How does IFRS 16 affect valuation multiples?

How does IFRS 16 affect valuation multiples? So I know it sits on the balance sheet opposed to an operating lease (which is essentially expenses similar to rent), and the lease essentially "amortizes" over time.

I would assume this would increase multiples because operating expenses would be lower, is this correct? Also how do you go about it when a company was using a different method before, do you just strip out the lease expense and capitalize it on the balance sheet? Wouldn't this be a fair chunk of work?

If someone could explain in detail I'd appreciate it.

9 Comments
 
Most Helpful

The new accounting method requires companies to capitalize operating leases, i.e. report them as debt on their balance sheets. So in simple interview friendly terms, debt is higher which means enterprise value is higher which means the multiple is higher. However, since you're adding operating leases to the numerator you need to also add back rent expense to the denominator (EBITDAR) to keep them apples-to-apples. (In practice we just exclude the operating leases from debt, tbh.)

It could also be helpful to think about the impact this has on different industries. Retailers, for example, have very high operating leases, so this rule change has a pretty material impact. Tech companies, on the other hand, not so much.

 

Very simple: Debt increases with lease liabilities (LL), EBITDA increases with lease expenses (rent).

So the new multiple becomes EV / EBITDA = [EV (old) + LL] / [EBITDA (old) + rent]. 
So the EV / EBITDA multiple will go up post IFRS 16 if the lease multiple (= LL / rent) is higher than the old EV / EBITDA multiple and vice versa if lower.

Something similar applies for the EV / EBIT multiple, it increases when the interest multiple (=LL / lease interest) is higher and vice versa if lower.

EV / Sales multiples will increase accross the board.

P / E multiples stay the same (but with a big caveat*)

*there can be temporary differences between net income pre and post IFRS 16 because the ROU asset depreciates straight line and the LL amortizes as an annuity. In general ROU asset depreciation is HIGHER than lease repayments in the beginning of a contract and LOWER than repayments near the end of a contract. So if a company has many "young" lease contracts net income (and thus PE multiples) can take a big hit moving to post IFRS 16, but this will reverse later on.

Source: I am a buy side equity analyst so have to deal with this IFRS 16 bullshit way more than I would like to.  

 

Yes and no, I do mean the lease expenses (which I dubbed rent) that are removed from the P&L post IFRS 16. This is equal to ROU depreciation + lease interest only on average as stated under the caveat in my post above. 

So a check I often do is see if the sum of ROU depreciation + lease interest over a long forecast period is similar to what I would expect if I would forecast and sum the pre IFRS 16 lease expenses over that same period. Then the model balances.

 

Deleniti quis corporis repudiandae. Veniam voluptas tempora praesentium dolores. Qui dignissimos omnis illum quos aut sit commodi. Accusamus quae libero optio dolorem commodi ratione amet.

Est totam earum beatae sunt voluptas a sunt est. Deserunt exercitationem animi inventore et voluptatem. Et perferendis non adipisci sunt quibusdam. Possimus quam soluta inventore vel occaecati voluptas. Dolores qui beatae laudantium commodi eos ducimus ratione. Ut esse in veritatis blanditiis aperiam ab est.

Eius aspernatur aut quia occaecati. Pariatur non dolores quia corporis est quo. In omnis rerum aut quia velit voluptas repellendus a.

Odit sint dolores commodi ipsum quis perspiciatis. Voluptatem placeat vel sunt tempora voluptas. Corrupti quae quasi tempore consequatur consectetur quam animi. Hic reprehenderit quis harum laboriosam voluptatem dignissimos. Doloribus distinctio in rem officia nulla. Doloribus ut est iusto officiis. Culpa error neque consectetur veritatis. Natus qui voluptatem ipsam dignissimos.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 03 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (51) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (26) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (15) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
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...”