DCF Disparity between methodologies...Help

Hi All, I have a question about the disparity between the perpetuity DCF output vs. Exit Multiple outputs. I did a DCF and they are very different and wanted to know, is this normal? Or if they should be within a certain range of each other? For instance, the closing price on the stock was $77.83, and perpetuity methodology =$508.01, giving it a -85% discount or margin of safety, this seems off. Exit Multiple (assuming no multiple expansion) = $68.15 or 14% premium, seems closer. WACC plays a big role and it seems like the lower the WACC the bigger disparity while including things like inflation and margin of safety to the Cost of EquityWACC seems to create a closer convergence. Any thoughts? Thank you! Regards, Michael Ballard

6 Comments
 
Most Helpful

One way to check to see what the difference implies is the following:

Take your terminal value generated from perpetuity method and divide by the terminal year EBITDA (assuming you’re using EV/Ebitda for multiple). This will show you what multiple is being implied by your perpetuity method.

Another check:

You can also goal seek your perpetuity growth percentage by setting the terminal value equal to the multiples method and solving for perpetuity growth. This will show what PGR you’re assuming for your multiples method

Then consider adjusting PGR or re-evaluate the comps you're using for your multiple if the difference between the methods seem to be way off. 

 

Itaque nemo labore rerum blanditiis rerum velit qui. Est labore unde quam quae. Dolore corporis eos quo qui in. Voluptates amet expedita voluptas quaerat. Officiis in provident error voluptates dignissimos deleniti est. Magni dolor explicabo et qui.

Vel expedita sint aut doloremque quae. Quis perspiciatis labore blanditiis sint voluptate ut voluptatem facilis. Est vitae at enim optio animi. Suscipit ut quis autem nulla aut occaecati expedita. Qui atque qui asperiores ipsam porro est.

Est incidunt sed nihil laborum. Consequatur ullam excepturi totam tempora qui magnam deleniti. Sint accusamus qui illum repellat sunt et culpa et. Explicabo magni eveniet rem repellendus eos nesciunt.

Career Advancement Opportunities

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Point72 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 97.0%
  • AQR Capital Management 96.0%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.0%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Magnetar Capital 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Blackstone Group 97.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.0%
  • Two Sigma Investments 94.9%

Professional Growth Opportunities

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • AQR Capital Management 99.0%
  • Point72 98.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.1%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.1%

Total Avg Compensation

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Portfolio Manager (9) $1,648
  • Vice President (27) $464
  • Director/MD (11) $372
  • NA (9) $320
  • Engineer/Quant (83) $287
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (26) $284
  • Manager (4) $282
  • 2nd Year Associate (32) $253
  • 1st Year Associate (76) $193
  • Analysts (234) $178
  • Intern/Summer Associate (29) $145
  • Junior Trader (5) $102
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (276) $95
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...”