Module 3 - Relative Valuation
Module 3 - Relative Valuation
MODULE 3:
Relative Valuation
PrE13: VALUATION CONCEPTS AND METHODS
Midyear | SY: 2020-2021
BSA 3
Overview 3
Learning Outcomes 3
Summary of Topics 3
Content
Topic 1: Relative Valuation 4
Topic 2: Relative Valuation Methods 7
2.1: Comparable Company Analysis 7
2.2: Precedent Transaction Analysis 9
References 11
In this module, you will learn all you need to know about relative valuation, including its
benefits and drawbacks, as well as its methodologies.
Topics:
1: Relative Valuation
2: Relative Valuation Methods
2.1 Comparable Company Analysis
2.2 Precedent Transaction Analysis
Relative valuation, also referred to as comparable valuation, is a very useful and effective
tool in valuing an asset. Relative valuation involves the use of similar, comparable assets in
valuing another asset.
In the real estate market, relative valuation forms the framework for valuing a piece of real
estate. Anyone who has ever bought, sold, or had a reappraisal has seen this process at work.
Anytime real estate is valued, the valuation process always integrates the value of other nearby
properties that have been sold. From that starting point, the subject property is tweaked to
account for any difference before arriving at a final valuation.
There's an old business adage that says an asset is only worth what the next guy is willing
to pay for it. The painful truth of that reality hits home during economic meltdowns when sellers of
real estate get offers that are significantly below what their homes were originally being valued
at. The effectiveness of comparable valuation is that the process specifically relies on the value
of other assets that have been bought or sold.
A similar and effective approach can be utilized concerning stocks. A stock is a share
in a business and the fundamentals of the underlying business can be used to determine
the value of similar stocks.
Some of the most common and useful metrics to utilize in relative valuation include:
Price-to-earnings ratio (P/E ratio) = Stock Price / Earnings Per Share
Price to Cash Flow = Stock Price / Cash Flow per share
Enterprise value (EV) = Market Capitalization + Net Debt
EV to EBITDA ratio = Enterprise Value / EBITDA
Since no two assets are exactly the same, any relative valuation attempt should
incorporate differences accordingly. But first and foremost, you can't begin to apply
relative valuation effectively if you are dealing with apples and oranges. For example,
relative valuation may not be a good idea to use between McDonald's (MCD) and Darden
(DRI). While both are restaurant companies, McDonald's is a fast food concept while
Darden operates more formal sit-down concepts. Both are involved in the food business,
but they offer a different concept at different price points. As such, comparing margins
or another ratio would be ineffective since the business model is different.
The first step in ensuring an effective relative valuation is to make sure the two
businesses are as similar as possible.
Visa (V) and MasterCard (MA) are the two most well-known branded credit card names in the
world. Since both operate similar business models, a relative valuation for both would be an
effective exercise. Looking at both companies in the summer of 2011, Visa shares trade for $85
while MasterCard shares fetch $304. Visa has a market cap of over $60 billion while MasterCard
Numbers are rounded for simplicity. Someone comparing the P/E ratios of Visa and
MasterCard may conclude that Visa is a better value because of a lower P/E. However, relatively
comparing various other metrics may suggest otherwise. Despite a lower operating margin,
MasterCard has a significantly higher return on equity on an unlevered balance sheet. Also
relative to its market cap, MA churns more cash flow per share than Visa. If MasterCard can
continue pulling in the free cash flow at similar levels, then it's clearly creating more value
from shareholders.
While investors often rely on market cap to determine ratios, enterprise value may be a more
effective tool. Simply defined: Enterprise Value = Market Cap + Debt – Cash
A company with loads of debt relative to cash will have an EV that is significantly higher
than its market cap. That's important because a company with a market cap of a $1,000 and a
profit of $100 will have a P/E of 10. If that company has $500 in net debt on the balance sheet,
its EV is $1,500, and its debt-adjusted P/E, or EV/E, is 15. We are looking at enterprise values
to earnings here for simplicity. Normally enterprise value should be compared to EBITDA.
Another useful metric in relative valuation, return on equity, and increases as a company
take on more debt. Without looking at the balance sheet an investor may conclude that company
A with an ROE of 30% is more attractive than company B with an ROE of 20%. But if company
A has a debt to equity ratio of two while company A is debt-free, the 20% unlevered return on
equity may be much more attractive.
What the comprehensive relative valuation process ultimately does is help prevent
investors from anchoring their decisions based on one or two variables. While value investors
love to buy stocks with low P/E ratios, that alone may not be effective. Consider Chipotle
Mexican Grill (CMG). Even during the recession, shares were trading for around 25 times
earnings when other restaurants were trading of 10–15 times earnings. But further comparison
justified Chipotle's P/E ratio: its margins were higher and it was growing its profits by leaps and
bounds while the balance sheet remained healthy. Chipotle shares soared nearly 200% in the
two years following the Great Recession.
Benefits
The main advantage of relative valuation, especially for beginners in the world of stock
investing, is its simplicity. The calculation of the ratios usually consists simply of a simple
arithmetic operation, usually a division, without going into the complexity of the calculation of
the cash flow discount. As such, relative valuation is often the most widely used valuation
method, especially among beginning investors.
However, although relative valuation is simple in its calculation, this does not mean that
we are dealing with a valuation method with limited resources, but rather that another advantage
of relative valuation is its adaptability. As I have already told you, there is no limited number of
ratios, so we can create new ratios to compare companies in a more precise way. For example,
to value telecommunications companies it is common to use a ratio of profit per customer to
calculate their efficiency.
Limitations
The main problem with relative valuation is that it can sometimes be misleading. We all
remember the housing and credit bubble experienced relatively recently in Spain, the United
States, and many Western countries. During that time, both banks and construction and real
estate companies did not seem to be trading at exorbitant prices in terms of their relative value.
However, they were if we considered that we were inside a bubble, something that only the most
experienced analysts and investors realized. Therefore, one must be careful with the limitations
of relative valuation to detect business cycles.
Bottom line
Like other valuation techniques, relative valuation has its benefits and limitations. The
key is to focus on the metrics that matter most and understand what they convey. But despite
those limitations, relative valuation is a very important tool used by many market professionals
and analysts alike.
There are two common types of relative valuation models: comparable company analysis and
precedent transactions analysis. Below is a detailed explanation of each method:
a) Comparable Company Analysis
b) Precedent Transaction Analysis
SIMILARITIES:
Relative valuation
Use multiples (EV/Revenue, EV/EBITDA)
Hard to find perfectly comparable companies
Shows what a presumably rational investor/acquirer is willing to pay (observable)
DIFFERENCES:
Takeover premium (included in precedents – not in comps)
Timing (precedents quickly become old– comps are current)
Available information (difficult to find for precedents– readily available for comps)
Both methods are a form of relative valuation, where the company in question is being compared
to other businesses to derive its value. However, “comps” are current multiples that can be
observed in the public markets, while “precedents” include a takeover premium and took place
in the past.
The next step is to search either of those databases for companies that operate in the
same industry and that have similar characteristics. The closer the match, the better.
The analyst will run a screen based on criteria that include:
Industry classification
Geography
Size (revenue, assets, employees)
Growth rate
Margins and profitability
The information you need will vary widely by industry and the company’s stage in the
business lifecycle. For mature businesses, you will look at metrics like EBITDA and EPS, but
for earlier stage companies you may look at Gross Profit or Revenue. If you don’t have access
to an expensive tool like Bloomberg or Capital IQ you can manually gather this information from
annual and quarterly reports, but it will be much more time-consuming.
5. Use the multiples from the comparable companies to value the company in question
Analysts will typically take the average or median of the comparable companies’ multiples
and then apply them to the revenue, gross profit, EBITDA, net income, or whatever metrics they
included in the comps table.
In order to come up with a meaningful average, they often remove or exclude outliers
and continually massage the numbers until they seem relevant and realistic.
For example, if the average P/E ratio of the group of comparable companies is 12.5 times,
then the analyst will multiply the earnings of the company they are trying to value by 12.5 times
to arrive at their equity value.
This is where the art of being a great financial analyst comes into play.
The above criteria can be set in a financial database, such as Bloomberg or CapIQ, and
exported to Excel for further analysis.
In order to sort and filter the transactions, an analyst has to “scrub” the transactions by
carefully reading the business descriptions of the companies on the list and removing any that
aren’t a close enough fit.
Many of the transactions would have missing and limited information if the deal terms
were not publicly disclosed. The analyst will search high and low for a press release, equity
research report, or another source that contains deal metrics. If nothing can be found, those
companies will be removed from the list.
The most common multiples for precedent transaction analysis are EV/EBITDA and
EV/Revenue. An analyst may exclude any extreme outliers, such as transactions that had
EV/EBITDA multiples much lower or much higher than the average (assuming there is a good
justification for doing so).
4. Apply the valuation multiples to the company in question
After a range of valuation multiples from past transactions has been determined, those
ratios can be applied to the financial metrics of the company in question.
--------------------------------------------------------end---------------------------------------------------------------------
https://divergentview.com/investment_guide/relative-valuation/
https://ourparishcouncil.org/relative-valuation-concept-advantages-and-disadvantages/
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/valuation/comparable-
company-analysis/
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/valuation/precedent-
transaction-analysis/
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/relative-valuation-model.asp