Study Session 9: Equity Valuation: Valuation Concepts
I work with someone who is adamant on comparing the PE values of different countries benchmark indexes, and using that to say that one country’s equity market is undervalued etc. [The only context i am used to using PE is stock vs its sector, and even then it can be hard to define a comparator group.]
This seems like total garbage to me, even the data is distorted by negative earnings, but what are the key reasons why this analysis is meaningless in practice?
Explain the implications of Fama French models’s factors - size, Value and market factors in determining the characteristics of a company
What is Growth biased and Value biased in Equity Valuation.
Is it true that the bond yield plus model DOESN’T factor in changes in inflation risk while the multi-factor model DOES? (I’m confused because I would think changes in expected inflation WOULD change any given firm’s LT bond yield and therefore would change the bond yield plus model’s required calc…)
Had an interview the other day and the question of which valuation method produces the highest value came up. My answer was precedent transactions>comparables due to premiums etc. Then I was specifically asked about DCF and I said that it depends on your inputs and estimations but usually it gives a higher price than the other two. The interviewer didn’t seem to like my answer and kept asking for the exact reason which I was unable to provide. After the interview I had a look online with no luck so I am here asking for your guidance! What do you think?
I don’t have a clear understanding of levered and unlevered beta and it would be great if someone could help me.
Correct me if I am wrong, when we unlever beta, we remove the debt component. The Schweser book says “The unlevering process isolates systematic risk”. But, beta already represents the systematic risk, so why do we have to unlever it in the first place?
If ‘the markets are overvalued’, why would that lead to a lower equity risk premium? I would think the risk premium would be higher if the markets were overvalued?
I came across this in a problem- we are asked to update certain economic parameters for a hypothetical firm due to a recent economic slowdown. Wouldn’t we want a higher equity risk premium and therefore higher required return and lower prices in our models?
I see everywhere these two formulas :
FCFF = NI + NCC + Int * ( 1 – T ) – Inv LT – Inv WC
FCFF = CFO + Int * ( 1 – T ) – Inv LT
According to these formulas, CFO = NI + NCC - Inv WC
But if there is a extra gain on sales from land in NI, then CFO = NI - gain on sales + NCC - Inv WC
So to their formula is WRONG, right ?
I would like to know why we seem to count two times the depreciation in the FCFF equation from EBIT and EBITDA.
As an example,
FCFF = EBITDA * (1- T) + Depreciation * T - WCInc - FCInv
With FCInv = Change in gross PPE - Depreciation
So Depreciation is counted in double, in EBITDA and add in FCInv… no ?
Thank you very much
Study together. Pass together.
Join the world's largest online community of CFA, CAIA and FRM candidates.