The growing perpetuity calculation in DCF
Hey, guys. I am a pre-MBA student. I studied one corporate finance class in law school so my question may seem too plain and simple. I was reading the DCF and noted that the calculation of the terminal value is different from the formula I learned from class. The formula taught in our class is to divide the year 10 cash flow by the discount rate minus the growth rate but the formula I found on the wso guide is to multiply cash flow by 1 plus the growth rate and divide that by the discount rate minus the growth rate. Could anyone explain why there is a difference? Or I completely misunderstood what the prof had taught us. Thank you!
WSO guide is right. The act of dividing by r-g is the growing perpetuity formula. This formula, however, gives you the PV of a growing perpetuity at time minus 1 if that makes sense. So to have the PV of the perpetuity at time 10, you first need to grow the cash flow by one year.
Thanks, Frenchstudent. It makes total sense now.
DCF Question - Discounting perpetuity twice? (Originally Posted: 12/23/2009)
Might be a stupid question but for a DCF using Perpetuity growth for terminal value, you get the value using FCF of the 5th year plus the growth rate divided by the discount rate minus growth. But then you have to present value the 5 year FCFs and the terminal value using the discount rate. Aren't your essentially discounting the perpetuity value twice here?
No. By calculating the value of the perpetuity from years 6 (year after last forecasted year) to infinity, you have the FUTURE VALUE of a perpetuity starting at the beginning of year 6/end of year 5. To determine the PRESENT VALUE of this perpetuity, you must discount it back 5 five years to the present day, a.k.a. time 0. Before you discount 5 years, you have what its value WILL BE at the end of 5 years. What you want to discover is its value NOW.
thanks jhoratio - but why is that value a future value if the discount rate is included? what is the point of the discount rate in the calculation of the perpetuity value?
CF / (k-g) is the value of the perpetuity at a given point in time. When you're valuing the perpetuity in year 5, that tells you what its worth in 2015 for example. But you need to know what its worth TODAY. So you discount it from Year 5 to now.
you discount stuff after 5th year back to year 5. Using wacc minus g in denominator. Then you discount this terminal value, as year 5 CF back to time point zero.
Gimme,
It's a future value because the perpetuity is being expressed as a single lump sum in year five. Is year 5 today? No. Year 5 is in the future. Any cash flow assigned to a future year is a future value.
In the context of your question, the perpetuity terminal value and the FCF in year 5 are both cash flows in year five. It doesn't matter that one is a normal cash flow as a result of business operations and the other is an lump sum equivalent to the value of a stream of cash from that time foward. Once they are expressed as single lump sum cash flows in year 5, they can be added, subtracted, moved foward and backwards through time just like any other cash flow. Forget what you did before to make the perpetuity into a single cash event in year 5. All that matters now is getting all the year 5 cash flows to time zero, which is accomplished by discounting.
Perpetuity, what the hell... (Originally Posted: 03/02/2011)
Ok, I'm sure this is a very stupid question, but I'm not understanding.
So, in the DCF model after projecting the free cash flows you need to make an estimate of the terminal value. If you use the perpetuity model, you are told that the total amount of cash flows in the year following the tenth is equal to a perpetuity.
Perpetuities are calculated this way:
PV=A/r
where A is the cashflow, and r is the discount rate.
Ok, so I find this completely mind-boggling. Why are we saying that a STREAM of cashfows, that usually is discounted like this:
C(1+i) + C(1+i)^-1 + C(1+i)^-2 and so on
In this case is discounted just by dividing by a rate, that is: A/r.
Can someone shed some light on this process? I've searched the net, but I only found sites explaining it's done this way, but no one explaining why.
.
it goes on forever. eventually the discount factor erodes the marginal years worth of cash flow to almost zero in present value terms.
Remember that Cf(n)/r = value of an infinite perpetuity (they call it a consol in finance classes sometimes). Try applying the long formula over 100 years and compare it.
Also why are you assuming zero growth in that cash flow?
The funny thing is that the assumptions regarding terminal value will often tell you whether the investment is worthwhile. Meanwhile, everyone is overly focused on next year's earnings. This is what I like to call "time horizon arbitrage", and you can make a ton of money buying up companies with excellent terminal values but that are currently out of favor (solar comes to mind as a current example, sector's out of favor because subsidies won't be there short-term, but long-term, there will be huge energy demand and fossil fuels are coming up short...so the terminal value is potentially very large).
Dude no offense and I know you just broke out on your own but if you think you can invest without identifying near term catalysts then I think you are in for a world of hurt. I'm a long term buyside investor also but you can't disrespect near term technicals ( not talking about resistance and m a c d bs)
^Is that "time horizon arbitrage?" Or is it just going long a risky asset class? I always thought that time horizon arbitrage involved taking advantage of certain investors' short time horizons in order to acquire investments at levels that appear attractive in the long run. For instance, a private equity investor aquiring a company from shareholders for a 25% premium today and selling it in 5 years for a multiple of their investment (ignoring the effect of leverage).
Perpetuity formula (Originally Posted: 08/07/2014)
Hey guys, I've got a pretty basic question which troubles me: Let's consider a perpetuity starting in year 5 paying 100 and growing at 3% (r=6%). You can calculate it using two different approaches: first one is using the TV formula starting at year 6 with an initial 103 CF. You then discount it back 5y. So it should be: 100*(1+3%)/(6-3%) / (1+6%)^5
Other one would be to take the TV formula starting at year 5 with an initial 100 CF: 100/(6-3%) / (1+6%)^4
But the 2 results are different and I don't see why...
Deleted
The easiest way to do this and see how it works is to go into excel and go 100 years or so. Have one column for the CF, one for the PV factor, one for the PV. Also, if the perp starts in year 5 you don't include r in your PV formula because it isn't growing from years 0-4.
Porro non consequatur qui odio. Sint quidem molestiae et voluptatem quibusdam quaerat. Alias reiciendis debitis hic animi. Possimus enim dicta ea. Incidunt dolorum aut hic inventore. Ipsum deserunt hic veritatis exercitationem autem iusto.
Impedit culpa mollitia dolorem rem. Quam non officia vel deleniti voluptas cupiditate. Voluptatum dolor id est. In quia praesentium eum a et. Eum et ea deserunt qui.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...