can be ignored if business of target company is acquired as a going concern.
Despite appearing to be a simple method the calculation of net realizable value may not be so simple
as being an off-market purchase it is likely that buyer may offer lowest prices.
This method is not so popular as it involves total break up of the target company. This method is
generally useful where the acquirer is interested in selling one part of business and integrate
remaining part of the business with the existing operations.
In the below example we see that the realizable values are different as compared to the book values:
Book Values Net Realizable Values
Long Term Debt
(Term Loan from ZB Bank) 10,000 10,000
Current Liabilities 10,000 10,000
Or
1
Reciprocal of PE Ratio =
PE Ratio
Using this method valuation of the company can be computed as follows:
Expected Annual Maintainable Profit
Capitalized Earning Value =
Capitalization Rate or Required Earning Yield
Though the main advantage of using this method is that it is forward looking approach however the
disadvantages are estimation of expected future profit and difference in treatment of extra ordinary
and exceptional items.
3.3 Cash flow based approach
As opposed to the asset based and income based approaches, the cash flow approach takes into
account the quantum of free cash that is available in future periods, and discounting the same
appropriately to match to the flow’s risk. Variant of this approach in context of equity has been
discussed earlier in the chapter of Security Valuation.
Simply speaking, if the present value arrived post application of the discount rate is more than the
current cost of investment, the valuation of the enterprise is attractive to both stakeholders as well
as externally interested parties (like stock analysts). It attempts to overcome the problem of over -
reliance on historical data as seen in both the previous methods. There are essentially five steps in
performing DCF based valuation:
(a) Arriving at the ‘Free Cash Flows’
(b) Forecasting of future cash flows (also called projected future cash flows)
(c) Determining the discount rate based on the cost of capital
(d) Finding out the Terminal Value (TV) of the enterprise
(e) Finding out the present values of both the free cash flows and the TV, and interpretation of
the results.
Let’s take an example, with assumed figures, to understand how the DCF method works:
Step a:
INR ('000s)
Computation of free cash flows 2016-17 Remarks
EAT (Earning After Taxes) 600
Less: One time incomes (200) One time events to be eliminated
Add: One time expenses 100 One time events to be eliminated
Add: Depreciation 100 Depreciation is a book entry
Free Cash Flow 600
Step b:
Assumptions to arrive at Adjusted Free Cash Flow as below:
Free Cash Flow estimated to grow @ 5% p.a.
Suitable assumptions to be made for changes in WC and investments in FA
Projected (in INR '000s)
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
Free Cash Flow (5 % increment Y-o-Y) 600.00 630.00 661.50
Less: Changes in Working Capital Cycle (50.00) (30.00) 10.00
Less: Investment in Fixed assets (50.00) (50.00) (20.00)
Adjusted Free Cash Flow 500.00 550.00 651.50
Step c:
Discounted Cash Flows (in INR '000s)
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
WACC (assumed) 8% 8% 8%
PVF 0.926 0.857 0.794
Present Value of Cash flow 463.00 471.35 517.29
Step d:
Terminal Value: The perpetual growth that will be achieved after year 3 onwards is assumed @ 3%
Therefore, TV = (CF at Year 3 * growth rate) / (WACC - growth rate) = (517.29*1.03)/(0.08 - 0.03) =
10656.17
Step e:
Total DCF of enterprise = 12,107.81 thousands (PV of cash flows arrived in above table plus the
TV arrived)
In other words, the value of the enterprise for a potential acquisition is approximately 12108
thousands.
The DCF is indeed a revolutionary model for valuation as FCFs truly represent the intrinsic value of
an entity. However, the whole calculation gravitates heavily on the WACC and the TV. In fact in
many cases the TV is found to be a significant portion in final value arrived by DCF. This means that
the growth rate and underlying assumptions need to be thoroughly validated to deny any room for
margin of error of judgment.
gearing level. The Asset Beta represents only systematic risk of the underlying project or asset of
the company and it does not represents any financial risk.
In other words it can be said that Asset Beta represents only company’s business risk. Applying
similar logic of calculation of WACC, the Asset Beta of the company can be calculated using
following equation.
E D(1- t)
βa =βe + βd
E+ D(1- t) E+ D(1- t)
βa = Ungeared or Asset Beta
βe = Geared or Equity Beta
βd = Debt Beta
E = Equity
D = Debt
t = Tax Rate
From the above equation it can be seen that company’s Equity Beta shall always be greater than
Asset Beta. In case company is debt free then Equity Beta shall be equal to Asset Beta.
Generally it is assumed that the Debt Beta tends to be Zero as Bonds’ Returns are not linked to the
volatility of market portfolio. In such situation the above mentioned equation shall become:
E
βa =βe
E+ D(1- t)
Thus, if we have been provided with figures of β e of a company we can calculate β a, which shall be
common for the industry or Pure Play firm.
Now let us see what steps are exactly involved in computation of Equity Beta for a new of business
or project for the company.
Step 1: Identify the Pure Play firms or companies (engaged entirely in same business and also called
proxy companies) and their Equity Betas to surrogate the Equity Beta of new Project or business.
Step 2: Once Beta of proxy companies have been identified we de-gear it and compute the Asset
Beta as the different companies may have different gearing levels.
Step 3: In case if there is only one proxy company then Asset Beta of the same company shall be
continued for further analysis. In case there are more than one proxy companies then we shall take
average of Asset Betas of these companies. Otherwise we can also opt for the Asset Beta of the
company that appears to be most appropriate.
Step 4: In next step we must re-gear the Asset Beta as per capital structure of the appraising
company to reflect the financial risk using the following formula (changing the positions of Asset
Beta mentioned earlier)
E+ D(1- t)
βe =βa
E
Step 5: In this step we can insert computed β e in CAPM and can compute required rate of return for
project under consideration or value of the business.
Illustration 1
There is a privately held company X Pvt. Ltd that is operating into the retail space, and is now
scouting for angel investors. The details pertinent to valuing X Pvt. Ltd are as follows –
The company has achieved break even this year and has an EBITDA of 90. The unleveraged beta
based on the industry in which it operates is 1.8, and the average debt to equity ratio is hovering at
40:60. The rate of return provided by risk free liquid bonds is 5%. The EV is to be taken at a multiple
of 5 on EBITDA. The accountant has informed that the EBITDA of 90 includes an extraordinary gain
of 10 for the year, and a potential write off of preliminary sales promotion costs of 20 are still pending.
The internal assessment of rate of market return for the industry is 11%. The FCFs fo r the next 3
years are as follows:
Y1 Y2 Y3
Future Cash flows 100 120 150
Finally, the future cash flows can be discounted at the WACC obtained above as under –
Y1 Y2 Y3
Future Cash flows 100 120 150
Discount factor 0.863 0.745 0.643
PVs of cash flows 86.30 89.40 96.45
VALUE OF THE FIRM 272.15
5. RELATIVE VALUATION
The three approaches that we saw to arriving at the value of an enterprise viz. the asset based, the
earnings based and the cash flow based are for arriving at the ‘intrinsic value’ of the same. Relative
Valuation is the method to arrive at a ‘relative’ value using a ‘comparative’ analysis to its peers or
similar enterprises. However, increasingly the contemporary financial analysts are using relative
valuation in conjunction to the afore-stated approaches to validate the intrinsic value arrived earlier.
The Concept of ‘Relative Valuation’: One way to look at the practical implementation of fair value
within the valuation context would be to identify assets that are similar to the ones held by the
acquiree company so that the values can be compared. This would be a significant departure from
the ‘intrinsic value’ approach that we have seen until now. Trying to get a value that would be the
nearest to the market price would mean that the valuation of a particular portfolio, or a divestiture in
an entity, would happen at an agreeable price that fits into the normal distribution.
In one sense, we are indeed using the relative valuation in a limited approach when we speak about
expected market returns, or when we are adopting an index based comparative. The more the asset
pricing gets correlated to the similar assets in the market, the more inclusive it gets. Thus, when we
are comparing bonds, the closer the YTM of the bond to the government index of return, the more
credible it gets when it comes to pricing.
The Relative valuation, also referred to as ‘Valuation by multiples,’ uses financial ratios to derive at
the desired metric (referred to as the ‘multiple’) and then compares the sam e to that of comparable
firms. Comparable firms would mean the ones having similar asset and risk dispositions and
assumed to continue to do so over the comparison period. In the process, there may be
extrapolations set to the desired range to achieve the target set. To elaborate –
1. Find out the ‘drivers’ that will be the best representative for deriving at the multiple
2. Determine the results based on the chosen driver(s) through financial ratios
3. Find out the comparable firms, and perform the comparative analysis, and,
4. Iterate the value of the firm obtained to smoothen out the deviations
Step 1: Finding the correct driver that goes to determine the multiple is significant for relative
valuation as it sets the direction to the valuation approach. Thereby, one can have two sets of
multiple based approaches depending on the types of the drivers –
(a) Enterprise value based multiples, which would consist primarily of EV/EBITDA, EV/Invested
Capital and EV/Sales.
(b) Equity value based multiples, which would comprise of P/E ratio and Price Earning Growth
(PEG) Ratio.
We have already seen the concept and application of Enterprise Value in previous section. However,
in light of relative valuation, we can definitely add that whereas EV/EBITDA is a popular ratio and
does provide critical inputs, the EV/Invested Capital will be more appropriate to capital intensive
enterprises, and EV/Sales will be used by companies who are cash rich, have a huge order book,
and forecast organic growth through own capital.
The P/E has a celebrated status amongst Equity based multiples, and the PEG (PE Ratio/ Growth
Rate i.e. the ratio of the PE to the expected growth rate of the firm) is more suitable where we are
doing relative valuation of either high growth or sunrise industries.
Step 2: Choosing the right financial ratio is a vital part of success of this model. A factor based
approach may help in getting this correct – for example – a firm that generates revenue mostly by
exports will be highly influenced by future foreign exchange fluctuations. A pure P/E based ratio may
not be reflective of this reality, which couldn’t pre-empt the impacts that Brexit triggered on currency
values. Likewise, an EV/Invested Capital would be a misfit for a company which may be light on core
assets, or if has significant investment properties.
Step 3: Arriving at the right mix of comparable firms. This is perhaps the most challenging of all the
steps – No two entities can be same – even if they may seem to be operating within the same risk
and opportunity perimeter. So, a software company ‘X’ that we are now comparing to a similar sized
company ‘Y’ may have a similar capital structure, a similar operative environment, and head count
size – so far the two firms are on even platform for returns forecast and beta values. On careful
scrutiny, it may be realized that the revenue generators are different – X may be deriving its revenues
from dedicated service contracts having Full Time Equivalent (FTE) pricing, whereas Y earns
through Unit Transfer Pricing (UTP) model. This additional set of information dramatically changes
the risk structure – and this is precisely what the discerning investor has to watch for. In other words,
take benchmarks with a pinch of salt.
Take another example – a firm is operating in a niche market, and that obviously leads to getting
comparable firms become a difficult task. In such cases, one may have to look beyond the current
operating market and identify similar structured companies from other industries.
The comparable firm can either be from a peer group operating within the same ris ks and
opportunities perimeter, or alternatively can be just take closely relevant firms and then perform a
regression to arrive at the comparable metrics. You would notice that in our example, the analyst is
adopting the later approach. Whereas the company ‘X’ will have to ignore ‘Y’ and search for a similar
revenue-risk based company. However, as a last resort, it may adopt a regression based model as
above.
Step 4: Iterate / extrapolate the results obtained to arrive at the correct estimate of the value of the
firm.
Thus, we can conclude that ‘Relative Valuation’ is a comparative driven approach that assumes that
the value of similar firms can form a good indicator for the value of the tested firm. There are some
assumptions that are inherent to this model –
i. The market is efficient
ii. The function between the fundamentals and the multiples are linear
iii. The firms that are comparable are similar in structure, risk and growth pattern
Further, we can approach Enterprise Value (EV) in two ways –
(a) Take Entity Value as the base, and then adjust for debt values for arriving the ‘EV’;
or
(b) Take a balance sheet based approach and arrive at EV.
Let’s apply the above concepts into a relative valuation illustration:
Illustration 2
A Ltd. made a Gross Profit of ` 10,00,000 and incurred Indirect Expenses of ` 4,00,000. The number
of issued Equity Shares is 1,00,000. The company has a Debt of ` 3,00,000 and Surplus Funds to
the tune of ` 5,00,000. The market related details are as follows:
Risk Free Rate of Return 4.5%
Market Rate of Return 12%
β of the Company 0.9
Determine:
(a) Per Share Earning Value of the Company.
(b) Equity Value of the company if applicable EBITDA multiple is 5.
Solution
(a) Capitalization Rate using CAPM
4.5% + 0.9(12% - 4.5%) = 11.25%
Now let us see how EV can be arrived at using Balance Sheet approach in the following
illustration.
Illustration 3
The balance sheet of H K Ltd. is as follows:
` 000
Non-Current Assets 1000
Current Assets
Trade Receivables 500
Cash and cash equivalents 500
2000
Solution
Shares outstanding 70,000
CMP ` 12
Market Capitalization ` 8,40,000
Add: Debt ` 2,00,000
Less: Cash & Cash equivalents (` 5,00,000)
Enterprise Value (EV) ` 5,40,000
comparison across industries in the same sector can give a more median PER that may be
acceptable for valuation purposes.
LBOs (Leveraged Buy Outs) – The increasing complex nature of commerce and its applications
have given rise to a new category of ‘strategic investors’ – Private Equity (PE) firms who scout for
enterprises in the ‘rough’, acquire the same using a clever mix of debt and equity (typically at 70:30
debt to equity), and then targeting to sell the same within a medium term period, say 3 to 5 year s.
In the process, they leverage on the debt and create value (both perceived and real) , and then they
either spin off the management control to another entity for a price, or go for an outright sale.
Example
X is a small software company that is providing a niche data control and testing service having 60
employees and some steady contracts, which generates an EBIDTA of ` 100 Lacs per year. A
Venture Capitalist (VC) convinces the managing director of the company to sell off the majority stake
to him – valued at a premium of 100% per share over the Book Value plus one time goodwill payoff
of ` 50 Lacs, using an Income Based Valuation approach. Thus, the total consideration comes out
` 250 Lacs.
Next, the VC ropes a banker to pump in ` 200 Lacs for the acquisition-cum-expansion as well as to
do brand marketing, thereby making the company a visible player in the market. The gap of ` 50
Lacs is his contribution as promoter equity towards securities premium. Since the core operations
team is not dismantled, the company easily achieves an approximate 20% average growth in each
of the next 3 years.
At the end of the third year, the VC puts the company on the ‘Sale Block’ and is able to garner
interest of a leading MNC in the same. Assume if the exit multiple that the VC looks is at 7 times the
EBDAT. The entity value is hypothetically can be worked out as under –
(in ` Lacs)
Y0 Y1 Y2 Y3
EBIDTA 100.00 120.00 144.00 178.00
Less: Interest# 36.00 30.00 24.00 18.00
EBDTA 64.00 90.00 120.00 160.00
Less: Taxes @ 30% 19.20 27.00 36.00 48.00
EBDAT 44.80 63.00 84.00 112.00
Multiple 7
Capitalized Value at end of Y 3 784
Less: Debt (100)
Equity Value 684
# Debt principal assumed to be repayable linearly in 6 years.
One of the prime casualties in a LBO model is that the future cannot be predicted with e xactitude.
Thus, if at end of third year, the industry is caught in a cyclical slowdown, the VC will find itself
saddled with a huge loan and burgeoning interest costs difficult to recycle.
6.2 Chop-Shop Method
This approach attempts to identify multi-industry companies that are undervalued and would have
more value if separated from each other. In other words as per this approach an attempt is made to
buy assets below their replacement value. This approach involves following three steps:
Step 1: Identify the firm’s various business segments and calculate the average capitalization ratios
for firms in those industries.
Step 2: Calculate a “theoretical” market value based upon each of the average capitalization ratios.
Step 3: Average the “theoretical” market values to determine the “chop-shop” value of the firm.
Illustration 4
Using the chop-shop approach (or Break-up value approach), assign a value for Cornett GMBH.
whose stock is currently trading at a total market price of €4 million. For Cornett, the accounting data
set forth in three business segments: consumer wholesaling, specialty services, and assorted
centers. Data for the firm’s three segments are as follows:
Business segment Segment sales Segment assets Segment income
Consumer wholesaling €1,500,000 € 750,000 €100,000
Specialty services €800,000 €700,000 €150,000
Assorted centers €2,000,000 €3,000,000 €600,000
Industry data for “pure-play” firms have been compiled and are summarized as follows:
Business segment Capitalization/sales Capitalization/assets Capitalization/
operating income
Consumer wholesaling 0.75 0.60 10.00
Specialty services 1.10 0.90 7.00
Assorted centers 1.00 0.60 6.00
Solution
Cornett, GMBH. – Break-up valuation
Business Segment Capital-to-Sales Segment Sales Theoretical Values
Consumer wholesaling 0.75 €1,500,000 €1,125,000
Specialty services 1.10 €800,000 €880,000
Assorted centers 1.00 €2,000,000 €2,000,000
Total value €4,005,000
EVA computations, whereas under the techniques seen till now, this performance-driven aspect
would have never been highlighted. The efficiency of the management gets highlighted in EVA, by
evaluating whether returns are generated to cover the cost of capital.
EVA is a performance measure for management of the company, and this is as evident in its
calculation formula as ‘the excess of returns over the weighted average cost of invested capital ‘.
The formula is as below –
EVA = NOPAT – (Invested Capital * WACC)
OR
NOPAT – Capital Charge
The concept NOPAT (Net Operating Profit After Tax) is nothing but EBIT minus tax expense. The
logic is that we are trying to find out the cash returns that business operations would make after tax
payments. Note that we have left depreciation untouched here – it being an operational expense for
the limited purposes of EVA. From this NOPAT we need to further identify the non-cash expenses
and adjust for the same to arrive at the ‘actual’ cash earnings. One common non-cash adjustment
would ‘provision for bad and doubtful debts’, as this would just be a book entry.
After arriving at the correct NOPAT, the next step would be finding the capital charge. This would
involve finding out.
(a) Invested Capital – Which would be easy from published financials, as it would be the
difference between total assets subtracted by the non-interest bearing current liabilities, like
sundry creditors, billing in advance, etc. Care should be taken to do the adjustments for non-
cash elements like provision for bad and doubtful debts. Also, it means equity plus long-term
debt and generally at the start of the year. Further some changes or adjustment are needed
to be made on account of Non-Cash Expenses both in Invested Capital and NOPAT.
(b) Applying the company’s WACC on the invested capital arrived in step (a)
Finally, the EVA is computed by reducing the capital charge as calculated by applying the WACC on
the invested capital from the adjusted NOPAT.
Illustration 5
Compute EVA of A Ltd. with the following information:
All Figure are in ` Lac
Profit and Loss Statement Balance Sheet
Revenue 1000 PPE 1000
Direct Costs -390 Current Assets 300
Selling, General &
Admin. Exp. (SGA) -200 1300
Step a(2):
Operating Cash Flow 69.65 71.33 75.18 79.20
Less: Forecasted Incremental Capital Invest. -- 12.00 6.00 9.00
Less: Forecasted Inc. in Net Working Capital 5.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Free Cash Flow (FCFs) 64.65 54.33 63.18 63.20
Step d & e:
Total PVs 482.81
Add: Investment Property (at FV) 35.00
Less: Carrying cost of Debt (19.00)
Value of Equity 498.81
Thus, we observe that SVA brings out a futuristic sense of value for shareholders. In fact, this can
be a good benchmark for shareholders from a cash return on investment perspective too.
The valuation of assets of a business entity is dependent on this assumption. Traditionally, historical
costing is followed in majority of the cases.
Non-Going Concern Valuation is also known as Liquidation Valuation because it is the net value
realised after disposing off all the assets and discharging all the liabilities. Since an on-going firm could
continue to earn the profit, which contributes to its value in addition to its liquation value the Going
Concern Value is known as Total Value.
Generally, the going-concern value of a firm will be greater than its liquidation value because when it is
acquired as on basis the value of its assets and considers the value of its future profitability, intangible
assets, and goodwill and hence the acquired firm can charge premium for the same.
Another reason for lower valuation on non-going concern is that liquation not only implies the laying off
its employees and, but it creates a feeling of bad reputation among potential investors.
Thus, valuation based on non-going concern should be applied only when investors are of view that the
firm has no longer value as a going concern.
A company is said to be in distress when the company is unable to meet, or has difficulty paying off, its
financial obligations to its creditors, typically due to high fixed costs, illiquid assets, or revenues being
sensitive to economic downturns. Such distress can lead to operational distress as increasing costs of
borrowings take a toll on the operations of the company as well.
Distressed companies are businesses that are likely to, or already have defaulted on their debts. Although
a company may not be making payments on some, or all of its debt obligations, however there still may
be some value remaining on the instruments they hold. Just because a company cannot make payments
on its debt does not mean the company is entirely worthless.
Conventional methods are not usefully deployed when valuing companies in distress as:
❖ Discounted cashflow valuation method required terminal value calculation which is based upon
an infinite life and ever-growing cashflows. However, the assumption of perpetuity of cash flows
may not be relevant in case of distressed firm because of negative cash flows.
❖ A distressed firm generally has negative and declining revenues hence expects to lose money for
some more time in the future. For such firms, estimating cash flows is difficult, since there is a
high risk of bankruptcy. For firms expected to fail, DCF does not work very well, since DCF values
a firm as a going concern – even if the firm is expected to survive, projections have to be made
until the cash flows turn positive, else the DCF would yield a negative value for equity or firm.
❖ Discount rates used in conventional methods reflect companies which are operationally as well
as financially sound. They have to be adjusted for the probabilities of failures of the companies to
be used in case of distressed companies.
The above-mentioned reasons warrant adjustments or amendments and modifications to be made to the
conventional methods to eliminate any issues that may arise in the valuation of a distressed company.
❖ Using updated debt to equity ratios and unlevered beta to estimate the cost of equity.
❖ Using updated measures of the default risk of the firm to estimate the cost of debt.
However, in case of inability to estimate the entire distribution, probability of distress shall be estimated
for each period and used as the expected cashflow:
Thus, the value of Distressed firm can be computing by following under-mentioned steps:
(i) Value the business as a going concern by looking at the expected cashflows it will have if it follows the
path back to financial health.
(ii) Determine the probability of distress over the lifetime of the DCF analysis.
(iii) Estimate the distress sale value as a percentage of book value or as a percentage of DCF value of
equity estimated as a going concern.
Accordingly following formula can be used to calculate the value of equity of a distressed firm.
Value of Equity= DCF value of equity (1 - Probability of distress) + Distress sale value of equity (Probability
of distress)
Firm Value = Unlevered Firm Value + (Tax Benefits of Debt - Expected Bankruptcy Cost from the Debt)
While the first part can be computed by discounting the free cashflows to the firm at the unlevered cost
of equity the second part reflects the present value of the expected tax benefits from the use of debt. The
expected bankruptcy cost can be estimated as the difference between the unlevered firm value and the
distress sale value:
Expected Bankruptcy Costs = (Unlevered firm value - Distress Sale Value)* Probability of Distress
(i) Earning/ Cash Flow Approach: In this approach, estimated cash flows for the foreseeable future are
discounted to present value and business is valued accordingly.
(ii) Asset approach: This approach is generally used when the business is not a going concern viz.
during liquidation, untimely losses etc. The assets and liabilities are valued based on their current
realisable value and that is considered as value of the business.
(iii) Market approach: This approach assigns the value of a business based on the value of comparable
companies in same/ similar industries, adjusted for their specific parameters.
One common feature in the above approaches is that it pre-supposes a business that is established and
generates cash flows using its assets.
On the contrary it is difficult to call Start-ups “established” in any sense or assume that their cash flows
(if not already spent on marketing) will remain constant. Profitability seems to be a cursed word in the
startup investor circles.
Like the valuation of startups is often required for bringing in investments either by equity or debt.
However, the most significant differentiating factor in the valuation of a startup is that there is no historical
data available based on which future projections can be drawn.
The value rests entirely on its future growth potential, which, in many cases, is based on an untested idea
and may not have been based on an adequate sampling of consumer behaviour or anticipated consumer
behaviour. The estimates of future growth are also often based upon assessments of the competence,
drive, and self-belief of, at times, very highly qualified and intelligent managers and their capacity to
convert a promising idea into commercial success.
The major roadblock with startup valuation is the absence of past performance indicators. There is no
‘past’ track record, only a future whose narrative is controlled based on the founders’ skill. It can be
equated as founders walking in the dark and making the investors believe that they are wearing night
vision goggles. While this is exciting and fun for the founders, this is risky for the investors.
This is why valuation of startups becomes critical and the role of a professional comes in – it is a way of
definitively helping investors navigate the dark using facts, rather than fairy tales.
• However, this is missing in new age startups whose value can lie majorly in the concept and potential
rather than numbers with a track record.
The failure of each of the traditional methods in case of new age startups is tabulated below:
Revenue The more revenue streams, the more valuable the company. While revenues
are not mandatory, their existence is a better indicator than merely
demonstrating traction and makes the startup more valuable.
Industry The industry’s attractiveness plays a vital role in the value of a company. As
attractiveness good as the idea may be, to sustainably scale, various factors like logistics,
distribution channels and customer base significantly impacts the startup value.
For example, a new-age startup in the tourism industry will be less valuable, as
innovative or unique as their offering is if significant lockdowns are expected in
the future.
Demand - supply If the industry is attractive, there will be more demand from investors, making
the industry’s individual company more valuable.
Competitiveness The lesser the competitors, the more valuable the startup will be. There is no
escaping the first-mover advantage in any industry. While it is easier to
convince investors about a business that already exists (for example, it must
have been easier for Ola to convince investors when Uber was already running
successfully), it also casts an additional burden on the startup to differentiate
itself from the competition.
10.3 Methods for valuing startups
One key observation would be that most value drivers described above are highly subjective. Hence,
there is a need to provide standard methods using value drivers above in order to value the startup
in a manner comparable to others.
There are many innovative methods for valuing startups that try to reduce the subjectivity in the
valuation of startups that have come in recent times.
Let us take a look at the most common methods of valuing startups:
10.3.1Berkus Approach
The Berkus Approach, created by American venture capitalist and angel investor Dave Berkus, looks
at valuing a startup enterprise based on a detailed assessment of five key success factors:
(1) Basic value,
(2) Technology,
(3) Execution,
(4) Strategic relationships in its core market, and
(5) Production and consequent sales.
A detailed assessment is carried out evaluating how much value the five critical success factors in
quantitative measure add up to the total value of the enterprise. Based on these numbers, the startup
is valued.
This method caps pre-revenue valuations at $2 million and post-revenue valuations at $2.5 million.
Although it doesn’t consider other market factor, the limited scope is useful for businesses looking
for an uncomplicated tool.
10.3.2 Cost-to-Duplicate Approach
The Cost-to-Duplicate Approach involves taking into account all costs and expenses associated with
the startup and its product development, including the purchase of its physical assets. All such
expenses are considered determine the startup’s fair market value based on all the expenses. This
approach is often criticized for not focusing on the future revenue projections or the assets of the
startup.
10.3.3 Comparable Transactions Method
With the traditional market approach, this approach is lucrative for investors because it is built on
precedent. The question being answered is, “How much were similar startups valued at?”
For instance, imagine XYZ Ltd., a logistics startup, was acquired for Rs 560 crores. It had 24 crore,
active users. That’s roughly Rs 23 per user.
Suppose you are valuing ABC Ltd, another logistics startup with 1.75 crore users. ABC Ltd. has a
valuation of about Rs 40 crores under this method.
With any comparison model, one needs to factor in ratios or multipliers for anything that is a
differentiating factor. Examples would be proprietary technologies, intangibles, industry penetration,
locational advantages, etc. Depending on the same, the multiplier may be adjusted.
10.3.4 Scorecard Valuation Method
The Scorecard Method is another option for pre-revenue businesses. It also works by comparing the
startup to others already funded but with added criteria.
First, we find the average pre-money valuation of comparable companies. Then, we consider how
the business stacks up according to the following qualities.
• Strength of the team: 0-30%
• Size of the opportunity: 0-25%
• Product or service: 0-15%
• Competitive environment: 0-10%
• Marketing, sales channels, and partnerships: 0-10%
• Need for additional investment: 0-5%
• Others: 0-5%
Then we assign each quality a comparison percentage. Essentially, it can be on par (100%), below
average (<100%), or above average (>100%) for each quality compared to competitors/ industry.
For example, the marketing team has a 150% score because it is thoroughly trained and has
tested a customer base that has positively responded. You’d multiply 10% by 150% to get a factor
of .15.
This exercise is undertaken for each startup quality and the sum of all factors is computed. Finally,
that sum is multiplied by the average valuation in the business sector to get a pre-revenue valuation.
10.3.5First Chicago Method
This method combines a Discounted Cash Flow approach and a market approach to give a fair
estimate of startup value. It works out:
• Worst-case scenario
• Normal case scenario
• Best-case scenario
Valuation is done for each of these situations and multiplied with a probability factor to arrive at a
weighted average value.
10.3.6Venture Capital Method
As the name suggests, venture capital firms have made this famous. Such investors seek a return
equal to some multiple of their initial investment or will strive to achieve a specific internal rate of
return based on the level of risk they perceive in the venture.
The method incorporates this understanding and uses the relevant time frame in discounting a future
value attributable to the firm.
The post-money value is calculated by discounting the rate representing an investor’s expected or
required rate of return.
The investor seeks a return based on some multiple of their initial investment. For example, the
investor may seek a return of 10x, 20x, 30x, etc., their original investment at the time of exit.
New-age startups are disruptors in their own right and a necessary tool for global innovation and
progress. By their very nature, startups disrupt set processes and industries to add value. In that
process, they transcend traditional indicators of success like revenues, profitability, asset size, etc.
Accordingly, it is no mean feat to uncover the actual value of a startup.
While the traditional methods fall short, there is no shortage of new innovative methods used to
value startups based on their value drivers. However, the valuation of a startup is much more than
the application of ways – it is about understanding the story of the future trajectory and
communicating that narrative using substantial numbers.
Category Descriptions
Marketplace Multiple buyers are matched to multiple suppliers.
For example: [Link] connects guests to hotels, while Uber links
travelers to drivers, Amazon connects sellers and buyers through its
platform.
Search engine Multiple people looking for information are matched to multiple sources of
information. As a search request triggers the system to actively seek out the
desired information, it is also called a search engine.
For example: Google, Bing, and Baidu
Repository Multiple suppliers ‘deposit’ their materials into a type of library, to be
retrieved by users at a later moment.
For example: Spotify, YouTube, GitHub
Digital communication Multiple users to send messages and/or documents to a variety of other
people, or interact in real time via voice as well as video.
For example: Whatsapp, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, Slack etc are
internet-based communication platforms.
Digital community On a digital community platform, people who want to remain virtually
connected for a longer period of time can find each other and interact.
For example: Facebook lets one build one’s own network of friends,
LinkedIn plays a similar role in the business context.
Payments Platform On a digital payment platform, matching takes place between those owing
money and those wanting to be paid.
For example: Paytm, GPay, are directed at online consumers and facilities
payments across vendors.
The principles of valuation for digital platform are largely like other types of companies with certain
nuances which are peculiar to the digital platform industry.
CAPM can be used to calculate the Cost of Equity which is calculated as under:
R = rf + β (rm- rf)
Where R = expected rate of return
rf = risk free rate of return
β = Beta value of the stock
rm = market rate of return
11.1.2 Specific considerations
(a) Beta measures the sensitivity of a stock or company to the market. Practically, the beta of a
company is estimated based on the sensitivity of the share price of the stock, its comparable or
the industry with respect to the market. Due to the unique nature of each digital platform and
scarcity of listed traded comparable, estimating beta becomes challenging. One might need to
draw a comparison between the general diversified sector, the industry driving the revenue or
international comparable.
(b) The survival of such a digital platform is highly dependent upon the quality of management, ability
to adapt to change quickly, and foresee opportunity.
Thus, there are certain specific risks of a digital platform that cannot be estimated using CAPM with
regard to only the industry or general sector beta. A Company Specific Risk Premium (‘CSRP’) or Alpha
needs to be estimated and added to determine the appropriate cost of equity used to discount the
estimated cash flows. The CSRP for nascent companies would be higher than mature digital platforms
with adequately large operations having a large customer base.
11.2 Market Approach
The Market Approach values a company by drawing a comparison from similar valued companies based
on multiples like profit to earnings (‘P/E’) ratio, Enterprise Value to Earnings before Interest, Tax,
Depreciation and Amortization (‘EV/EBITDA’) ratio, Price to Book Value ratio, Price to Revenue/Sales
Ratio. The selection of comparable to draw such comparison is vital and parameters like the market
capitalization, revenue, Profit margins, capital structure etc. are used while making the selection.
However, in case of digital platform, such comparison becomes difficult due to the following reasons:
• The listed comparables are scarce and even absent for many platforms.
• The underlying value specifically Profit and EBITDA may be negative for certain digital platforms.
• Such digital platforms are capital-lite making their Book Value very low.
Due to the above complexity, the application of Market Approach for digital platform, lays emphasis on
revenue of a digital platform. Comparison is sought on the manner the platform envisages its primary
driver of revenue.
Certain examples of the drivers of revenue that can be used as a basis are as under:
The valuation of digital platform can be tricky based on the peculiarities as mentioned above. However,
the fundamentals of valuation remain the same. The understanding of the business, the revenue model,
the quality of management, and the risk-reward parameters determine the value of the digital platform.
know that focus on ESG issues requires robust governance practices which will fortify their company’s
portfolio as a strong contender with investors and shareholders.
Now question arises how the risks of ESG factors can be incorporated in the Valuation of any business.
As mentioned earlier the most popular technique of valuing any business is discounting of Future Cash
Flows. Accordingly, the impact of these risks can be incorporated either in discount rate or expected cash
flows.
Generally, management and investors are more interested in adjusting discount rate by inclusion of risk
premium in the same. Even though this approach is more practical but the impact of ESG factors may
not be that much explicit. Hence adjustment of ESG factors in cash flows would be more explicit.
Now let see how the impact of each factor can be incorporated in computation of expected cash flows:
(i) E of ESG: The risk of this factor (Environment) can be incorporated by carrying out 2-degree
scenario analysis i.e. if temperature of the plant is increased by 2 degrees. Similarly, adjustment
in cash flows can be made by considering carbon points.
(ii) S of ESG: The risk of this factor (Social) can be considered by adjusting the impact of social
measures cost on the revenue such as better labour working conditions, CSR, and other welfare
measures for the various stakeholders.
(iii) G of ESG: The risk of this factor (Governance) can be considered by adjusting the impact of poor
governance on revenue in the form of penalty, fines, taxes etc.
CASE STUDIES
A couple of real life case studies would help us to understand the Concepts better –
Case Study 1
The application of ‘valuation’ in the context of the merger of Vodafone with Idea Cellular Ltd:
The valuation methods deployed by the appointed CA firms for the merger were as fo llows:
(a) Market Value method: The share price observed on NSE (National Stock Exchange) for a
suitable time frame has been considered to arrive at the valuation.
(b) Comparable companies’ market multiple method: The stock market valuations of comparable
companies on the BSE and NSE were taken into account.
(c) NAV method: The asset based approach was undertaken to arrive at the net asset value of
the merging entities as of 31st December 2016.
Surprisingly, the DCF method was not used for valuation purposes. The reason stated was that the
managements to both Vodafone and Idea had not provided the projected (future) cash flows and
other parameters necessary for performing a DCF based valuation.
The final valuation done using methods a to c gave a basis to form a merger based on the ‘Share
Exchange’ method.
Above information extracted from: ‘Valuation report’ filed by Idea Cellular with NSE
However, let’s see how the markets have reacted to this news – the following article published in
The Hindu Business Line dated 20th March 2017 will give a fair idea of the same:
“Idea Cellular slumped 9.6 per cent as traders said the implied deal price in a planned merger with
Vodafone PLC's Indian operations under-valued the company shares. Although traders had initially
reacted positively to the news, doubts about Idea's valuations after the merger sent shares
downward.
Idea Cellular Ltd fell as much as 14.57 per cent, reversing earlier gains of 14.25 per cent, after the
telecom services provider said it would merge with Vodafone Plc's Indian operations.”
Hence, we can conclude that the valuation methods, though technically correct, may not elicit a
positive impact amongst stockholders. That is because there is something called as ‘perceived value’
that’s not quantifiable. It depends upon a majority of factors like analyst interpretations, majority
opinion etc.
Case Study 2
Valuation model for the acquisition of ‘WhatsApp’ by Facebook
Facebook announced the takeover of WhatsApp for a staggering 21.8 billion USD in 2015. The key
characteristics of WhatsApp that influenced the deal were –
(a) It is a free text-messaging service and with a $1 per year service fee, had 450 million users
worldwide close to the valuation date.
(b) 70% of the above users were active users.
(c) An aggressive rate of user account increase of 1 million users a day would lead to pipeline of
1 billion users just within a year’s range.
The gross per-user value would thus, come to an average of USD 55, which included a 4 billion
payout as a sweetener for retaining WhatsApp employees post takeover. The payback for Facebook
will be eventually to monetize this huge user base with recalibrated charges on international
messaging arena. Facebook believes that the future lies in international, cross-platform
communications.
Above information extracted from the official website of business news agency ‘CNBC’
Practical Questions
1. ABC Company is considering acquisition of XYZ Ltd. which has 1.5 crores shares outstanding
and issued. The market price per share is ` 400 at present. ABC's average cost of capital is
12%. Available information from XYZ indicates its expected cash accruals for the next 3 years
as follows:
Year ` Cr.
1 250
2 300
3 400
Calculate the range of valuation that ABC has to consider. (PV factors at 12% for years 1 to
3 respectively: 0.893, 0.797 and 0.712).
2. Eagle Ltd. reported a profit of ` 77 lakhs after 30% tax for the financial year 2011-12. An
analysis of the accounts revealed that the income included extraordinary items of ` 8 lakhs
and an extraordinary loss of `10 lakhs. The existing operations, except for the extraordinary
items, are expected to continue in the future. In addition, the results of the launch of a new
product are expected to be as follows:
` In lakhs
Sales 70
Material costs 20
Labour costs 12
Fixed costs 10
You are required to:
(i) Calculate the value of the business, given that the capitalization rate is 14%.
(ii) Determine the market price per equity share, with Eagle Ltd.‘s share capital being
comprised of 1,00,000 13% preference shares of ` 100 each and 50,00,000 equity
shares of ` 10 each and the P/E ratio being 10 times.
3. ABC Co. is considering a new sales strategy that will be valid for the next 4 years. They want
to know the value of the new strategy. Following information relating to the year which has
just ended, is available:
Income Statement `
Sales 20,000
Gross margin (20%) 4,000
Administration, Selling & distribution expense (10%) 2,000
PBT 2,000
Tax (30%) 600
PAT 1,400
Balance Sheet Information
Fixed Assets 8,000
Current Assets 4,000
Equity 12,000
If it adopts the new strategy, sales will grow at the rate of 20% per year for three years. From
4th year onward Cash Flow will be stabilized. The gross margin ratio, Assets turnover ratio,
the Capital structure and the income tax rate will remain unchanged.
Depreciation would be at 10% of net fixed assets at the beginning of the year.
The Company’s target rate of return is 15%.
Determine the incremental value due to adoption of the strategy.
4. H Ltd. agrees to buy over the business of B Ltd. effective 1 st April, [Link] summarized
Balance Sheets of H Ltd. and B Ltd. as on 31 st March 2012 are as follows:
Balance sheet as at 31 st March, 2012 (In Crores of Rupees)
Liabilities: H. Ltd B. Ltd.
Paid up Share Capital
-Equity Shares of `100 each 350.00 --
-Equity Shares of `10 each -- 6.50
Reserve & Surplus 950.00 25.00
Total 1,300.00 31.50
Assets:
Net Fixed Assets 220.00 0.50
Net Current Assets 1,020.00 29.00
Deferred Tax Assets 60.00 2.00
Total 1,300.00 31.50
H Ltd. proposes to buy out B Ltd. and the following information is provided to you as part of
the scheme of buying:
(1) The weighted average post tax maintainable profits of H Ltd. and B Ltd. for the last 4
years are ` 300 crores and ` 10 crores respectively.
(2) Both the companies envisage a capitalization rate of 8%.
(3) H Ltd. has a contingent liability of ` 300 crores as on 31st March, 2012.
(4) H Ltd. to issue shares of ` 100 each to the shareholders of B Ltd. in terms of the
exchange ratio as arrived on a Fair Value basis. (Please consider weights of 1 and 3
for the value of shares arrived on Net Asset basis and Earnings capitalization method
respectively for both H Ltd. and B Ltd.)
You are required to arrive at the value of the shares of both H Ltd. and B Ltd. under:
(i) Net Asset Value Method
(ii) Earnings Capitalisation Method
(iii) Exchange ratio of shares of H Ltd. to be issued to the shareholders of B Ltd. on a Fair
value basis (taking into consideration the assumption mentioned in point
4 above.)
5. AB Ltd., is planning to acquire and absorb the running business of XY Ltd. The valuation is
to be based on the recommendation of merchant bankers and the consideration i s to be
discharged in the form of equity shares to be issued by AB Ltd. As on 31.3.2006, the paid up
capital of AB Ltd. consists of 80 lakhs shares of ` 10 each. The highest and the lowest market
quotation during the last 6 months were ` 570 and ` 430. For the purpose of the exchange,
the price per share is to be reckoned as the average of the highest and lowest market price
during the last 6 months ended on 31.3.06.
XY Ltd.’s Balance Sheet as at 31.3.2006 is summarised below:
` lakhs
Sources
Share Capital
20 lakhs equity shares of `10 each fully paid 200
10 lakhs equity shares of `10 each, `5 paid 50
Loans 100
Total 350
Uses
Fixed Assets (Net) 150
Net Current Assets 200
350
An independent firm of merchant bankers engaged for the negotiation, have produced the
following estimates of cash flows from the business of XY Ltd.:
9. With the help of the following information of Jatayu Limited compute the Economic Value
Added:
`
Debt (Coupon rate = 11%) 40 lakhs
Equity (Share Capital + Reserves & Surplus) 125 lakhs
Invested Capital 165 lakhs
Required:
(i) Estimate Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) of RST Ltd.; and
(ii) Estimate Economic Value Added (EVA) of RST Ltd.
11. Tender Ltd has earned a net profit of ` 15 lacs after tax at 30%. Interest cost charged by
financial institutions was ` 10 lacs. The invested capital is ` 95 lacs of which 55% is debt.
The company maintains a weighted average cost of capital of 13%. Required,
(a) Compute the operating income.
(b) Compute the Economic Value Added (EVA).
(c) Tender Ltd. has 6 lac equity shares outstanding. How much dividend can the company
pay before the value of the entity starts declining?
12. The following information is given for 3 companies that are identical except for their capital
structure:
Balance Sheet
($ Million)
With the above information and following assumption you are required to compute
(a) Economic Value Added ®
(b) Market Value Added.
Assuming that:
(i) WACC is 12%.
(ii) The share of company currently quoted at $ 50 each
15. Herbal Gyan is a small but profitable producer of beauty cosmetics using the plant Aloe Vera.
This is not a high-tech business, but Herbal’s earnings have averaged around ` 12 lakh after
tax, largely on the strength of its patented beauty cream for removing the pimples.
The patent has eight years to run, and Herbal has been offered ` 40 lakhs for the patent
rights. Herbal’s assets include ` 20 lakhs of working capital and ` 80 lakhs of property, plant,
and equipment. The patent is not shown on Herbal’s books. Suppose Herbal’s cost of capital
is 15 percent. What is its Economic Value Added (EVA)?
16. Constant Engineering Ltd. has developed a high tech product which has reduced the Carbon
emission from the burning of the fossil fuel. The product is in high demand. The product has
been patented and has a market value of ` 100 Crore, which is not recorded in the books.
The Net Worth (NW) of Constant Engineering Ltd. is ` 200 Crore. Long term debt is ` 400
Crore. The product generates a revenue of ` 84 Crore. The rate on 365 days Government
bond is 10 percent per annum. Market portfolio generates a return of 12 percent per annum.
The stock of the company moves in tandem with the market. Calculate Economic Value added
of the company.
ANSWERS/ SOLUTIONS
Answers to Theoretical Questions
1. Please refer paragraph 6.4.
2. Please refer paragraph 5.
Answers to the Practical Questions
1. VALUATION BASED ON MARKET PRICE
Market Price per share ` 400
Thus value of total business is (` 400 x 1.5 Cr.) ` 600 Cr.
VALUATION BASED ON DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW
Present Value of cash flows
(` 250 cr x 0.893) + (` 300 cr. X 0.797) + ( ` 400 cr. X 0.712 ) = ` 747.15 Cr.
Value of per share (` 747.15 Cr. / 1.5 Cr) ` 498.10 per share
RANGE OF VALUATION
Per Share ` Total ` Cr.
Minimum 400.00 600.00
Maximum 498.10 747.15
2. (i) Computation of Business Value
(` Lakhs)
77 110
Profit before tax
1 − 0.30
Less: Extraordinary income (8)
Add: Extraordinary losses 10
112
Profit from new product (` Lakhs)
Sales 70
Less: Material costs 20
Labour costs 12
Fixed costs 10 (42) 28
140.00
Less: Taxes @30% 42.00
Future Maintainable Profit after taxes 98.00
PE ratio 10
Market price per share ` 17
6. Cost of capital by applying Free Cash Flow to Firm (FCFF) Model is as follows:-
FCFF1
Value of Firm = V 0 =
K c − gn
Where –
FCFF1 = Expected FCFF in the year 1
Kc= Cost of capital
gn = Growth rate forever
Thus, ` 1800 lakhs = ` 54 lakhs /(Kc-g)
Since g = 9%, then K c = 12%
Now, let X be the weight of debt and given cost of equity = 20% and cost of debt = 10%, then
20% (1 – X) + 10% X = 12%
Hence, X = 0.80, so book value weight for debt was 80%
Correct weight should be 60 of equity and 72 of debt.
Cost of capital = K c = 20% (60/132) + 10% (72/132) = 14.5455% and correct firm’s value
= ` 54 lakhs/(0.1454 – 0.09) = ` 974.73 lakhs.
7. High growth phase :
ke = 0.10 + 1.15 x 0.06 = 0.169 or 16.9%.
kd = 0.13 x (1-0.3) = 0.091 or 9.1%.
Cost of capital = 0.5 x 0.169 + 0.5 x 0.091 = 0.13 or 13%.
Present Value (PV) of FCFF during the explicit forecast period is:
* Excluding Depreciation.
Present Value (PV) of FCFF during the explicit forecast period is:
125 40
= 20.74 x + 7.70 x = 15.71 + 1.87 = 17.58%
165 165
Taxable Income = ` 25,00,000/(1 - 0.30)
= ` 35,71,429 or ` 35.71 lakhs
Operating Income = Taxable Income + Interest
= ` 35,71,429 + ` 4,40,000
= ` 40,11,429 or ` 40.11 lacs
EVA = EBIT (1-Tax Rate) – WACC x Invested Capital
= ` 40,11,429 (1 – 0.30) – 17.58% x ` 1,65,00,000
= ` 28,08,000 – ` 29,00,700 = - ` 92,700
11. Taxable Income = ` 15 lac/(1-0.30)
= ` 21.43 lacs or ` 21,42,857
Operating Income = Taxable Income + Interest
= ` 21,42,857 + ` 10,00,000
= ` 31,42,857 or ` 31.43 lacs
EVA = EBIT (1-Tax Rate) – WACC x Invested Capital
= ` 31,42,857(1 – 0.30) – 13% x ` 95,00,000
= ` 22,00,000 – ` 12,35,000 = ` 9,65,000
` 9,65,000
EVA Dividend = = ` 1.6083
` 6,00,000
WACC
Orange: (10.4 x 0.8) + (26 x 0.2) = 13.52%
Grape: (8.45 x 0.5) + (22 x 0.5) = 15.225%
Apple: (9.75 x 0.2) + (20 x 0.8) = 17.95%
(ii)
(iii) Orange would be considered as the best investment since the EVA of the company is
highest and its weighted average cost of capital is the lowest
(iv) Estimated Price of each company shares
Since the three entities have different capital structures they would be exposed to
different degrees of financial risk. The PE ratio should therefore be adjusted for the
risk factor.
(v) Market Capitalisation
Estimated Stock Price (`) 14.30 15.95 15.73
No. of shares 6,100 8,300 10,000
Estimated Market Cap (`) 87,230 1,32,385 1,57,300
13. (i) Taxable income = Net Income /(1 – 0.40)
or, Taxable income = ` 15,00,000/(1 – 0.40) = ` 25,00,000
$ Million
EBIT 180.00
Less: Taxes @ 35% 63.00
Net Operating Profit after Tax 117.00
Less: Cost of Capital Employed [W. No.1] 72.60
Economic Value Added 44.40
$ Million
Market value of Equity Stock [W. No. 2] 500
Equity Fund [W. No. 3] 425
Market Value Added 75
Working Notes:
(1) Total Capital Employed
Equity Stock $ 100 Million
Reserve and Surplus $ 325 Million
Loan $ 180 Million
$ 605 Million
WACC 12%
Particulars Amount
Working capital ` 20 lakhs
Property, plant, and equipment ` 80 lakhs
Patent rights ` 40 lakhs
Total ` 140 lakhs
Amount (` Crore)
Net Worth 200.00
Long Term Debts 400.00
Patent Rights 100.00
Total 700.00
E D
WACC (ko) =k +k
e E+D d E+D
300 400
= 12 + 10
700 700
= 5.14% + 5.71% = 10.85%
EVA = Profit Earned – WACC x Invested Capital
= ` 84 crore – 10.85% x ` 700 crore
= ` 8.05 crore
Industry key performance indicators (KPIs) play a critical role in valuing consultancy firms as they provide benchmarks for what constitutes successful performance within the industry. By comparing a firm's financial metrics against these KPIs, valuation experts can assess how the firm stacks up relative to its competitors. This is essential for determining a realistic valuation by placing the firm's financial data in the context of industry performance standards. KPIs thus help in normalizing comparisons and identifying areas where a firm might excel or lag behind industry norms .
Valuing startups is challenging due to the lack of historical data, which is essential for making future projections. Most startups don't have a track record of financial performance, as they are often based on untested ideas with no adequate sampling of actual consumer behavior . The absence of a performance history makes it difficult to apply traditional valuation models, which rely on past financial performance to predict future cash flows. Startups' valuations often rest entirely on their growth potential, the competence of their management, and the feasibility of their business ideas .
Normalizing net income and cash flows is crucial when comparing consultancy firms because it ensures that comparisons are made on a 'like-for-like' basis by eliminating anomalies that could distort financial analysis, such as non-recurring expenses or any exceptional gains or losses. This step allows valuation experts to adjust financial statements to provide a clear view of the firm's ongoing operational performance, facilitating a fair comparison with competitors and ensuring that only regular, sustainable earnings are considered .
The Market Approach might not be suitable for startup valuations because it relies on comparisons with established businesses that have consistent revenue streams and historical performance data. Startups often lack this historical data and generate limited or no immediate cash flows, making such comparisons unreliable. Unlike established firms, startups are valued more on potential future growth and innovation capacity, which may not be accurately reflected in market comparisons with currently operating businesses. Thus, the market approach can misrepresent the value of a startup .
The P/E ratio, or price-to-earnings ratio, is a popular measure among equity multiples, reflecting the market value per share to earnings per share. It is often used to assess a company's growth prospects . In contrast, the EV/Sales ratio is used for companies that are cash-rich, have a substantial order book, and forecast organic growth through their own capital, as it provides a view of the value of the firm relative to its sales. This metric could better reflect the financial health of cash-rich companies focused more on turnover and organic growth than immediate profitability, which is what P/E ratio traditionally emphasizes .
Different revenue generation models, such as dedicated service contracts versus unit transfer pricing in similar-sized software companies, significantly affect valuation comparability. Even if these firms have similar capital structures and operative environments, the distinct revenue models imply different risk structures and growth potentials. Dedicated service contracts might provide more stable, predictable income, akin to subscription models, while unit transfer pricing depends more on volume and possibly more volatile demand. These differences necessitate adjustments in financial analysis and highlight why seemingly comparable firms cannot be evaluated directly without nuanced consideration of their business models .
The Cost Approach, which estimates a platform's value based on the total cost to build it or a similar one, has significant limitations for digital platforms . This method fails to account for the potential revenue generation capacity of the platform, which can significantly exceed the initial development costs, thus undermining its actual market value. Consequently, using the Cost Approach could undervalue digital platforms and not reflect potential shareholder value, as it doesn't consider the revenue-generating capabilities and market dynamics that can considerably enhance shareholder wealth beyond the development costs .
Factoring in future foreign exchange fluctuations significantly affects the choice of financial ratios for a firm with significant export revenue. Such firms are susceptible to currency value changes, which can impact profitability and financial health. A pure P/E ratio might not adequately capture this risk because it doesn't consider potential volatility in revenue from exchange rate movements. Instead, choosing a valuation approach that can incorporate these fluctuations or employing additional metrics that reflect currency risk is crucial for accurately assessing the firm's financial standing and growth prospects .
Relative valuation multiples such as Revenue and EBITDA are often preferred for distressed firms because these multiples can still be applied regardless of the firm's financial performance anomalies like negative earnings, which make Price Earnings ratios inapplicable. A distressed firm often cannot present a positive net income, rendering the P/E ratio unusable. Hence, using revenue or EBITDA multiples allows investors to focus on other performance metrics that don't require profitability but still represent operational capabilities .
Comparing EVA across firms with different capital structures provides insights into their efficiency in generating value above their capital costs. A higher EVA suggests better management of capital resources, even if the operational size or income is similar. For investment decisions, firms with higher EVA are deemed better investment opportunities as they are more likely to generate excess returns after covering the cost of capital. Consequently, this metric helps investors identify which firms maximize shareholder value and might be more resilient to financial risks, influencing portfolio composition and capital allocation .