Best Valuation Method
How to answer an interview question:
Which is better DCF, Trading comps, or transaction comps?
How to answer an interview question:
Which is better DCF, Trading comps, or transaction comps?
| +293 | I Snuck Into UBS Office And Took A Shit On The Floor | 28 | 1h |
| +287 | TPH V.S. Mizuho [HOU] | 36 | 1d |
| +243 | Why leave restructuring for M&A? | 30 | 1h |
| +228 | Best Power/Renewables/Energy Teams? | 38 | 38s |
| +216 | Houston 2026 Oil & Gas Investment Banking Rankings | 48 | 1h |
| +183 | Centerview HC group falling off? | 30 | 41m |
| +183 | Actual EB List | 27 | 10h |
| +172 | Incoming TPH Analysts Larping as PWP on LinkedIn | 21 | 2h |
| +154 | Shame on you Evercore - SA 28 | 41 | 2d |
| +39 | Predicted 1Q 2027 Story - UBS IB blames Outlook Outage for Down Quarter | 5 | 1h |
Career Resources
Whichever method gets you to the valuation your MD wants to see
Theoretically the DCF is the most "correct" valuation methodology, since we should be able to determine the value of anything by finding the net present value of its future cash flows. Notice how I said "most correct" and not best. When you are valuing a company, the best valuation methodology is the one that provides the most accurate estimate. Some companies are not market comparable, and trading comps are simply useless. Other companies such as a biotech or tech startups have unpredictable cash flows (kind of hard to find the NPV when you can't properly predict future cash flows; a probability weighted DCF can be used for these companies in some cases). FIG has similar issues due to the use of debt and net working capital in their balance sheet, so a DCF is also not the best approach here.
All in all, a mixture of different valuation methodologies and common sense is what we consider "best". Some other methodologies include: LBO analysis, sum of the parts, NAV (net asset value) etc.
Another thing here, there is no relationship among DCF, trading comps, and precedent transaction comps that always holds, but transaction comps tend to give you a higher valuation due to the control premium built into acquisition (a control premium is any amount paid by the buyer in excess of the target's actual value – e.g., you'll usually see deals where the strategic buyer pays $X in excess of the target's share price).
Honestly, we just end up using comps.
Precedent comps and LBO, tbh. Precedent comps show you what the market is willing to pay, LBO is a good reality check.
Iusto soluta id modi. Facere et deleniti consequatur laboriosam. Quae enim sed voluptatem inventore optio quisquam sed. Vel suscipit sequi qui magnam illum ratione repudiandae ex. Beatae corporis voluptatem labore quia et voluptatibus. Rerum omnis magni voluptatem sapiente ut sit. Aliquid dolor consequatur autem qui suscipit.
Voluptatibus velit ut aliquid optio ratione ex quae. Accusantium reiciendis eaque tempora. Dicta non qui occaecati id dignissimos sunt quis quas.
Et sint doloribus quae natus totam dolores iusto. Et voluptatem voluptatem et in ut fuga a. Consequatur necessitatibus ut natus. Nihil nesciunt molestiae quae consequuntur a voluptas unde.
Molestias exercitationem ut aspernatur distinctio voluptas. Atque sit temporibus voluptas libero quasi molestias qui. Qui officia sed exercitationem inventore aliquam.
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...