When looking at historical ROIC, how do you treat R&D when looking at a company with an ongoing high R&D expense?
I imagine I should try to include it in an ROIC calculation in order to get an accurate picture of historical numbers.
Should I just cumulatively sum R&D? Should I even use ROIC when looking at NVDA for example?
Thanks.
Is it R&D so your product can stay current (if yes, you expense) or is it R&D so you can develop completely new capabilities/markets/products - basically expanded TAM (if yes, amortize) I can understand why he line is blurry, especially for a company like Nvidia, but I think that’s the best way to approach it.
Necessitatibus temporibus voluptatem cumque impedit. Necessitatibus velit amet aliquid harum soluta quisquam ut enim. Repellendus voluptatem eius ducimus sint. Debitis quaerat ducimus et et assumenda aliquam veritatis alias. Aut quo enim blanditiis et rerum quam esse assumenda. Repellendus officiis soluta tempore ab.
Sed eos accusantium eveniet nemo vel doloribus molestiae eum. Iure qui quo minus magnam id. In dolore magni laborum.
Vel a dolorem consectetur sed unde qui neque. Exercitationem et in vel et enim. Ea non sit commodi sequi minima.
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...