If multiples are a distillation of BOTH growth / margin AND return on capital, and most bankers / and even some hedge funds are laying out comp sheets with only growth and margin and valuation multiples and argue this name should trade at this higher multiple if it can accelerate revenue and improve margin, shouldn't we always include the peer ROE / ROIC into comp sheet and make that argument?
Lmk if I am wrong. tks.
Secyh62 thoughts?
| +30 | Interesting juncture: L/S Hedge Fund or MM Private Credit? | 6 | 4h | |
| +19 | London HFs | 8 | 1d | |
| +19 | MM BD people make LSD/MSD $m?? | 25 | 12h | |
| +16 | Road to Working at a Hedge Fund? | 14 | 1d | |
| +15 | JD or CFA for Distressed Debt/Activism? | 3 | 1h | |
| +15 | Credit comps | 9 | 4h | |
| +14 | Large HFs in SF / Bay Area | 10 | 2d | |
| +13 | Fund Accountant @ HF | 7 | 4d | |
| +10 | Junior Summer: Long Only AM vs High Yield Research at a BB | 3 | 6h | |
| +9 | Blackrock hedge fund interview | 5 | 3d |
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.
First, ROIC bakes in a margin assumption (NOPAT margin X IC Turnover = ROIC) so might not need to include both but I think to answer the question you have to think about one's purpose/task. A banker's task is to close deals/facilitate transactions. They are incentivized to use whatever metrics look best and dress up the deal. So I don't know that we can say they would be wrong using something else given that context.
A public markets investor should be using ROIC IMO. You could have two businesses with the exact same growth and margins but different ROIC if one business is more capital intensive than the other, which would drive valuation disparity that would be lost if ROIC was not included in your comp sheet. Risk is another driver of valuation, or how certain one is that they will actual receive the cash flows (reflected in cost of capital, but in a comps table one might reflect it as beta). So you could have two businesses that at a snap shot in time look the same but trade at different valuations due to differing risk profiles (perhaps one is highly recurring, use of leverage, etc.).
IMO differences in risk (financial & operational), profitability (ROIC preferred), and growth should all be addressed in some fashion when doing a comps analysis as a public markets investor
thank you, the OG legend
Dolor sed perferendis ea dolor cumque aut nesciunt. Qui non tempora alias illo quia cumque tempora. Quam accusamus qui in architecto excepturi distinctio. Molestiae quae quia dicta sunt. Maiores quos explicabo animi aut quia. Quis delectus fugit qui voluptates recusandae voluptatem earum. Quaerat quam quo omnis suscipit sint.
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...
Quis provident perferendis in sit explicabo. Error amet et qui blanditiis expedita fugit. Aut numquam accusamus ea et quis natus necessitatibus. Modi ut cupiditate et pariatur. Consequatur architecto non qui cumque cupiditate rerum. Nihil voluptatem in ex sed.
Maiores necessitatibus inventore amet doloribus pariatur delectus. Suscipit non non facilis. Repudiandae laudantium est minima id. Sint impedit necessitatibus quo quia maxime quo dolores. Facilis et et consectetur occaecati qui.
Voluptatibus velit consequuntur maxime ab odio suscipit. Nulla eum optio iste. Ea dolorem necessitatibus eum. Voluptas ut quasi soluta eos. Voluptate qui odit ut quaerat perspiciatis doloribus. Quod cumque non quam qui consectetur omnis.