Why use EV/EBIT multiple when compared companies in the asset intensive industry?

Hi, can anybody explain me that Why use EV/EBIT multiple when compared companies in the asset intensive industry?

I've read a interview question about this:

Question:'TheEV/EBIT,EV/EBITDA,andP/E multiples all measure a company’s profitability. What’s the difference between them,and when do you use each one?'

Answer: P/E depends on the company’s capital structure whereas EV/EBIT and EV/EBITDA are capital structure neutral. Therefore, you use P/E for banks, financial institutions, and other companies where interest payments/expenses are critical.

EV/EBIT includes Depreciation&Amortization whereas EV/EBITDA excludes it – you’re more likely to use EV /EBIT in industries where D&A is large and where capital expenditures and fixed assets are"important"(e.g."manufacturing), and EV/EBITDA in industries where fixed assets are"less"important"and where"D&A"is comparatively smaller(e.g."Internet"companies).

I know the difference between P/E and EV/EBIT (EV/EBITDA), but I don't know why we use EV/EBIT in asset intensive industry, rather than EV/EBITDA?

Can anyone help me with this? Thank you very much (This question bother me for a long time)...

14 Comments
 

because the tooth fairy doesn't pay for Cap Ex, and in capital intensive industries, you are more likely to see EBITDA consumed by D&A. Look at Five Star Quality Care, Inc. They are trading at a super low EBITDA multiple (5.0x) , but all of their EBITDA is locked in D&A.

 

Thanks for your response, and I have further question about it. When we compared the companies in the same industry (Asset intensive industry). Every company has huge D&A at the same time, so I think this situation may makes the EBITDA multiple still useful for comparing?

THANKS

 

not that it isn't useful. Just some metrics are more useful than others. Say Company A more efficiently utilizes its asset than Company B. Assuming both are in the same industry, and EBITDA is equal, earnings in company A are more valuable because less is locked in D&A.

 

OK, I got the point here... So, you were saying that because D&A is so important in this kind of industry, so the effect from the D&A should be eliminated when we compare the companies profitability.

Is that right?

 
Best Response

D&A is a proxy for capex. Ideally, you would want to do EV / EBITDA - Maintenance Capex, but most company don't break down capex between growth and maintenance so D&A is the best proxy. So if a company is able to get more out of its assets, it will be spending less in capex (and therefore D&A) and be more profitable, hence why there can be a disconnect between EV / EBITDA and EV / EBIT and why EV / EBIT is more appropriate for capital intensive firms.

 

What i do not understand is, if a company is less efficient with its capital, it has a lower EBIT because of higher D&A. But the if the EV stays the same, the multiple rises. So why then does the less efficient company have a higher multiple?

 

Eos accusantium sapiente eos odit autem et. Veritatis dolor cupiditate optio sequi autem. Nihil saepe est vitae tempora quia. Quam ex qui in eum ad totam.

Beatae pariatur sit omnis aspernatur. Pariatur expedita sit aliquid. Unde velit et autem iste.

Consequatur eum deleniti soluta quia est amet alias. Ut perspiciatis dolorem repudiandae perferendis et sunt. Distinctio ea sit rem delectus fugiat minus. Nobis odio et veritatis quis laborum expedita. Velit dolorum minima ipsum voluptatibus nihil commodi. Eos cum omnis inventore. Ipsam delectus omnis voluptate ut quibusdam.

Temporibus velit error incidunt nemo sed et. Nisi facilis qui qui natus voluptas sapiente eaque asperiores. At itaque earum officia dolor quia ut.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $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
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
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...”