Why do you need to add the Noncontrolling Interest to Enterprise Value?
Whenever a company owns over 50% of another company, it is required to report the financial performance of the other company as part of its own performance. So even though it doesn’t own 100%, it reports 100% of the majority-owned subsidiary’s financial performance. In keeping with the “apples-to-apples” theme, you must add the Noncontrolling Interest to get to Enterprise Value so that your numerator and denominator both reflect 100% of the majority-owned subsidiary.
How do you calculate fully diluted shares?
Take the basic share count and add in the dilutive effect of stock options and any other dilutive securities, such as warrants, convertible debt or convertible preferred stock. To calculate the dilutive effect of options, you use the Treasury Stock Method (detail on this below).
Why do you subtract cash in the formula for Enterprise Value? Is that always accurate?
The “official” reason: Cash is subtracted because it’s considered a non-operating asset and because Equity Value implicitly accounts for it. The way I think about it: In an acquisition, the buyer would “get” the cash of the seller, so it effectively pays less for the company based on how large its cash balance is. Remember, Enterprise Value tells us how much you’d really have to “pay” to acquire another company. It’s not always accurate because technically you should be subtracting only excess cash – the amount of cash a company has above the minimum cash it requires to operate.
Is it always accurate to add Debt to Equity Value when calculating Enterprise Value?
In most cases, yes, because the terms of a debt agreement usually say that debt must be refinanced in an acquisition. And in most cases a buyer will pay off a seller’s debt, so it is accurate to say that any debt “adds” to the purchase price. However, there could always be exceptions where the buyer does not pay off the debt. These are rare and I’ve personally never seen it, but once again “never say never” applies.
Why do we add Preferred Stock to get to Enterprise Value?
Preferred Stock pays out a fixed dividend, and preferred stock holders also have a higher claim to a company’s assets than equity investors do. As a result, it is seen as more similar to debt than common stock.
Are there any problems with the Enterprise Value formula you just gave me?
Yes – it’s too simple. There are lots of other things you need to add into the formula with real companies:
-) Net Operating Losses – Should be valued and arguably added in, similar to cash.
-) Long-Term Investments – These should be counted, similar to cash.
-) Equity Investments – Any investments in other companies should also be added in, similar to cash (though they might be discounted).
-) Capital Leases – Like debt, these have interest payments – so they should be added in like debt.
-) (Some) Operating Leases – Sometimes you need to convert operating leases to capital leases and add them as well.
-) Unfunded Pension Obligations – Sometimes these are counted as debt as well.
So a more “correct” formula would be:
Enterprise Value = Equity Value – Cash + Debt + Preferred Stock + Noncontrolling Interest – NOLs – LT and Equity Investments + Capital Leases + Unfunded Pension Obligations
In interviews, usually you can get away with saying “Enterprise Value = Equity Value – Cash + Debt + Preferred Stock + Noncontrolling Interest” I mention this here because in more advanced interviews you might get questions on this topic.
When would you not use a DCF in a Valuation?
You do not use a DCF if the company has unstable or unpredictable cash flows (tech or bio-tech startup) or when debt and working capital serve a fundamentally different role. For example, banks and financial institutions do not re-invest debt and working capital is a huge part of their Balance Sheets – so you wouldn’t use a DCF for such companies.
What other Valuation methodologies are there?
Other methodologies include:
When would you use a Liquidation Valuation?
This is most common in bankruptcy scenarios and is used to see whether equity shareholders will receive any capital after the company’s debts have been paid off. It is often used to advise struggling businesses on whether it’s better to sell off assets separately or to try and sell the entire company.
When would you use Sum of the Parts?
This is most often used when a company has completely different, unrelated divisions – a conglomerate like General Electric, for example. If you have a plastics division, a TV and entertainment division, an energy division, a consumer financing division and a technology division, you should not use the same set of Comparable Companies and Precedent Transactions for the entire company. Instead, you should use different sets for each division, value each one separately, and then add them together to get the Combined Value.
When do you use an LBO Analysis as part of your Valuation?
Obviously you use this whenever you’re looking at a Leveraged Buyout – but it is also used to establish how much a private equity firm could pay, which is usually lower than what companies will pay. It is often used to set a “floor” on a possible Valuation for the company you’re looking at.
What are some examples of industry-specific multiples?
Technology (Internet): EV / Unique Visitors, EV / Pageviews Retail / Airlines: EV / EBITDAR (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization & Rental Expense) Energy: EV / EBITDAX (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization & Exploration Expense), EV / Daily Production, EV / Proved Reserve Quantities Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs): Price / FFO per Share, Price / AFFO per Share (Funds From Operations, Adjusted Funds From Operations) Technology and Energy should be straightforward – you’re looking at traffic and energy reserves as value drivers rather than revenue or profit. For Retail / Airlines, you add back Rent because some companies own their own buildings and capitalize the expense whereas others rent and therefore have a rental expense. For Energy, all value is derived from companies’ reserves of oil & gas, which explains the last 2 multiples; EBITDAX exists because some companies capitalize (a portion of) their exploration expenses and s4ome expense them. You add back the exploration expense to normalize the numbers. For REITs, Funds From Operations is a common metric that adds back Depreciation and subtracts gains on the sale of property. Depreciation is a non-cash yet extremely large expense in real estate, and gains on sales of properties are assumed to be non-recurring, so FFO is viewed as a “normalized” picture of the cash flow the REIT is generating.
When you’re looking at an industry-specific multiple like EV / Scientists or EV / Subscribers, why do you use Enterprise Value rather than Equity Value?
You use Enterprise Value because those scientists or subscribers are “available” to all the investors (both debt and equity) in a company. The same logic doesn’t apply to everything, though – you need to think through the multiple and see which investors the particular metric is “available” to.
Would an LBO or DCF give a higher valuation?
Technically it could go either way, but in most cases the LBO will give you a lower valuation. Here’s the easiest way to think about it: with an LBO, you do not get any value from the cash flows of a company in between Year 1 and the final year – you’re only valuing it based on its terminal value. With a DCF, by contrast, you’re taking into account both the company’s cash flows in between and its terminal value, so values tend to be higher. Note: Unlike a DCF, an LBO model by itself does not give a specific valuation. Instead, you set a desired IRR and determine how much you could pay for the company (the valuation) based on that.
When would a Liquidation Valuation produce the highest value?
This is highly unusual, but it could happen if a company had substantial hard assets but the market was severely undervaluing it for a specific reason (such as an earnings miss or cyclicality). As a result, the company’s Comparable Companies and Precedent Transactions would likely produce lower values as well – and if its assets were valued highly enough, Liquidation Valuation might give a higher value than other methodologies.
Let’s go back to 2004 and look at Facebook back when it had no profit and no revenue. How would you value it?
You would use Comparable Companies and Precedent Transactions and look at more “creative” multiples such as EV/Unique Visitors and EV/Pageviews rather than EV/Revenue or EV/EBITDA. You would not use a “far in the future DCF” because you can’t reasonably predict cash flows for a company that is not even making money yet. This is a very common wrong answer given by interviewees. When you can’t predict cash flow, use other metrics – don’t try to predict cash flow anyway!
What would you use in conjunction with Free Cash Flow multiples – Equity Value or Enterprise Value?
Trick question. For Unlevered Free Cash Flow, you would use Enterprise Value, but for Levered Free Cash Flow you would use Equity Value. Remember, Unlevered Free Cash Flow excludes Interest and thus represents money available to all investors, whereas Levered FCF already includes the effects of the Interest expense (and mandatory debt repayments) and the money is therefore only available to equity investors. Debt investors have already “been paid” with the interest payments and principal re payments they received.
You never use Equity Value / EBITDA, but are there any cases where you might use Equity Value / Revenue?
It’s very rare to see this, but sometimes large financial institutions with big cash balances have negative Enterprise Values – so you might use Equity Value / Revenue instead. You might see Equity Value / Revenue if you’ve listed a set of financial institutions and non-financial institutions on a slide, you’re showing Revenue multiples for the nonfinancial institutions, and you want to show something similar for the financial institutions. Note, however, that in most cases you would be using other multiples such as P/E and P/BV with banks anyway.
How do you select Comparable Companies / Precedent Transactions?
The 3 main ways to select companies and transactions:
For Precedent Transactions, you often limit the set based on date and only look at transactions within the past 1-2 years. The most important factor is industry – that is always used to screen for companies/transactions, and the rest may or may not be used depending on how specific you want to be.
Here are a few examples:
Comparable Company Screen: Oil & gas producers with market caps over $5 billion
Comparable Company Screen: Digital media companies with over $100 million in revenue
Precedent Transaction Screen: Airline M&A transactions over the past 2 years involving sellers with over $1 billion in revenue
Precedent Transaction Screen: Retail M&A transactions over the past year
Why would a company with similar growth and profitability to its Comparable Companies be valued at a premium?
How do you take into account a company’s competitive advantage in a valuation?
But if the company you’re valuing is distressed, is not performing well, or is at a competitive disadvantage, you might use the 25th percentile or something in the lower range instead – and vice versa if it’s doing well.
You mentioned that Precedent Transactions usually produce a higher value than Comparable Companies – can you think of a situation where this is not the case?
Sometimes this happens when there is a substantial mismatch between the M&A market and the public market.
For example, no public companies have been acquired recently but there have been a lot of small private companies acquired at extremely low valuations. For the most part this generalization is true but there are exceptions to almost every “rule” in finance.
Two companies have the exact same financial profiles and are bought by the same acquirer, but the EBITDA multiple for one transaction is twice the multiple of the other transaction – how could this happen?
Possible reasons:
Why does Warren Buffett prefer EBIT multiples to EBITDA multiples?
Warren Buffett once famously said, “Does management think the tooth fairy pays for capital expenditures?” He dislikes EBITDA because it hides the Capital Expenditures companies make and disguises how much cash they are actually using to finance their operations.
In some industries there is also a large gap between EBIT and EBITDA – anything that is very capital-intensive, for example, will show a big disparity. Note that EBIT itself does not include Capital Expenditures, but it does include Depreciation and that is directly linked to CapEx – that’s the link. If a company has a high Depreciation expense, chances are it has a high CapEx.