Free Cash Flow to Firm vs. Free Cash Flow to Equity Growth Rates

1. FCFF is preferable (to FCFE) for a company with a history of leverage changes, as its growth rate will be more stable than FCFE growth rate.
2. FCFF is better for a firm with high leverage.

can someon explain why?

What is Free Cash Flow?

Free cash flow is a measure of how much money is available to investors through the operations of the business after accounting for expenses of the business such as operational expenses and capital expenditures.

To answer the OP's original questions - user @jdm05520" shared:

jdm05520 - Private Equity Associate:
  1. When a firm has a significant amount of past leverage changes the FCFE growth rate is skewed due to the inclusion of Principal and Interest payments in the FCFE calculation. FCFF does not account for principal and interest payments, rather it is calculated to arrive at the cash available to the firm's debt and equity holders.
  2. A firm with high leverage has a significant amount of P&I payments in the FCFE calculation historically making it difficult to assess the growth rate going forward.

Definition of Unlevered Free Cash Flow?

Typically, when someone is referring to free cash flow, they are referring to unlevered free cash flow (also known as Free Cash Flow to the Firm) which is the cash flow available to all investors, both debt and equity. When performing a discounted cash flow with unlevered free cash flow - you will calculate the enterprise value.

Free cash flow is calculated as EBIT (or operating income) * (1 - tax rate) + Depreciation + Amortization - change in net working capital - capital expenditures.

Definition of Levered Free Cash Flow?

While unlevered free cash flow looks at the funds that are available to all investors, levered free cash flow looks for the cash flow that is available to just equity investors. Levered Free Cash Flow is also known as Free Cash Flow to Equity. It is also thought of as cash flow after a firm has met its financial obligations. When performing a discounted cash flow with levered free cash flow - you will calculate the equity value.

Levered free cash flow is calculated as Net Income (which already captures interest expense) + Depreciation + Amortization - change in net working capital - capital expenditures - mandatory debt payments.

Even if a company is profitable from a net income perspective and positive from an unlevered free cash flow perspective, the company could still have negative levered free cash flow. This could mean that this is a dangerous equity investment since equity holders get paid last in the event of bankruptcy.

How to discount levered and unlevered free cash flow?

When performing a discounted cash flow analysis on unlevered free cash flow, you are examining the cash flow available to the entire capital structure - debt holders, equity holders, and preferred equity investors - and therefore you need to use the weighted average cost of capital which looks at the costs of capital across the capital structure.

When performing a discounted cash flow analysis on levered free cash flow, you are examining the cash flow available to equity investors and should just be using the cost of equity - or the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) to discount cash flows.

Preparing for investment banking interviews?

The WSO investment banking interview course is designed by countless professionals with real world experience, tailored to people aspiring to break into the industry. This guide will help you learn how to answer these questions and many, many more.

Investment Banking Interview Course Here

 

hmm, thanks for your reply, Kraken. :D

I've always understood theoretically why FCFF and FCFE calculation of equity value are identical. (in principle) But when i do actual valuation models using both techniques, they give slightly different results for equity value. And, algebraically, I can't seem to prove that the equity value calculated are similar.

Any idea? Thanks!

 
  1. When a firm has a significant amount of past leverage changes the FCFE growth rate is skewed due to the inclusion of Principal and Interest payments in the FCFE calculation. FCFF does not account for principal and interest payments, rather it is calculated to arrive at the cash available to the firm's debt and equity holders.

  2. A firm with high leverage has a significant amount of P&I payments in the FCFE calculation historically making it difficult to assess the growth rate going forward.

I assume you are asking the question as it relates to back of the envelop valuation techniques such as Dividend Discount Models, H-Model etc. FYI, IB and PE tend to use FCFF in valuation.

 
Best Response
jdm05520:
1. When a firm has a significant amount of past leverage changes the FCFE growth rate is skewed due to the inclusion of Principal and Interest payments in the FCFE calculation. FCFF does not account for principal and interest payments, rather it is calculated to arrive at the cash available to the firm's debt and equity holders.
  1. A firm with high leverage has a significant amount of P&I payments in the FCFE calculation historically making it difficult to assess the growth rate going forward.

I assume you are asking the question as it relates to back of the envelop valuation techniques such as Dividend Discount Models, H-Model etc. FYI, IB and PE tend to use FCFF in valuation.

thanks. i understand now. if we use FCFE as a forecast start point, we will have a huge range of valuations.
 

Old thread, but FWIW, a few flaws in the methods above. Either WACC, or total debt(250) can be constant, not both. If you assume debt constant at 250, WACC will change each year due to changes in D/A.

For FCFE, tax shield from debt should be discounted at pre tax cost of debt and cf to equity at unlevered cost of equity (appropriate risk).

Fcfe and fcff are fundamently different approaches, yielding slightly different numbers(except for the general case where D/A is constant. P.S. I'm an illiterate in finance, take all this with a grain of salt.

 

calculator I have the same gap in understanding as you did. Can you please provide a slightly more detailed explanation?

 

Okay that's right, although this is much trickier to get working when growth is assumed. What I am having difficult modeling is that capital structure approaches 100% equity funding in perpetuity. Even when I bring the model out 100 periods it doesn't reconcile perfectly in the early periods. Damodaran seems to approach it differently (here http://www.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/pc/fcffvsfcfe.xls) so I will see if his method is practical.

It just frustrates me that my equity value will not reconcile perfectly between the two methods!

 

No. The (1-D) terms don't make any sense.

In a year where debt is not taken out / repaid, FCFE is basically Cash From Ops - Capex. If you want to start with net income and get to free cash flow to equity, it should be something like:

Net Income +D&A - Increase in Working Capital +/- Other Reconciling Items [i.e. adding back non-cash expenses, subtracting non-cash gains] - Capital Expenditures +/- Debt Raised / Repaid

 
[Comment removed by mod team]
 

Ipsum velit unde odit consequatur eum officia asperiores sint. Quo quis iste maiores distinctio voluptates eaque quo.

Quaerat commodi officiis eveniet est sed sequi. Dolore et harum vel corrupti aliquid cum. Architecto ut eveniet eius sit mollitia.

Id consectetur illum adipisci quod labore id. Repellendus et ducimus voluptas magni. Et nihil eum perspiciatis natus modi harum sapiente. Fuga omnis a dolorum et quis.

Amet vero dolor unde voluptatem consequuntur tenetur perferendis. Omnis ipsum nostrum placeat a facere.

 

Aperiam soluta consequatur quia possimus dolore deleniti at. Laboriosam porro atque officia aut distinctio quod quidem. Consequatur porro aperiam hic tenetur ea.

Quo aliquid laboriosam qui nobis nesciunt distinctio. Quae et velit porro sint consequatur modi voluptas. Odit voluptas omnis ut atque quia cum officia. Illo cum quaerat repudiandae perspiciatis debitis aut ut. Nostrum tempora aut consequuntur rerum ipsa ut aspernatur.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”