This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

Errors in estimating the discount rate or mismatching cashflows and discount rates can lead to serious errors in valuation. * At an intutive level, the discount rate used should be consistent with both the riskiness and the type of cashflow being discounted. I. Cost of Equity The cost of equity is the rate of return that investors require to make an equity investment in a firm. There are two approaches to estimating the cost of equity; * a risk and return model * a dividend-growth model. Models of Risk and Return The Capital Asset Pricing Model * Measures risk in terms on non-diversifiable variance * Relates expected returns to this risk measure. * It is based upon several assumptions (a) that investors have homogeneous expectations about asset returns and variances (b) that they can borrow and lend at a riskfree rate (c) that all assets are marketable and perfectly divisible (d) that there are no transactions costs and that there are no restrictions on short sales. Risk in the CAPM Beta: The non-diversifiable risk for any asset can be measured by the covariance of its returns with returns on a market index, which is defined to be the asset's beta. The cost of equity will be the required return, Cost of Equity = Rf + Equity Beta * (E(Rm) - Rf) where,

Rf = Riskfree rate E(Rm) = Expected Return on the Market Index Using the Capital Asset Pricing Model * Inputs required to use the CAPM (a) the current risk-free rate (b) the expected return on the market index and (c) the beta of the asset being analyzed. Practical issues in using the CAPM -1. Measurement of the risk premium * It is generally based upon historical data, and the premium is defined to be the difference between average returns on stocks and average returns on riskfree securities over the measurement period. Magnitude of the risk premium Historical Period 1926-1990 1962-1990 1981-1990 Stocks - T. Bills Arithmetic 8.41% 4.10% 6.05% Geometric 6.41% 2.95% 5.38% Stocks - T.Bonds Arithmetic 7.24% 3.92% 0.13% Geometric 5.50% 3.25% 0.19%

*** Generally, geometric averages provide better estimates of risk premiums in valuation.
**

y

The risk premiums will vary across markets, depending upon their riskiness. While historical data can be used to estimate premiums outside the United States, it is not very reliable. An alternative way of estimating premiums is to use country bond ratings to estimate these premiums relative to the U.S. premium. For instance, the risk premiums for South American countries can be estimated as follows: Rating BBB BB Risk Premium 5.5% + 1.75% = 7.25% 5.5% + 2% = 7.5%

Country Argentina Brazil

do not add a risk premium to the risk free rate.75% = 6.00%.50%) = 14.5% = 7% 5. The same estimation can be done in British Pounds.5% + 0.75% = 7.5% = 8% 5.6% = 7.50% + 1.25% 5. When the long term government bond rate is not available. the thirty-year treasury bond rate in the United States was 8.50%) = 14. Riskfree Rate The long-term government bond rate is the appropriate riskfree rate. At the same point in time. Which beta would you use in valuing Glaxo? .Chile Columbia Mexico Paraguay Peru Uruguay AA A+ BBB+ BBBB BBB 5.1% A Warning: If you add a default premium to the risk premium.10 (5.25% = 6. Illustration 3: Using the CAPM to calculate cost of equity Glaxo Holdings had an estimated beta of 1.05% This is the cost of equity. if cash flows are estimated in dollars.00% + 1.K.5% + 1. Wellcome has a beta of 0.65. which was 8.50% at the same point in time ñ Cost of Equity (British Pounds) = 8. using the long term Government Bond rate in the U.5% + 1. That would be double counting. The estimated cost of equity for Glaxo in December 1994 was ñ Cost of Equity = 8.75% 5..25% 5.5% + 1.10 at the end of 1994.55% This difference reflects differences in expected inflation in the two markets. II. y Wellcome is planning an acquisition of Glaxo.5% + 1.10 (5.5% + 2. it may make sense to look at the rate at which large corporations can borrow in the local market.

* If all of the firm's risk are borne by the stockholders. and debt has a tax benefit to the firm. either through acquisitions or through projects. and is usually defined in terms of the relationship between fixed costs and total costs. the higher is its beta. had a beta of 1. What would the impact of these actions be on pharmaceutical firmsí betas? II. It had research and development expenses which were 670% of sales in 1994. * A firm which has high operating leverage -> higher variability in earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) -> higher beta y Sticking again with pharmaceutical firms.e. * The beta of a firm is the weighted average of the betas of its different business lines. (Wellcome is a good example. or because of the nature of their business.) These firms will have higher betas than other firms which have more traditional cost structures. the beta of debt is zero.. Levered Beta = Unlevered Beta (1 + (1-t) (D/E)) .8.65 in 1994. Thus cyclical firms can be expected to have higher betas. Degree of Operating Leverage: * DOL is a function of the cost structure of a firm. either because they focus heavily on research. for instance. Biotechnology firms have an average beta of 1. (Synergen. there are some firms which have very high fixed costs. than non-cyclical firms. other things remaining equal. Type of Business: * The more sensitive a business is to market conditions.) III. then. i.Determinants of Betas I. Financial Leverage: * An increase in financial leverage will increase the equity beta of a firm. y Pharmaceutical companies are increasingly looking at expanding into biotechnology.

The private firm had a debt/equity ratio of 30%. Illustration 5: Using comparable firms to estimate betas Assume that you are trying to estimate the beta for a private firm that is in the business of manufacturing.10 /(1+0. Firm General Binding Hunt Manufacturing Moore Coroporation Nashua Company Pitney Bowes Average Beta 1.80 0. its beta would be much higher (Tax rate was 30%) ñ Current Beta (Levered) = 1.17 . had a debt/equity ratio of 4% in 1994.20 0.05 0. * Correct for differences in financial leverage between the firm being analyzed and the comparable firms.where.00 0.45 1. Using comparable firms: * Use the betas of publicly traded firms which are comparable in terms of business risk and operating leverage.10 0. If Glaxo were to raise its debt/equity ratio to 20%.97 Debt/Equity 0. with a beta of 1.7*0.90 1. selling and servicing fax machines.20 0.7*0.95 0.10.10 Unlevered Beta = 1.07 New Levered Beta = 1.2) = 1.07 (1+0.04) = 1. t = Corporate tax rate D/E = Debt/Equity Ratio Illustration 4: Effects of Financial Leverage on Betas Glaxo.03 0.22 Other approaches to estimating Betas I. The betas of publicly traded firms involved in office equipment and supplies are as follows (They face an average tax rate of 40%).

dividend yield.17)) = 0.30 Growth in Earnings per share = 0.3)) = 1.15 Debt/Equity Ratio + 0.08 CV in Operating Income . size.00001 Total Assets where.126 Dividend Yield + 0.88 Beta for private firm involved in office supplies = 0.88 (1 + (1-0. BETA = 0.04 Debt/Equity Ratio = 0.9832 + 0. .Unlevered Beta of office supply firms = 0.4) (0. coefficient of variation in operating income.97 / (1 + (1-0.0. CV in Operating Income = Coefficient of Variation in Operating Income = Standard Deviation in Operating Income/ Average Operating Income Illustration 6: Using fundamental information to predict betas Assume that you are trying to estimate the beta for a private firm. with the following financial characteristics (defined consistently with the regression): Coefficient of Variation in Operating Income = 2.000 (in thousands) The estimated beta for this firm. Using fundamental factors: * Combines industry and company-fundamental factors to predict betas.04 II.034 Growth in Earnings per Share .30 Total Assets = $ 10. * Income statement and balance sheet variables are important predictors of beta * Following is a regression relating the betas of NYSE and AMEX stocks in 1991 to five variables .0. debt/equity and growth in earnings.2 Dividend Yield = 0.4) (0.

If these factor-specific betas and the factor risk premia can be estimated. however.04 + 0.00001*10.Rf = 3% : Risk Premium for factor 1 E(R2) . * The arbitrage pricing model relates expected returns to economic factors.30 + 0.034 * 0. with a beta specific to each factor. * Measure of this non-diversifiable risk in the APM.9832 +0. investors get rewarded for taking on non-diversifiable risk. and that there are three factors.2 .19 The Arbitrage Pricing Model * Logic behind the arbitrage pricing model (APM) same as the logic behind the CAPM. where.Rf = 4% : Risk Premium for factor 2 E(R3) .Rf = 1.BETA = 0.5% : Risk Premium for factor 3 Assume that the betas specific to each of these factors are estimated for Pepsi Cola in 1992 and . the cost of equity can also be estimated.Rf = Risk premium per unit of factor j risk k = Number of factors Using the Arbitrage Pricing Model Illustration 7: Using the APM to estimate the cost of equity Assume that the parameters for the arbitrage pricing model have been estimated.0.35% E(R1) .08*2.15* 0.. i.30 . * The number and the identity of the factors are determined by the data on historical returns. Riskfree rate = 3.126* 0.0.e. is not a single factor but is determined by an asset's sensitivity to various economic factors that affect all assets.000 = 1. Rf = Riskfree rate Fj = Beta specific to factor j E(Rj) .

* The biggest intuitive block in using the arbitrage pricing model is its failure to identify specifically the factors driving expected returns.20 F2 = 0. Cost of Equity = 3.10 Substituting into the APM.20 (3%) + 0. but it will underperform the richer APM when the company is sensitive to economic factors not well represented in the market index. These variables can then be correlated with returns to come up with a model of expected returns.35% + 1. Roll and Ross (1986) suggest that the following macroeconomic variables are highly correlated with the factors that come out of factor analysis -.5%) = 12.20% Considerations on the use of the APM * Capital asset pricing model can be considered to be a specialized case of the arbitrage pricing model. * In general. changes in default premium. . as will the risk premia associated with each economic factor. the CAPM has the advantage of being a simpler model to estimate and to use. tend to have low CAPM betas. unanticipated inflation and changes in the real rate of return. which derive most of their risk from oil price movements. * For example.that the estimates are as follows: F1 = 1. where there is only one underlying factor and that underlying factor is completely measured by the market index. * Costs of going from the arbitrage pricing model to a macro-economic multi-factor model can be traced directly to the errors that can be made in identifying the factors.industrial production.90 (4%) + 1. Multi-factor Models for risk and return * Unidentified factors in the arbitrage pricing model are replaced with macro-economic variables.1 (1.90 F3 = 1. Example: Oil companies. Chen. with firm-specific betas calculated relative to each variable. * The factors in the model can change over time. shifts in the term structure.

98 Cost of Equity = $2.5% .g) where. P0 = Price of the stock today DPS1 = Expected dividends per share next year ke = Cost of Equity g = Growth rate in dividends (steady state) A simple manipulation of this formula yields. since the current price is a key input to the model.5% and the firm is assumed to be in steady state.98 / $66 + 5.82 and the stock traded at $66 in December 1992. the present value of a share of equity can be written as: Po = Present Value of expected dividends = DPS1 / (ke . The dividend growth model can then be used to estimate the cost of equity. Dividend Growth Model For a firm which has a stable growth rate in earnings and dividends.82 *1. ke = DPS1 / P0 + g = Expected Dividend Yield + Growth rate in earnings/dividends More importantly. Illustration 8: Using the Dividend Growth Model to estimate the cost of equity: Southwestern Bell In 1992.* Using the wrong factor(s) or missing a significant factor in a multi-factor model can lead to inferior estimates of cost of equity. The estimated growth rate in dividends is 5. it is inappropriate to use this approach to value stock in a firm.055 = $2. using this cost of equity. There is a strong element of circular reasoning involved that will lead the analyst to conclude. Expected Dividends in 1993 = $2. that equity is fairly valued. Southwestern Bell paid dividend per share of $2.

WACC = Weighted Average Cost of Capital ke = Cost of Equity kd = After-tax Cost of Debt kps = Cost of Preferred Stock E/(E+D+PS) = Market Value proportion of Equity in Funding Mix D/(E+D+PS) = Market Value proportion of Debt in Funding Mix PS/(E+D+PS) = Market Value proportion of Preferred Stock in Funding Mix Illustration 9: Calculating the Cost of Capital: Genzyme Corporation.50%) = 16.00% (in market value terms) of the funding mix and debt made up the remaining 15.60.60 (5. the stock is found to be fairly valued.80% * an after-tax cost of debt of 6.00%. Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) Definition of the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) The weighted average cost of capital is defined as the weighted average of the costs of the different components of financing used by a firm. .00%. This results in Cost of equity = 8.98 / (. (Pre-tax cost of debt=9.= 10% To illustrate the circular reasoning involved in using this cost of equity to value stock.055) = $66 Not surprisingly. Tax rate=30%) * Equity comprised 85.10 .00%+1. In December 1994.30%. WACC = ke ( E/ (D+E+PS)) + kd ( D/ (D+E+PS)) + kps ( PS/ (D+E+PS)) where. Genzyme Corporation had * a beta of 1. Value of Equity = $ 2..

80% (0.Operating Expenses = Earnings before interest.Taxes = Net Income + Depreciation & Amortization = Cash flows from Operations . taxes and depreciation (EBITDA) .Working Capital Needs .* The cost of capital for Genzyme can then be calculated as follows: WACC = 16.Principal Repayments + Proceeds from New Debt Issues = Free Cash flow to Equity Levered Firm at Desired Leverage Net Income .23 % ESTIMATION OF CASH FLOWS Cash flows to Equity for a Levered Firm Revenues .85) + 6.30% (0.Depreciation & Amortization = Earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) .Capital Expenditures .Interest Expenses = Earnings before taxes .Preferred Dividends .15) = 15.

92 $ 519.Depreciation) (1-DR) .DR) Working Capital Needs = Free Cash flow to Equity For this firm.(1. 1994 $ 695.50 14%) $ 572.Depreciation) .56 Estd 1995 $ 765. The company had capital expenditures of $362 million in 1994 and is expected to have capital expenditures of $400 million in 1995. The companyís working capital increased to $225 million in 1994 from $203 million in 1993.(1. (How does one know?) The company reported net income of $695 million in 1994 and is projected to have a net income of $765 million in 1995.00 $ 156.50 $ 172. leading to a debt to capital ratio (ìdebt ratioî) of 14%.00 Net Income . This debt ratio is assumed to be stable. The company reported depreciation of $180 million in 1994 and is expected to have depreciation of $200 million in 1995.52 $ 18.(Cap Ex .5 billion in debt outstanding and $ 9 billion in market value of equity.( Change in Working Capital) (1-DR) FCFE Proposition : The Free Cash Flow to Equity will increase as the amount of debt financing used by the firm increases.DR) (Capital Expenditures . It is expected to maintain working capital at the same percentage of sales in 1995. and sales are expected to increase from $6420 million in 1994 to $7100 million in 1995.00 (DR = 14%) (DR = $ 20. .. Proceeds from new debt issues = Principal Repayments +DR (Capital Expenditures Depreciation + Working Capital Needs) Illustration 10: Estimating the cash flow to equity for a firm at its desired leverage: WarnerLambert The following is an estimation of free cash flows to equity for Warner-Lambert in 1994 and for 1995 (projected). Thus FCFE will be an increasing function of _. y y y y y The company had $1.

tax rate) + Depreciation .Depreciation) (DR = $ 109.Capital Spending .Illustration 11: Sensitivity to Debt Ratio .70 The following graph illustrates the effect on free cash flows to equity of changing the debt ratios from 0% to 100% ñ CASHFLOWS TO THE FIRM EBIT ( 1 . 1994 Estd 1995 Net Income $ 695.00 $ 765.30 Capital) (1-DR) 40%) FCFE $ 572.00 .20 $ 120.Warner Lambert Corporation The following are the cash flows to equity for Warner Lambert.Change in Working Capital .(Cap Ex .20 $ 14.60 $ 630.00 (1-DR) 40%) .( Change in Working (DR = $ 13. using a debt ratio of 40% instead of a debt ratio of 14%.

The earnings before interest and taxes is expected to increase to 3.838 mil DM . The free cashflows to the firm for 1992 and 1993 (estimated) are provided below.Bond rate is 6.560 mil DM 5. as a German-based multinational involved in a wide range of businesses. The firm has a beta of 1. The expected inflation rate is 3% in both the firm's cash flows and the general economy. depreciation and working capital are all expected to increase by 5% in 1993. Real cash flows should be discounted at real discount rates.613 million DM and capital expenditures of 5. In addition. reported earnings before interest and taxes of 3.159 mil DM 2.tax rate) 2. The valuation of this firm can be done on either a real or a nominal basis: The estimates of growth on a real and nominal basis are done first .= Cash flow to the firm Illustration 12: Estimating the expected cash flow to the firm .Siemens Siemens AG. at 5% a year for the next three years and 3% a year after that.405 million DM in 1992. Capital expenditures. The firm had a tax rate of 38% in 1992. in real terms.613 mil DM 4.Change in Working Capital 1.306 million DM in 1991 to 15.560 million DM in 1992. 1992 Projected 1993 EBIT (1 . Illustration 13: The Effect of Inflation on Cash flows and Discount Rates Consider a firm which has cash flows to equity currently of $100 million and is expected to grow. the working capital increased from 14.482 million DM in 1992. prior to general provisions and extraordinary charges.844 mil DM .0 and the current T.5%.967 million DM in 1993.Capital Expenditures 5.098 mil DM 770 mil DM Free Cashflow to firm 114 mil DM 696 mil DM INFLATION AND VALUATION Consistency Principle 1: Nominal cash flows should be discounted at nominal discount rates. It had depreciation of 4.460 mil DM + Depreciation 4.

078 Terminal value (Nominal Cash flows) = $ 126 * 1.09% The discount rate can similarly be estimated on a real and nominal basis: Real Nominal Discount Rate 1.Real Nominal Growth Rate in first 3 years 5% (1.03)-1 = 6.0874 + $ 110 / 1. with a historical premium earned by stocks over T.271 The terminal values are calculated as follows for real and nominal cash flows: Terminal value (Real Cash flows) = $ 116 * 1.03)(1.74% E(R) =6.122 + ($126 + $2.08743 = $ 1.03 / (.03)-1 = 8. The present values of the cash flows to equity and the terminal value can then be calculated using the appropriate discount rate: Present value (using real cash flows) = $105/1.05)(1.5%) =12% The expected nominal return is estimated using the CAPM.123 = $ 1.12/1.0609) = $ 2.5%.078) / 1.15% Growth Rate after year 3 3% (1.08742 + ($116 + $2.12 + $ 117 / 1.0874 ..896 Illustration 13A: The Effect of mismatching cash flows and discount rates Real Cash flows@ Nominal Nominal Cash flows@ Real rate rate .03 -1 = 8.896 Present value (using nominal cash flows) = $108/1.271 This calculation assumes that the growth rates after year 3 are steady state growth rates and will continue through infinity.5% +1(5..078 $126 $2.271) / 1.0609 / (.Bonds of 5. Using these growth rates the cash flows can be generated in both nominal and real terms: Real Cash flows Nominal Cash flows Terminal Nominal Cash Terminal Year CF to Equity Value flows Value 1 $105 $108 2 $110 $117 3 $116 $2.03) = $ 2.12 .

293 > True value of $1.068 If real cash flows are discounted at the nominal discount rate.325 Nominal Cash flows $108 $117 $126 Terminal Value $5.896 TAXES AND VALUATION Consistency Principle 2: Pre-tax cash flows should be discounted at pre-tax discount rates.0609 / (.08742 + ($126 + $5.Year CF to Equity 1 2 3 $105 $110 $116 Terminal Value $1.03) = $1.325 Terminal value (using real rate and nominal cash flows) = $ 126 * 1. After-tax cash flows should be discounted at after-tax discount rates.03 / (.08743 = $4.12-.896 If nominal cash flows are discounted at the real discount rate. E(Rj) = Expected pre-tax return on asset j Rf = Riskfree rate Fj = Beta of asset j .068) / 1.0609) = $ 5.Rf) where.0874 + $ 117 / 1.122 + ($116 + $1. Terminal value (using nominal rate and real cash flows) = $ 116 *1.068 The terminal values are miscalculated because cash flows and discount rates are not matched.123 = $ 1.325) / 1. the present value is: Present value (real cash flows discounted at nominal rates) = $105/1.0874 -.12 + $ 110 / 1. After-tax version of the Capital Asset Pricing Model E(Rj) = Rf + H+ HFj + H2 (Kj . the present value is: Present value (nominal cash flows discounted at real rates) = $108/1.207 < True value of $1.

43 $2.05 (5.41 The discount rate can be estimated before personal taxes and used to calculate the present value per share: Discount rate before personal taxes = 7. The following example values Eli Lilly on the basis of cash flows after personal taxes for an investor with a tax rate of 40% for ordinary income and 28% for capital gains.56 3 $2.36 2 $2.Initial price) * Capital Gains tax rate = $ 93.12932 + $2.41 The discount rate before personal taxes can be apportioned into dividend yield and price appreciation: .05 and the treasury bond rate wass 7.Ordinary tax rate) Terminal price after taxes = Terminal price before taxes .$62.98 $1. The cash flows on a pre and post tax basis are as follows: Before personal taxes After personal taxes Dividends per Terminal Dividends per Terminal Year share price share price 1 $2.15% + 1.12933 + $3.27/1.91 $93.1293 + $ 2.12935 = $ 62.60 $1.79 4 $3.43 .28 = $84.45)/1.60 / 1.91+$93.05 5 $3.($93.98/1.15%. The firm had a beta of 1.43 .Kj = Dividend Yield of asset j H0 = A constant term H1 = Market premium for systematic risk H2 = Influence of dividend payout on expected returns Illustration 14: Effect of personal taxes on cash flows and discount rates: Eli Lilly The expected dividends and the terminal price were estimated for Eli Lilly at the beginning of 1992 for the next five years (before personal taxes).27 $1.41/1.20.(Terminal price . The cash flows after personal taxes are estimated after personal taxes as follows: Dividends per share after taxes = Dividends per share before taxes * (1 .20) * 0.20 The initial price is assumed to be $62.41 $2.35 $84.12934 + ($3.5%) = 12.93% Present Value per share (based upon pre-tax cash flows and pre-tax discount rates) =$ 2.

79/1. Estimating and Using Historical Growth Rates y y y Historical growth rates can be estimated in a number of different ways o Arithmetic versus Geometric Averages o Simple versus Regression Models Historical growth rates can be sensitive to o the period used in the estimation In using historical growth rates.08865 = $ 62.Expected Dividend Yield = 12.35+$84. the following factors have to be considered o how to deal with negative earning o the effect of changing size Illustration 15: Using arithmetic average versus geometric average: Autodesk The following are the earnings per share at Glaxo Pharmaceuticals.08863 + $2.41)/1.86% Present Value per share (based upon after-tax cash flows and after-tax discount rates) =$ 1.66 $0.27 / $62.Expected Dividend Yield = Expected Dividends next year/ Initial Price =$2.13 $1. starting in 1989 and ending in 1994: Year 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 EPS $0.56 / 1.0886 + $ 1.11% 39.56% -11.05/1.22% Discount rate after personal taxes = 3.0.27 Growth Rate 36. ESTIMATING GROWTH RATES I.36% 1.71% Expected Price Appreciation = Expected Return .71% = 9.0.02% 12.22% (1 .08864 + ($2.91 $1.93% .36/1.27 $1.28) = 8.39% .90 $0.71% (1 .20 Thus the value is unaffected by whether cash flows are before or after personal taxes.3.40) + 9. as long as the discount rates are adjusted accordingly.08862 + $1.20 = 3.

Arithmetic mean = (36.42 -0.90 $0.90 $0.5171 + 0.65 $0.36%+1. The earnings per share from 1988 until 1994 is provided for Glaxo.24 0.91 $1.27/0. starting in 1988 instead of 1989 and uses six years of growth rather than five to estimate the arithmetic and geometric averages. and the linear and log linear regressions are done below: Time (t) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Year 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 EPS $0.32% Geometric mean = (1.09 0.24 Linear Regression : EPS = 0.11%+39.65)1/6 -1 = 11.66)1/5 -1 = 13.27 ln(EPS) -0.11 -0.02%+12.66 $0.91 $1.68% Geometric mean = (1.66 $0.1132 t .27/0.27 Arithmetic average = 13. Time (t) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Year 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 EPS $0.27 $1.43 -0.13 $1.99% Illustration 16: Sensitivity of historical growth rates to the length of the estimation period: Glaxo The following table provides earnings per share at Glaxo..13 $1.39%)/5 = 15.27 $1.56%-11.65 $0.12 0.81% Illustration 17: Linear and Log-linear models of growth: Glaxo Inc.

00% .38% -37.5536 + 0.53 -88.00.27 2 1989 $1. For instance.07 -39.34 -1.1 = -200 % Geometric growth rate = $1.Log-linear Regression: ln (EPS) = -0.1132 (8) = $1.28% 3 1990 $1. The following series lists earnings per share from 1988 to 1994 for Sterling Chemicalsñ Growth Modified Time (t) Year EPS log(EPS) Rate Growth Rate 1 1988 $3.55536 + 0.56 1.00> .EPSt-1) Illustration 18: Dealing with negative earnings: Sterling Chemicals.10) NMF -225.08 -2.5171 + 0.00> to $1.00> = -100% There is a solution to this problem.67 -0.38% 5 1992 $0.55% -39.40 -37.00/<$1. if earnings per share goes from <$1.1225 (8)) = $ 1.00/<$1.00% 7 1994 $0.28% -50.57 -50.00% 225.06% -88. since the traditional growth rate measures often fail.1225 t Expected EPS (1995) : linear regression = 0.08 129. Modified growth rate =(EPSt-EPSt-1)/Max(EPSt.42 Expected EPS (1995): log-linear regression = e (-0.77 0.06% 6 1993 ($0.41% 440.07 0.53 Dealing with negative earnings Calculating growth rates when earnings become negative is problematic. the traditional growth rate measures would be ñ Arithmetic Growth Rate = = EPSt/EPSt-1 -1 = $1.55% 4 1991 $0.

60 86.10 1991 $186.06 = -48.0.291. % Growth Æ Net Year Net Income Rate Income 1995 $801.42% Assuming that this growth rate continues for the next five years.90 15.10 1992 $306.51.192.494.00 21. in both percentage and dollar terms.42% $1.35 1998 $5. The following table shows the growth in net income for Amgen from 1989 to 1994.30 116.5139 / 1.70 64.72 1997 $2.48% Approach 2: Using the minimum or maximum of earnings as the denominator Arithmetic average.20 1994 $430.40 1993 $354. % Growth Æ Net Year Net Income Rate Income 1989 $19.5139 t Average EPS (1988-94) = $ 1.487. but do not do much better than such models over the long term. Analystsí Forecasts Of Earnings: How Good Are They? Studies indicate that analysts do better than mechanical models at forecasting earnings in the short term.63% $120.407.60 1996 $1.16% $75. using modified growth rates = .63 86.42% $692. .785.10 1990 $86.67 86.81% Illustration 19: The Effect of size on growth: Amgen Amgen increased its net income from $19.32 86.1 million in 1989 to $430 million in 1994.20 351.680.42% $371.72% $48.06 Growth rate = .31 1999 $9.42% $4.98 86.1114 .42% $2.13% $100.31% $67.Approach 1: Using the slope coefficient from the linear regression EPS =3.0.65 II.10 Geometric Average Growth Rate = 86.

4% 32. 13.2% 1972-75 Fried & Givoly Earnings Forecaster 16. Expected Growth And Fundamentals Retention Ratio and Return on Equity gt = Retained Earningst-1/ NIt-1 * ROE = Retention Ratio * ROE = b * ROE .7% 34. Studies examining how effective analysts are conclude the following ñ y y On average. III. Buy recommendations affect prices less than sell recommendations.8% for the sells). The recommendations made by the ëbestí analysts (Institutional Investorís All American Analysts) have a greater impact on stock prices (3% on buys. and they continue to rise in the following period (2.Mean Relative Absolute Error Study Analyst Group Analyst Mechanical Forecasts Models Collins & Hopwood Value Line Forecasts 31.4% 19.4% for buys. The prices tend to drift back to their original levels. analysts affect stock prices with their recommendations.7% on sells).1% 1970-74 Brown & Rozeff Value Line Forecasts 28.8% 1969-79 Are some analysts more equal than others? Some analysts are better at predicting earnings than other analysts. For these recommendations the price changes are sustained. They are also usually better at picking stocks. 4.

1994 1995 BV of Equity 11700 Net Income 3010 Retention Ratio 52.i (1-t)) .5% translates into a drop in the growth rate of 2. The relationship between growth rates and changes in return on equity is as follows ñ gt = [BV of Equityt-1 * (ROEt .52*0.52*0.255-. Short term changes in ROE Small changes in return on equity can lead to large shifts in the growth rate for some firms.Proposition 1: The expected growth rate in earnings for a company cannot exceed its return on equity in the long term.26)/3010) = 13.26 = (11700*(.52% + 0. ROE and Leverage ROE = ROA + D/E (ROA .255 = 11.32% A drop in the return on equity of 0.5% Growth Rate = 0.ROEt-1) / NIt-1]+ b * ROE Illustration 20: Changes in ROE and growth rates: Merck Inc.0% 25. The following table provides information on the retention ratio and the return on equity for Merck for 1994 and projections for 1995.20%. If the ROE drops by 2% the expected growth rate in 1995 would be 4.72%.00% 52% Return on Equity 26.

80. The pre-interest.362 Pre-interest.6851 to 1.43% 7.where.00% Total Assets $17.t) / BV of Total Assets D/E = BV of Debt/ BV of Equity i = Interest Expense on Debt / BV of Debt t = Tax rate on ordinary income Note that BV of Assets = BV of Debt + BV of Equity.424 Asset Turnover 1. ROA = (Net Income + Interest (1 .tax rate) $ 2181 Sales $ 29.43% to 7% as a consequence and the asset turnover is expected to increase from 1.tax rate)) / BV of Total Assets = EBIT (1. Return on Assets. after-tax profit margin 7. asset turnover and growth rates after the shift in corporate strategy: 1992 After shift in strategy EBIT (1.6851 1. after-tax profit margin is expected to drop from 7. Profit Margin and Asset Turnover ROA = EBIT (1-t) / Total Assets = [EBIT (1-t) / Sales] * [Sales/Total Assets] = Pre-interest profit margin * Asset Turnover Illustration 22: Evaluating the effects of corporate strategy on growth rate and value: Procter and Gamble Procter & Gamble decided to reduce prices on their disposable diapers in April 1993 to compete better with low-price private label brands. The following table provides projections in profit margins.80 .

375% Illustration 24: Weighting based upon standard deviations: Autodesk Inc.74% Illustration 23: Adjusting inputs for firm type: Neutrogena Inc.50% 12. Consider Autodesk Inc.a software company.00% Growth Rate 14.31 0.00% . retention ratio and interest rates for Neutrogena.43% 1992 $1.00% 16.91 41. The following table provides estimates of return on assets.48% 1990 $2.7108 Interest rate on debt (1 . Historical EPS Analyst Estimates Growth Year EPS Rate 1987 $0.00% 12.27% Growth Rate 10.7108 0.82% 8.60% Retention Ratio 58.42% 1991 $2.Return on Assets 12.27% 4. Neutrogena is expected to grow at an extraordinary rate in the first five years (growth phase) and at a stable rate after that (steady state).30 20.00% 58. with earnings per share available from 1987 to 1992.52% 12.tax rate) 4.5% 15% Debt/Equity 0% 25% Interest rate on debt 10% 8. The following table also provides analyst forecasts of expected growth over the next five years from nine analysts following Autodesk.29% Analyst Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Estimated Growth 10.98 -14.35 51.00% 16.00% Debt/Equity 0.66% 10.89 1988 $1. Growth phase Steady State Retention Ratio 76% 50% Return on Assets 19.50% 13.00% 10.69% 1989 $1. a cosmetics manufacturer.

49% Standard Deviation = 3.45% .95% Consensus Forecast = 14% Standard Deviation = 27.00% Arithmetic mean = 19.8 18.

- US Federal Reserve
- Engro Fertilizer Limited
- European fin system
- Paper 2 Regression Analysis
- (1)Banks Exposure to Interest Rate Risk
- project rp
- IPM - Valuation of Bond
- MAS Term Exam
- APV
- FM11 Ch 02 Show
- DCF (1)
- Chen 2002.pdf
- Corporate Finance Study Slides PDP
- 232-0105
- Work 402
- A Note on Contingent Claims Pricing With Non-Traded Assets
- 05Testbank for Business Finance
- Review of Literature
- financaa
- HP10BII QuickReferenceGuide
- 9
- Amazon 2005
- Amazon
- Amazon.com
- 5
- HullRMFI4eCh24
- Quantifi Whitepaper - CVA DVA and Q4 Bank Earnings

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd