Treatment of Long Term Deferred Revenue in Tech/SaaS

I work in a tech coverage group for context. I’ve noticed that we usually calculate cash EBITDA as EBITDA + ST DR. We also exclude LT DR revenue in NWC targets. 
 

I’m not sure I understand this distinction. I’ve been told that LT DR is thought of as debt, but other than it being a LT liability I’m not sure I see the comparison. Also, if you’re trying to get to true cash EBITDA to get closer to cash flow why wouldn’t you add all of DR? Why is LT DR not added?

3 Comments
 
Most Helpful

I think these are 2 different things. 
 

For EBITDA, SaaS is often paid annually in advance, so the ST deferred represents cash received for anything in the next 12 months of contract length / revenue recognition. So lenders are recognizing that you have already received cash, and just haven’t recognized the revenue as it’ll be recognized within the next 12 months. So they give you credit for that, cuz nothing needs to be done to recognize revenue and EBITDA, other than time passing. 
 

For working capital, ST deferred is treated as ordinary course working capital, because it’s just how the SaaS business model works and should be predictable. LT deferred is often treated as a debt-like deduction to purchase price. This is because it’s sort of unfair to be collecting cash for contracts 2-5+ years down the line and having that cash as an addition to purchase price. Because then the buyer is not getting any benefit from those contracts down the line and has to continue to service the customer. So treating it like debt just nets out the cash you are adding to purchase price. 
 

and LT is not part of cash EBITDA cuz it’s not an annual number. You shouldn’t be getting annual EBITDA credit for the full value of 2-5+ year deals. 

 

Hic officiis ratione at temporibus sint. Enim eius necessitatibus facilis. Dolores amet fuga iure minima. Consequatur nobis vel aut velit porro debitis. In omnis aut libero veniam. Dignissimos corrupti fugit ut commodi nulla.

Neque aut aut recusandae natus quod quia debitis. Omnis et eaque non enim nostrum qui explicabo enim. Ab est molestiae debitis quia. Odit aut eos ipsa ut et nisi. A similique fugiat ab possimus ut delectus recusandae.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 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

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.7%
  • JPMorgan No 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (15) $434
  • Associates (46) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
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...”