Why is DCF not used much in Buy Side

I have been reading a bit lately that DCF is not used that much on the Buy Side. Why exactly is that? I know one of the points to it is to develop a price target, which I guess is not that much of a concern on Buy Side. Do they use relative analysis more often then? What method do they mostly use in determining value?

17 Comments
 

not an expert on this but probably the standard reasons why DCF is bad: 1. projecting cashflows is hard 2. very sensitive to assumptions 3. if your DCF shows massive over or undervaluation, its not going to be a secret to market participants

 

if anything, working has made me completely skeptical of financial models. Last summer, I was working my first sponsor deal and the IRR's were just terrible--something like 5-7% even with the min capex, optimistic margin and revenue expansion, etc etc. My VP comes over and says "let me take a look." He toggles a few numbers, plays around with it for 20 seconds, and gets it to jump to 28%. And that's what went into the book.

 
Best Response
Solidarityif anything, working has made me completely skeptical of financial models. Last summer, I was working my first sponsor deal and the IRR's were just terrible--something like 5-7% even with the min capex, optimistic margin and revenue expansion, etc etc. My VP comes over and says "let me take a look." He toggles a few numbers, plays around with it for 20 seconds, and gets it to jump to 28%. And that's what went into the book.
This is why I hate working on the sell-side in general. I'm a realist, and I'd much rather be spending my hours modelling likely scenarios, rather than the most optimistic possible future that can be "defended"/BSed. This is why I can't wait to get to the buy-side; it's a personality thing.
 
ThaVanBurenBoyz
Solidarityif anything, working has made me completely skeptical of financial models. Last summer, I was working my first sponsor deal and the IRR's were just terrible--something like 5-7% even with the min capex, optimistic margin and revenue expansion, etc etc. My VP comes over and says "let me take a look." He toggles a few numbers, plays around with it for 20 seconds, and gets it to jump to 28%. And that's what went into the book.
This is why I hate working on the sell-side in general. I'm a realist, and I'd much rather be spending my hours modelling likely scenarios, rather than the most optimistic possible future that can be "defended"/BSed. This is why I can't wait to get to the buy-side; it's a personality thing.

Wake up homes. In the event you will monetize a position through a sale your presentation to potential buyers will likely include bullish metrics to maximize valuation.

 

Some good answers here already, but my $0.02: equity research it's more about relative valuation--what are you buying/selling in relation to other names than it is about the absolute valuation of a particular company. God knows you need to be aware of the cash flows and significant variations between income and cash, but the incremental cost vs. the benefit of doing a DCF vs. your IS/BS metrics with Dupont breakdown, then comparing across your sector names, is minimal in my humble opinion.

So many names, so many metrics, so much modeling, so little time.

 

As mentioned by others, DCF is highly sensitive to many assumptions. That said about half the buyside managers I speak to claim to do DCFs on their stocks, and I'd say at least a quarter actually does it consistently.

E.g. a very good question posed to me by one manager: How do you reflect the characteristic of 'quality' in a DCF? Let's say you have two companies, one that you know with almost certainty will earn $100, and one a shoddy business that can have a range of outcomes but with a reasonably certain midrange at $100? The only way to reflect this would be either with some kind of utility function that punishes ex ante volatility (which nobody uses or cares about) or to apply a higher discount rate (and the entire valuation will be extremely sensitive to changes in discount rate which throws up the nice question of which one to apply).

 
SpiderMonkeyOhYesE.g. a very good question posed to me by one manager: How do you reflect the characteristic of 'quality' in a DCF? Let's say you have two companies, one that you know with almost certainty will earn $100, and one a shoddy business that can have a range of outcomes but with a reasonably certain midrange at $100? The only way to reflect this would be either with some kind of utility function that punishes ex ante volatility (which nobody uses or cares about) or to apply a higher discount rate (and the entire valuation will be extremely sensitive to changes in discount rate which throws up the nice question of which one to apply).

Excellent example spidermonkey, I've never really thought about that. +1

 
SpiderMonkeyOhYesAs mentioned by others, DCF is highly sensitive to many assumptions. That said about half the buyside managers I speak to claim to do DCFs on their stocks, and I'd say at least a quarter actually does it consistently.

E.g. a very good question posed to me by one manager: How do you reflect the characteristic of 'quality' in a DCF? Let's say you have two companies, one that you know with almost certainty will earn $100, and one a shoddy business that can have a range of outcomes but with a reasonably certain midrange at $100? The only way to reflect this would be either with some kind of utility function that punishes ex ante volatility (which nobody uses or cares about) or to apply a higher discount rate (and the entire valuation will be extremely sensitive to changes in discount rate which throws up the nice question of which one to apply).

The only problem I have with the DcF is that it gives a be all and end all number.. when I look at stocks I always try to operate in bands of values.

 

Anyone know where there are examples of DCFs for stocks anywhere online? I know the study guides walk you through a DCF but that's about it

 

You can create, and when DCFs are used in the real world they almost always are created, a band of values. You can do multiple operating scenarios, sensitize the WACC, sensitize the TV multiple, use a different TV multiple, use a growing perpetuity, etc., etc. etc.

There's really no end to what you can do to a DCF, which is probably the reason it is less used.

 

Voluptatibus enim delectus aut. Perspiciatis veritatis modi et quis fugit dolore. Maxime vitae quo rerum est magni quia.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (65) $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

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
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...”