BIWS - DCF Basic

Walk me through a DCF

"A DCF values a company based on the Present Value of its Cash Flows and the Present Value of its Terminal Value. First, you project out a company's financials using assumptions for revenue growth, expenses and Working Capital; then you get down to Free Cash Flow for each year, which you then sum up and discount to a Net Present Value, based on your discount rate - usually the Weighted Average Cost of Capital. Once you have the present value of the Cash Flows, you determine the company's Terminal Value, using either the Multiples Method or the Gordon Growth Method, and then also discount that back to its Net Present Value using WACC. Finally, you add the two together to determine the company's Enterprise Value."

Why do you have to un-lever and re-lever Beta?

Again, keep in mind our "apples-to-apples" theme. When you look up the Betas on Bloomberg (or from whatever source you're using) they will be levered to reflect the debt already assumed by each company. But each company's capital structure is different and we want to look at how "risky" a company is regardless of what % debt or equity it has. To get that, we need to un-lever Beta each time. But at the end of the calculation, we need to re-lever it because we want the Beta used in the Cost of Equity calculation to reflect the

How do you calculate the Cost of Equity?

Cost of Equity = Risk-Free Rate + Beta * Equity Risk Premium The risk-free rate represents how much a 10-year or 20-year US Treasury should yield; Beta is calculated based on the "riskiness" of Comparable Companies and the Equity Risk Premium is the % by which stocks are expected to out-perform "risk-less" assets. Normally you pull the Equity Risk Premium from a publication called Ibbotson's.

Why would you use Gordon Growth rather than the Multiples Method to calculate the Terminal Value?

In banking, you almost always use the Multiples Method to calculate Terminal Value in a DCF. It's much easier to get appropriate data for exit multiples since they are based on Comparable Companies - picking a long-term growth rate, by contrast, is always a shot in the dark. However, you might use Gordon Growth if you have no good Comparable Companies or if you have reason to believe that multiples will change significantly in the industry several years down the road. For example, if an industry is very cyclical you might be better off using long-term growth rates rather than exit multiples.

Let's say that you use Levered Free Cash Flow rather than Unlevered Free Cash Flow in your DCF - what is the effect?

Levered Free Cash Flow gives you Equity Value rather than Enterprise Value, since the cash flow is only available to equity investors (debt investors have already been "paid" with the interest payments).

What's the relationship between debt and Cost of Equity?

More debt means that the company is more risky, so the company's Levered Beta will be higher - all else being equal, additional debt would raise the Cost of Equity, and less debt would lower the Cost of Equity.

How do you select the appropriate exit multiple when calculating Terminal Value?

Normally you look at the Comparable Companies and pick the median of the set, or something close to it. As with almost anything else in finance, you always show a range of exit multiples and what the Terminal Value looks like over that range rather than picking one specific number. So if the median EBITDA multiple of the set were 8x, you might show a range of values using multiples from 6x to 10x.

What do you usually use for the discount rate?

Normally you use WACC (Weighted Average Cost of Capital), though you might also use Cost of Equity depending on how you've set up the DCF.

What's an appropriate growth rate to use when calculating the Terminal Value?

Normally you use the country's long-term GDP growth rate, the rate of inflation, or something similarly conservative. For companies in mature economies, a long-term growth rate over 5% would be quite aggressive since most developed economies are growing at less than 5% per year.

Walk me through how you get from Revenue to Free Cash Flow in the projections.

Subtract COGS and Operating Expenses to get to Operating Income (EBIT). Then, multiply by (1 - Tax Rate), add back Depreciation and other non-cash charges, and subtract Capital Expenditures and the change in Working Capital. Note: This gets you to Unlevered Free Cash Flow since you went off EBIT rather than EBT. You might want to confirm that this is what the interviewer is asking for.

What's an alternate way to calculate Free Cash Flow aside from taking Net Income, adding back Depreciation, and subtracting Changes in Operating Assets / Liabilities and CapEx?

Take Cash Flow From Operations and subtract CapEx - that gets you to Levered Cash Flow. To get to Unlevered Cash Flow, you then need to add back the tax-adjusted Interest Expense and subtract the tax-adjusted Interest Income.

Why do you use 5 or 10 years for DCF projections?

That's usually about as far as you can reasonably predict into the future. Less than 5 years would be too short to be useful, and over 10 years is too difficult to predict for most companies.

How do you calculate WACC?

The formula is: Cost of Equity * (% Equity) + Cost of Debt * (% Debt) * (1 - Tax Rate) + Cost of Preferred * (% Preferred). In all cases, the percentages refer to how much of the company's capital structure is taken up by each component. For Cost of Equity, you can use the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM - see the next question) and for the others you usually look at comparable companies/debt issuances and the interest rates and yields issued by similar companies to get estimates.

What's the flaw with basing terminal multiples on what public company comparables are trading at?

The median multiples may change greatly in the next 5-10 years so it may no longer be accurate by the end of the period you're looking at. This is why you normally look at a wide range of multiples and do a sensitivity to see how the valuation changes over that range. This method is particularly problematic with cyclical industries (e.g. semiconductors).

Cost of Equity tells us what kind of return an equity investor can expect for investing in a given company - but what about dividends? Shouldn't we factor dividend yield into the formula?

Trick question. Dividend yields are already factored into Beta, because Beta describes returns in excess of the market as a whole - and those returns include dividends.

How do you calculate the Terminal Value?

You can either apply an exit multiple to the company's Year 5 EBITDA, EBIT or Free Cash Flow (Multiples Method) or you can use the Gordon Growth method to estimate its value based on its growth rate into perpetuity. The formula for Terminal Value using Gordon Growth is: Terminal Value = Year 5 Free Cash Flow * (1 + Growth Rate) / (Discount Rate - Growth Rate).

How do you get to Beta in the Cost of Equity calculation?

You look up the Beta for each Comparable Company (usually on Bloomberg), un-lever each one, take the median of the set and then lever it based on your company's capital structure. Then you use this Levered Beta in the Cost of Equity calculation. For your reference, the formulas for un-levering and re-levering Beta are below: Un-Levered Beta = Levered Beta / (1 + ((1 - Tax Rate) x (Total Debt/Equity))) Levered Beta = Un-Levered Beta x (1 + ((1 - Tax Rate) x (Total Debt/Equity)))

If you use Levered Free Cash Flow, what should you use as the Discount Rate?

You would use the Cost of Equity rather than WACC since we're not concerned with Debt or Preferred Stock in this case - we're calculating Equity Value, not Enterprise Value.