Linking value drivers and enterprise value multiples

Posted on

Target valuation multiples that are implied by key value drivers are a great way to better understand equity valuation and how the characteristics of a company affect value. The approach incorporates the same links with underlying value drivers on which DCF is based, but in a simplified way that is more intuitive than a full DCF model.

Our target multiple model can be used to estimate a deserved valuation multiple for a company, sector or index, to reverse engineer returns or growth implied by a current market valuation multiple and to derive a terminal value multiple in DCF analysis.

Continue reading “Linking value drivers and enterprise value multiples” →

Interactive model: Target enterprise value multiples

Posted on

Use this model to derive ‘target’ enterprise value multiples that are consistent with specified value drivers, including measures of growth, return on investment, margins and capital intensity. The model is based on an underlying 2-stage DCF methodology. We explain its derivation, the key assumptions and how to select appropriate value driver inputs.

Continue reading “Interactive model: Target enterprise value multiples” →

Should you ignore intangible amortisation? – AstraZeneca

Posted on

Like many companies, AstraZeneca excludes intangible asset amortisation from its adjusted performance metrics. The stock currently trades at a price earnings ratio of 23x based on ‘core’ 2018 earnings, but without the add back the PE would be about 37x. Is the add back justified? And if so do companies add back the right amount?

The intangible amortisation problem in equity analysis arises from the inconsistency between the accounting for purchased and self-developed intangible assets. We argue that the accounting treatment of subsequent expenditure, either capitalised or expensed, determines the appropriate adjustment to reported earnings.

Continue reading “Should you ignore intangible amortisation? – AstraZeneca” →

Deferred tax fails to reflect economic value – Vodafone

Posted on

Most deferred tax adjustments in financial statements help investors – but not always. The ‘economic value’ of deferred tax assets arising from unused tax losses may be significantly less than the balance sheet figure. However, as a consequence, profit forecasts may be understated, potentially leading to an undervaluation by investors. 

We estimate that if the £24bn deferred tax asset of Vodafone were discounted to an economic value then it would instead be closer to £8bn, but forecast profit would rise by about £500m.

Continue reading “Deferred tax fails to reflect economic value – Vodafone” →

Dot-com bubble accounting still going strong – Tesla

Posted on

Some 20 years ago the dot-com bubble was in full swing. A feature of many technology companies at the time, and arguably a factor contributing to the bubble, was not expensing the significant amounts of stock options granted to employees.

Today stock-based compensation is included in IFRS and GAAP profit measures. However, many companies still exclude this item from key performance metrics provided to investors. Surely it is time for this practice to stop? We use the alternative performance measures given by Tesla to illustrate.

Continue reading “Dot-com bubble accounting still going strong – Tesla” →

Operating leases: You may still need to adjust

Posted on

Do you invest in both IFRS and US GAAP reporters? If so, then in recent financial statements you might have noticed differences in the accounting for leases. This could result in a significant lack of comparability in key metrics.

Both IFRS and US GAAP now better reflect the economics of leasing and so the old adjustments to capitalise operating leases are no longer necessary. Unfortunately, you now need to make other adjustments to get comparability between US and IFRS reporters. We explain the adjustments and provide an interactive model to help.

Continue reading “Operating leases: You may still need to adjust” →

Ignore this ‘recycled’ profit – Ping An

Posted on

There is a particular gain or loss in the income statement of many companies that, in our view, is irrelevant to investors. Fortunately, it is gradually disappearing from most IFRS financial statements due to the introduction of IFRS 9. However, if you invest in insurance companies you might not be so lucky.

Chinese insurer Ping An’s pre-2018 results were significantly impacted. But no longer – the company is one of the few IFRS reporters in the global insurance sector where investors now benefit from the elimination of this ‘irrelevant’ component of profit & loss.

Continue reading “Ignore this ‘recycled’ profit – Ping An” →

When investors need to restate liabilities – EDF

Posted on

In measuring its €40bn French nuclear decommissioning liability, EDF applies a 10-year historical ‘sliding average’ discount rate to a current estimate of cash flows. In our view, this leads to an out of date (and at present understated) liability that you should not use in your analysis, even though the approach is deemed to comply with IFRS.

Smoothing out the effects of discount rate changes may reduce apparent volatility, but it does not help investors. Balance sheets should include realistic and fully up to date estimates of the present value of decommissioning and other similar obligations.

Continue reading “When investors need to restate liabilities – EDF” →

EV/EBITDA multiples must be consistent – Novartis

Posted on

Swiss pharma company Novartis provides investors with its own calculation of an EV/EBITDA multiple. However, in our view, the EV is inconsistent with EBITDA. We review the company’s calculation and suggest amendments to ensure it better captures the value of Novartis’ core business.

To derive useful valuation multiples, you must be consistent. Our main adjustment to the Novartis calculation relates to the value of their stake in fellow Swiss pharma company Roche.

Continue reading “EV/EBITDA multiples must be consistent – Novartis” →

Leasing – Are you prepared for IFRS 16?

Posted on

EBITDA up, EBIT up, EPS? … well it depends. The impact of lease capitalisation under IFRS 16 on key company metrics in 2019 is complex and depends on several variables, including transition options chosen by companies.

We highlight what you should look out for and present a simple interactive model to help you understand the effects of IFRS 16 on profitability, growth rates, return on capital and leverage.

Continue reading “Leasing – Are you prepared for IFRS 16?” →

In search of free cash flow – Amazon

Posted on

Amazon provides investors with three alternative calculations of a free cash flow metric. For 2018 these range from $8.4bn to $19.4bn. In contrast our preferred approach gives a negative free cash flow of $3.4bn. What explains these material differences?

The disclosures by Amazon about its free cash flow measures are good and the calculations go further than many other companies. However, in our view important components are missing. We explain our additional adjustments in respect of leased assets and stock-based compensation.

Continue reading “In search of free cash flow – Amazon” →