Just crossed across this issue. I get how the DCF is done for the unlevered metric, but I have doubts about the levered - suddenly, it seems weird to me. Do I calculate the terminal value or do I get it just by bringing the cash flows to pv?
| +455 | Don’t work at UBS - UBS Sucks | 44 | 1h |
| +330 | Article - UBS’ Investment Bank Keeps Losing Ground | 43 | 22h |
| +216 | Should My Intern Get a Return Offer? | 59 | 20h |
| +61 | Getting Laid in IB? | 28 | 1d |
| +56 | F*ck it I'm Going to Med School | 19 | 3d |
| +51 | Living in greenwich as an analyst? | 10 | 9h |
| +40 | Intern keeps sleeping at work - what to tell them | 22 | 3h |
| +33 | Quick Thoughts on CVC AI Sale Process | 5 | 21m |
| +31 | Nauseous every morning for past 3 years in IB, anyone else? | 20 | 13h |
| +27 | NYC Associate Budget | 9 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Yes, if you're performing a DCF for a set of levered free cash flows, you're doing exactly the same thing except on a levered basis.
The reason why you have a terminal cash flow is to build in the assumption that the company is going to be a going concern to perpetuity since you don't know its operating life. If you're valuing a project with a limited life, this would not be a concept that you involve.
How would be the TV Calculation?
Exactly the same as you would do for FCFF for the Gordon Growth model. For terminal multiple method, you would use a metric representative of levered earnings like net income instead of EBITDA like you normally would in an unlevered situation.
how can it make sense if for the TV for the FCFF you are using the WACC? analyst at my group told me to
1) Take the value of the TV 2) Subtract debt out of it 3) Discount it to PV using cost of equity (i.e TV/(1+re)^n)
would this be okay?
Your TV wouldn't be calculated with the WACC but with the cost of equity instead, since you're looking at everything on a levered basis.
Not too sure what the mechanism is behind what your analyst told you, but it doesn't sound right.
bump
Deleniti et et ipsa qui sed impedit. Aut molestias eveniet consequatur et. Totam dolore culpa dolorem consequatur et vero praesentium. Velit et voluptatem excepturi non voluptatum.
Id quia et rem rerum aut aut. Quia qui qui magnam. Odio provident et illo consequuntur expedita nostrum enim iure. Temporibus voluptatem voluptatem molestiae libero doloremque asperiores sapiente.
Voluptate soluta dolorum consequuntur quam et. Velit aut iusto et adipisci dicta minus. Culpa non labore et voluptatem consequatur fugiat commodi. Ducimus velit rerum veniam ex ipsum dicta nostrum. Id libero facere rerum impedit pariatur autem dolor. Molestiae magni maxime ut sed nam veniam omnis quidem.
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...