Valuation of Letter of Credit Posting in DCF

I'm reviewing the DCF for a project that requires a letter of credit to be posted throughout the life of the project. It is unlikely to be drawn as it is merely for credit support for the project. My thought is that the letter of credit posting should be treated the same as if it were a cash posting to support the project since the company's LC posting capacity is finite. Thus, it looks like a loan with a cash outflow for the posting on Day 0 and a cash inflow for the posting at termination and annual cash payments equivalent to the fronting fee (0.125%) for issuing the LCs. All of these cash flows would be discounted by the company's WACC to determine the impact of the credit support to the project valuation.

My line of thinking is that, while cheaper and finite resources - such as a letter of credit facility - exist to support projects, any particular project should not be directly benefitted by those cheaper resources since its use of this finite resource will ultimately cause other projects to be funded with capital at the company's marginal cost of capital (WACC). The one issue that I have with my approach is that it makes the NPV of the LC posting worse than if we chose a cash posting of equal amount (since the cash posting would not carry the 0.125% fronting fee). However, as a practical matter, we would generally always chose to post LCs vs. cash if the nominal amount of the posting was the same.

How do others thing about project valuations requiring such credit support? Do you agree with my line of thinking and valuation approach?

Also, how do you think about valuations that require other less tangible forms of credit support (e.g., unsecured guaranties, secured guaranties, liens, etc.)? As a corporate finance professional; my natural pecking order would be to first give no credit support, followed by unsecured guarantees, then secured guarantees, next LCs, and finally cash. However, I haven't seen a valuation decision-making framework to address this issue.

 
Best Response

Ut et veritatis voluptatem eligendi et. Nam maxime molestiae est consectetur molestias voluptatem quam. Quia optio quia tenetur necessitatibus. Aut sit ad ut aut. Possimus error aspernatur consectetur itaque.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $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
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
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...”