HOME PAGE
Joe Ponzio's F Wall Street
INTRODUCTION
what is F Wall Street?
THE BLOG
for non-conventionalists
RESOURCES
coming soon
CONTACT ME
e-mail Joe Ponzio
Joe Ponzio's F Wall Street
You are here: Home ›› F Wall Street Blog ›› Valuing A Business ›› Calculating The Value Of A Business - Part IV

Calculating The Value Of A Business - Part IV

Jul
24

By now, you have determined what your desired rate of return is. Personally, I like to use 15%. At that rate, my money will double approximately every 5 years. Why 15%? Considering that I have to find the companies, analyze them, say "no" to most of them, and patiently wait on the sidelines until an opportunity comes along, 15% is the minimum annual return I want to justify the work that I have put in.

Let's say that, like me, you want a 15% average annual return on your money. Let's also assume that you would ideally like to hold your company for at least twenty years—assuming you could continue to earn 15% for all twenty years. If that's the case, then we need to know what to pay today to earn 15% on tomorrow's cash.

The Future Cash

The key to valuing a business is projecting, with a degree of accuracy, the future cash that a business can produce. Difficult? Yes. Most companies do not have steady, consistent operations that lend themselves to accurate, or comfortable, valuations. If the company's operations are a roller coaster ride—up and down in an unpredictable cycle—it is nearly impossible to predict the future cash because there is no reason or data supporting your valuation.

If, however, a business has consistently and steadily grown its owner earnings for a decade or more, and assuming the business has not recently undergone a radical change, then it is possible to have confidence in your predictions and value calculation. The more consistent the numbers have been, the more confidence you can have.

What Is Consistency?

Consistency is not a firm, annual yardstick by which we measure the success of a company. When we look for consistency, we should look less at the actual numbers, and more at a chart of that consistency. It is easy to look at a set of data and quickly deduce that there is no consistency. However, a chart will allow you to better visualize your company in a long-term timeframe without focusing on a single year's performance.

One need not look further than Buffett's legendary purchase of Coca-Cola in 1988. At first glance, the owner earnings from 1978 through 1987 looked as inconsistent as they come, first dropping 14% from '78 to '79, then growing 100%, then 2%, 9%, 31%, 29%, -2%, 68%, and finally up 3% in 1987 from 1986's level. Where's the consistency? Look at the graph below to find it:

Coca-Cola Owner Earnings Graph

The green line is the actual owner earnings. The black line is a trend line. Coca-Cola's owner earnings were practically married to the straight trend line. Sure, they strayed a bit, but no company will be spot on. This is about as consistent as they come. What's inconsistent you ask? Take a look at Campbell Soup below:

Campbell Soup Owner Earnings Graph

Need I say more? Perhaps you can value and own this company. I don't want to work that hard.

Projecting Cash

Okay—you know your company's cash has been steady and predictable. Let's say it has grown about 14% a year. To find that, of course, you've looked at multiple timeframes throughout the ten years. Let's also say that your company had $10,000 of owner earnings in 2007. Based on its consistent past and operations, you may reasonably expect it to generate $11,400 (14% more) in 2008.

Why can you say that? Though business is very fast paced, businesses move like snails. They usually do not grow consistently for ten years—and then change course on a dime. Nor do they often swing up and down, and then turn into "old reliable" in a year. If your business has been consistent, you can reasonably expect it to stay that way. As you check in on it in the future, if you find things to be otherwise, you can take the appropriate action (buy more, sell, or hold).

Buying The Cash

At the beginning of this discussion, we assumed a 15% growth rate. That means we can not buy the company's $11,400 in excess cash for $11,400. We have to figure out what price we can pay today to earn 15% for one year and end up with $11,400. Fortunately, Excel® can do the leg work for us. To buy 2008's $11,400, we can pay $9,913.04 today and earn 15%.

Do the same thing for 2009 through 2015, growing the cash at 14% and then "discounting" it back to today at 15%. Then, for years 2016 through 2025, use a 5% growth rate in cash, and then discount it back at 15%. Add up all of your "discounted cash flows" and you'll have the price at which you can buy the projected cash and earn 15% a year for 20 years.

Add It Up

You know the net worth. You have a reasonable expectation of the cash flows and you have a purchase price. Add them up. Now, you have a company value. Three questions remain:

  1. Is it a wonderful company?
  2. How confident am I in my valuation?
  3. How much money should I invest?

Only you can answer those. And that, my friend, is how you value a business.

Other Posts In This Series

Calculating The Value Of A Business - Part I
Calculating The Value Of A Business - Part II
Calculating The Value Of A Business - Part III

 

Filed under Valuing A Business Print this article
Comment on this [ 37 ] By: Joe Ponzio

comments

Hi Joe,

When we are looking to value a company in the financial services area, which meterics would we utilize to determine cash flow? I am thinking specifically of a brokerage firm and or a credit card company.

Thanks for your time!

Georgia

by Georgia on July 25, 2007 at 11:18 AM
Hello Georgia,

I know - Morningstar doesn't cover the financial sector yet. Probably because it is a little more difficult to get to the root of free cash flow/owner earnings.

Start your research at DowJones' Market Watch. They provide four years' worth of cash flow data—a good indication as to whether or not you need to continue your research.

If you want to investigate further, you'll need to head over to the SEC's EDGAR database (it's free) to look up the numbers from each year's annual report (Form 10-k).

In the financial sector, you'll want to remove any investment gains and realized investment gains from the stated Cash Flow From Operations. Then, don't forget to subtract the Purchase of Plant, Property, & Equipment—a business can't survive without them!

Hope that helps.

by Joe Ponzio on July 25, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Thanks so much!!

by Georgia on July 25, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Joe,

I was referred to your website by a friend. I am new to investing, and currently have positions in 10 companies. I am not sure that I'm 100% confident in everyone of them.

I have read through the information on your website, and was curious to see how you'd go about valuing a company in an industry sector that isn't always rich in free cash flow as a result of capital expenditure. One example is UNT.

In your opinion, is a company like this too difficult to perform a reasonable valuation on (i.e. the rock analogy)?

Any thoughts you or anyone else can share would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for the wonderful site!

-Josh

by Josh on August 20, 2007 at 8:01 PM
Hi Josh,

The problem with companies that have consistently high capital expenditures is that they struggle through slow times and have a hard time generating cash through good times. This, of course, assumes the capital expenditures are fixed rather than tied to revenue. (An auto manufacturer or airline generally has fixed capital expenditures.)

Here's my thing: I don't fall in love with a company. With the thousands of available investment options, I look for "ideal" investing conditions. For me, an ideal company generates a ton of excess cash (relative to its size and above and beyond capital expenditures) - and does so with relatively little capital.

If I don't find that in a company, I move on.

Remember: All businesses have a value. But, also remember that a business that is eating more cash than it is generating is shrinking your investment rather than growing it. Every time it borrows money, sells stock, or otherwise raises funds, you end up with a smaller piece of the pie.

I'm not a gambler, so I'd pass on UNT and look for ATM-type businesses where the cash is always flowing.

by Joe Ponzio on August 20, 2007 at 9:22 PM
In an interview available at http://bankstocks.com/print.asp?id=9881373 Buffet and Charlie M, mention that "When we try to determine a company’s intrinsic value or its stock’s margin of safety, there’s no one easy method. We use multiple techniques and models..."

Besides using the model which you mention on your blog, what other models are you aware that Buffet and Charlie might be using?

Thanks in advance :-)

Regards,

Sanjay Shetty
I blog at: http://indiainvestor.wordpress.com

by Sanjay Shetty on October 26, 2007 at 1:06 AM
I use p/e model.
Here is the excel -
http://rapidshare.com/files/65316532/BUFFET_EXCELL_VALUATION.xls

by mm on October 26, 2007 at 8:48 AM
MM,

Would you mind sending this to me directly at rcrawford@starlight.unc.edu? The download process at the referenced site presents a problem with my browser.

I'll share any upgrades I create from it with you.

Robert

by Robert Crawford on October 27, 2007 at 5:52 PM
Robert Crawford

Check your mail.


by mm on October 28, 2007 at 6:21 AM
MM,

My mistake. I left out a portion of the email address. It should be:

rcrawford@starlight.sph.unc.edu

Thanks for being patient with an old academic.

Robert

by Robert Crawford on October 28, 2007 at 2:05 PM
Wow,

All these years, and that is all there is to DCF and FCF?

Joe. I think you should get a pat on the back as that was the most well written discussion on investing I have ever read on the internet. I know hter e is more to learn, but talk about leading a horse to water.

All that is left is to go over your JNJ Excel spreadsheet and "reverse engineer" it to make sure I understand everything to DCF/FCF based valuation.

I want you to know the following. In all my years of investing (about 7 now), I think this past hour was the best single hour I have ever spent reading about investing.

I feel like an idiot thinking about how I valued stocks in the past (I relied heavily on PE). And now, I even think I understand the problem with valuing financial companies more so now than ever.

by kfh227 on November 9, 2007 at 10:17 PM
I think I have a good question.

Does one need to consider dividend or yield at all? It sems like DCF/FCF might already implicate yield into the equation but I'm not sure.

My thoughts are as follows. Let us assume that you get a 2.5% yield from JNJ which is 2% after taxes (for simplicity) and you want a 15% annual return. Should you actually use a discount rate of 13% (15%-2%)? This way, you would guarantee (hopefully) a 13% return via capital appreciation and 2% via dividends.

Or should the yield just be considered icing on the cake?

by kfh227 on November 9, 2007 at 10:44 PM
KFH227,

The day a stock goes ex-dividend, the value of the dividend is removed from the price of the stock (the stock decreases by the amount of the dividend) and will eventually be deposited into your brokerage account. There is no change in the value of your stock position. In theory you haven't been made any better or worse off because of this dividend, and all it amounts to is a cash flow transaction in your brokerage account. Therefore you should not decrease your discount rate by the dividend yield of a stock.

Most people think of a dividend as free money as you wait for the stock price to appreciate. They forget that they are "robbing Peter to pay Paul" and there is not any change in their stock position value when they receive a dividend.

Dave Miller

by Dave Miller on November 12, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I have read this series and everything was clear until the last few paragraphs. I understand what Shareholder Equity is ( Part 1 ). I don't see how that is used in determining value ( parts 2, 3 and 4 ). I understand completely the math behind projecting the cash forward and then discounting backwards. However, these calculations don't use the Shareholder Equity, so how should I gauge what a "good" value is for Shareholder Equity?

by Edward on November 29, 2007 at 11:36 AM
I just went trough your example above...I understand that to buy 2008's $11,400, we can pay $9,913.04 today and earn 15%. That is 13% less...how did you get to 13%? how did you come up with a number of 2% less? Di I invest $11,400 in 2007 then another $9918 in 2008 to maintain 15%.

What is tha actual formula....

Thanks,

Tom


by Tommy V on November 29, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Excellent work! Very, very helpful.

One question... after calculating net present value of futue cash-flows + shareholders' equity, you divide it by # of shares outstanding and that gives you intrinsic value per share. I understand it so far...

But, how would you do that in case of Berkshire - it has class A and class B shares. It doesn't make sense to add # of shares outstanding for both classes and use such total in above division. So how do I get intrinsic value per share of class B only?

Thanks.

Hari

by Hari on December 1, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Edward: There is no "good" or "bad" value for shareholder equity. It just is. If a company is asset-heavy, you will likely pay more than a company that is asset-light. In the event of a break-up or closure, the asset-heavy business can sell the assets and distribute the cash to shareholders. The asset-light business relies more on cash flow and leaves little left for shareholders in a break-up. Then again, you'll generally pay more for the asset-heavy business because of that. Make sense?

Tommy V: The formula is the discounted cash flow over a time period using a certain rate. I know: It sounds greek. Excel can do it quickly using the NPV or PV formula. If you want to understand the advanced math behind it, check out this Wikipedia article on the discounted cash flow formula.

Hari: You need to divide the total value by the pieces to figure out the value per share. In the case of Berkshire, you would divide by the total outstanding shares by using the total outstanding "A" shares + the total outstanding "B" shares x 30. That "30" is because 30 B shares are equal to 1 A share.

by Joe Ponzio on December 4, 2007 at 9:46 AM
Hey Joe, great site at first glance. The name alone appeals to me. I've really been wanting to delve into value investing but I'm having a hard time with the calculations. I have an awesome bank that has a pretty detailed screener on it. However, I'm having trouble figuring out what numbers to plug in where and what info I need to be screening for. Is there anywhere I can go to find out how to employ somewhat of a "Buffett Method" so I can create a custom screener to figure out the value of a company and whether or not I should be buying it?

thanks

by Jason on December 8, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Jason,

My advice would be to look at as many companies as you can. If you limit your search to companies with rapidly growing earnings, high returns on capital, and low debt, you'll wind up with a few real gems. You'll also miss out on some companies that may be generating tons of cash and just about ready to explode.

If your bank allows you to screen by free cash flow, that's probably the best place to start - companies with positive and growing FCF. Once you've exhausted that screen, broaden your results. Keep going until you're crosseyed or you found some opportunities.

Hope that helps!

by Joe Ponzio on December 10, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Thanks Joe. Could you help a little with my choices please? For "rapidly growing earnings" my choices are these:
LTM Revenue
LTM Income from Total Operations
LTM Income from Continuing Operations
Last Twelve Months EPS Continuing Operations
Last Twelve Months EPS Total Operations

For "high returns on capital" I have these:
Return on Assets
Return on Equity
Return on Invested Capital
Return on Assets: 5 Year Average
Return on Equity: 5 Year Average
Return on Invested Capital: 5 Year Average

For "low debt" I have these:
Long Term Debt
Debt/Equity Ratio
Long Term Debt/Equity Ratio

Which of those would you use in the screener? It does allow me to choose FCF and I will use that for the screen.

Thanks for an awesome sight and great info!

by Jason on December 11, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Joe,

I have a question about valuations...

I am very careful about looking at what the company does with it's free cash flows. Does it buy back stock? Pay dividends? Increase equity? Pay off debt? etc...

There is somethings that's not making sense to me about how the cash flow sheet and balance sheet correlate.

I was looking into a company called Patterson-UTI Energy Inc (PTEN). And what I noticed was this... The net issuance of debt in the cash flow sheet is greater than the increase in total liabilities on the balance sheet. Why is this? Logic tells me that an increase in issuance of debt should be reflected in an equal or greater increase in total liabilities.

I've been looking for answers on the net but am having trouble finding the answer I'm looking for.

TIM


by Tim2 on February 7, 2008 at 1:04 AM
Tim
check this link:
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/

by mm on February 7, 2008 at 9:27 AM
Tim,

When a company assumes, say, $1 million worth of debt, the majority of that will head to the long-term liabilities category. Interest and the principal payments due in the next twelve months goes on the short-term liabilities side of things. So, if $1 million was borrowed and a total of $50,000 in interest and $30,000 of principal were due in the first twelve months, it would look something like this:

ST Liabilities: $80,000
LT Liabilities: $970,000
Cash flow from financing: $1 million

Make sense?

by Joe Ponzio on February 11, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Joe,

Yes that does make sense, thanks...

I have another question! This is also in the financing section of the Cash Flow sheet.

When I am trying to establish wether management is being rational with the free cash flow they make, what I am doing is this....

I try to make sure that when I add the following:

1. Shareholder equity increase from previous year
2. Share buybacks
3. Repayment of debt
4. Dividends Paid out

that the total of these 4 things is at least equal to the Free Cash flow for that year...

Are there any other areas that a company can spend money in a 'good' way that I should be aware of?

Tim


by Tim2 on February 23, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Absolutely! Companies can (and often do) spent their cash on "assets" to increase revenue and profit margins, ultimately hoping to generate more cash. Those "assets" can be on-the-balance-sheet assets like physical plants, techonology, etc. or human assets such as sales people.

You won't be able to track every penny of cash for that exact reason. If I want to increase our cash flow at the company, I'm going to hire another adviser and burn cash initially while training and supporting him or her, with the ultimate hopes of watching that adviser grow, provide additional revenue, and ultimately generate excess cash for the firm.

You'll never see that on our balance sheet (save maybe a desk, computer, etc.) but it is the absolute best way for us to increase future cash flow, and ultimately the value of my business.

by Joe Ponzio on February 26, 2008 at 9:23 AM
This is a great start thank-you Joe. If you were Graham and didn't rely as much on future projections how would you go about finding the intrinsic value of a company?

Thanks for your help!

by edward on February 28, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Joe-

I've been using your method now for two weeks or so (ever since I found this great site) and have picked out a great company that seem very strongly underpriced (i.e., intrinsic value >> than market capitalization).

How do I know how confident I am in the valuation?

My findings disagree strongly with the analyst research I've dug up (they mostly say, hold or market perform, and some even claim to be using a discounted cash flow method). Since I've just started, I was hoping that other research would confirm what I found. What to do?

At the same time, I also saw that analysts aren't all agreeing on JNJ or AEO, two companies you've mentioned as undervalued...

Don't know if you'd need to know, but the company is BDK.

It seems like each company is so different that even though the model seems great, it's hard to figure out what to do when rubber hits road. I know that some more examples (even historical ones or with identities removed) would help me.

by miguel.s on March 6, 2008 at 4:46 AM
Miguel,

FWIW, I have come to the same conclusion as you regarding BDK and have bought some at 80, then 70, and I have recently sold March 65-strike puts to maybe get some more BDK, or pocket a little cash.

Mike

by (MikeR) on March 6, 2008 at 8:50 AM
You're right, BDK valuation looks really good. I'm getting about 74% MOS, and CROIC looks nice. The brand name is a kind of moat I suppose, although I'm kind of weak on determining moat. I would say that perhaps the moat isn't very strong given that other brands like Dewalt are known for high quality giving the others stronger pricing power. Another possible flag for BDK is the high debt to equity (about TD/E is about 1).

by Howard on March 6, 2008 at 9:53 PM
If the analysts knew what the heck they were talking about, they wouldn't be analysts - they'd be billionaire private money managers crushing the markets! Analysts tend to be very short-sighted - What's this stock going to do for the next three to twelve months?

Analysts generally equate "risk" with short-term price volatility when the two are completely unrelated if you are looking at and valuing a business.

Retail is getting clobbered right now, and that may continue for the next 6-months, year, 5 years. Of course they will hate AEO and other retailers - their stock prices are falling! Six months ago, they hated Wal-Mart. Then, WMT ran up almost 20% and they loved it. Now, they hate it again because it's retail.

JNJ - is there any fundamental business risk? Not that I'm aware of. Maybe the stock won't move for a year; maybe it will rise or fall 20% in six months. The real question: Will JNJ be making more money five years from now than it is today? If the answer is a resounding yes!, who cares what the analysts say?

Don't ask: Am I confident? Ask yourself, Why am I not confident?

What is holding you back from jumping on Black & Decker? What are the risks to its business - not this year, but five years from now?

If you are unsure of your strategy, go back in time and make yourself confident by running analyses on various companies in various timeframes. If you are confident in your strategy, but unsure of your valuation, you should probably skip it.

Before you put any money to work, you need to believe you are stealing a business because you are confident that you know about where that business will be in five or ten years. If you don't see that in BDK, move on.

by Joe Ponzio on March 7, 2008 at 7:22 AM
If you look at the company information on Black and Decker's web site, you will see that Dewalt is actually one of Black & Decker's companies. They also list Porter-Cable and Delta there as well. If they own all these "competitors", it seems they have a corner on the power tool market. That was a big boost to my confidence when looking at BDK.

by Carson on March 7, 2008 at 7:48 AM
Carson,

Wow, that's very useful info. To me that is pretty big moat. And with the valuation this does look very attractive. I'm going to try and investigate any other risks from the SEC reports and independent news and go from there.

by Howard on March 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM
I'm a finance major graduating this semester....and I can honestly say I have learned more about valuation through this series of articles than I have in four years of undergrad. A classmate of mine told me about the site and he also felt the same way. Please keep up the amazing work. Thanks!

by Alex on March 8, 2008 at 1:19 AM
@ Joe: Thanks, as always. I have jumped on BDK, and I feel like I'm stealing the company, and that is exactly what is making me nervous. (My doubting voice is asking: How am I more right than a lot of people who do this for a living?) Your site is helpful in instilling confidence, but I still don't feel the force running through me.

"If you are unsure of your strategy, go back in time and make yourself confident by running analyses on various companies in various timeframes."

I think I previously asked about this. How are you generating those "price follows value" charts that you've put up in several places? Using forecast data, or something else. Once you truly believe price follows value, then you can be a worry-free investor.

Re BDK: My intention wasn't to make this thread about one particular company, so maybe I shouldn't have mentioned it, but I do like the company's products, mainly because of DeWalt. In fact, I basically started 'filtering' companies by going through my day with awareness tuned to products I use and really like. BDK was the first company like that where the valuation model gave a "buy signal", and a pretty strong one to boot. But I could come up with reasons that in five years things might be worse (e.g., maybe the housing crisis puts so many home builders out of work that the second hand market is flooded with DeWalt tools...).

by miguel.s on March 9, 2008 at 12:51 AM
Hi Joe,

Yes article is indeed looks very good for learners. It has simplified many things said and mentioned so far but never elaborated.

One simple question - Just wondering if the world now knows the investing art of legendary W Buffet then why still we have only one Buffet? There has to be something which is yet not revealed or its always less or more context specific which can never be formulated.

Rgds
Manish

by Manish on May 23, 2008 at 4:01 AM
Manish -- there is only one Buffett, but plenty of others have made millions and billions doing the same thing. I know Beethoven's Fur Elise when I hear it; I can play it on the piano too. Though we may never see another "Beethoven", we can certainly enjoy the copycats who produce beautiful music.

Will there ever be another "Buffett"? I can almost guarantee it, though it took him fifty years to become the world's richest man and he's still going. We'll see another, but probably only after Buffett is long gone and others can crawl out of his shadow.

by Joe Ponzio on May 27, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Joe,

Yeah! you are right in your explanation.

I am trying to use your valuable excel for FCF based evaluation. While trying to determine the FCF definition i come across this article (http://seekingalpha.com/a...) which says that FCF definition is different for different people.

Whats your difnition of FCF among following?

1) As per Buffett - net income from "operations" plus depreciation and amortization minus capital expenditures.
Net income from operation - Is it cash flow from operation or Net Profit?

2) Investopedia and Wikipedia definition
-Cash provided by operations less capital expenditures
-Cash provided by operations less capital expenditures and dividends paid
-Net income plus depreciation less capital expenditures EBITDA less capital expenditures

As usual thanking you in anticipation of your answer to above.

-Manish



by Manish on June 2, 2008 at 6:05 AM

 

post a comment

Comments are moderated which means they will not show up on F Wall Street until they are approved. Please keep all comments on topic and clean.

Your name

Your e-mail (optional, will not be displayed)

Comment: