Bad debt expense in DCF valuation

Hi guys,

I'm valuing a semi-financial institution where people would still use DCF valuation - the issue is that its business incurs bad debt expenses and not sure how to reflect this correctly in FCF. In technical terms seems correct to calc FCF = Net income + D&A + Bad debt expense - NWC - CAPEX , and with NWC calculated by using pre-provisioned receivables.

But the issue is if I increase bad debt the EV as valued by DCF goes UP - Net income goes down by (1-t) of the bad debt expense, but adding back the full bad debt expense afterwards FCF goes up - which seems counterintuitive. ie. if I project bad debt expense as % of revenue, inputting an assumption of 5% would give me a much larger EV than assuming 0%.

Is there a way to somehow justify not adding back the bad debt expense as a non-cash item and still be correct technically?

4 Comments
 

Interested to know this as well. Seems like when you increase the contra account, your AR goes down hence your -NWC will forever be getting smaller and smaller and value to DCF will be going up

 

Not a FIGgy, but here are my 5 cents: when you have defaults on your loans, you will take those out of your books against the bad debt (no cash impact). However you will not collect the money either --> negative cash flow impact you're looking for. You cant just build provisions and never use/need them.

Furthermore: you're not adding back the interest, are you working with pre-tax discount rate then? Otherwise double counting for that.

 

Bad debt expense would also be included in net income, so a higher bad debt expense wouldn’t mean FCF is higher, because it would just be balancing out a lower net income. Changing the bad debt expense assumptions shouldn’t affect FCF.

 

Minus itaque nihil rem suscipit. Culpa rerum soluta sapiente minus voluptatem quidem dolorem. Voluptatum aut repudiandae adipisci enim. Ipsam dolorem ea qui id asperiores.

Molestiae sit laboriosam quod voluptates dicta adipisci. Fuga accusamus ut tenetur et quod et et. Assumenda ab vitae placeat praesentium rerum. Distinctio voluptatem in beatae distinctio aspernatur aut dolore.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.3%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • Goldman Sachs 02 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (44) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (79) $150
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (73) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
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...”