Estimate Microsoft's (MSFT) share price using a price earnings (PE) multiples approach with the following assumptions and figures only:
- Apple, Google and Microsoft are comparable companies,
- Apple's (AAPL) share price is $526.24 and historical EPS is $40.32.
- Google's (GOOG) share price is $1,215.65 and historical EPS is $36.23.
- Micrsoft's (MSFT) historical earnings per share (EPS) is $2.71.
Source: Google Finance 28 Feb 2014.
Which of the following investable assets are NOT suitable for valuation using PE multiples techniques?
Estimate the US bank JP Morgan's share price using a price earnings (PE) multiples approach with the following assumptions and figures only:
- The major US banks JP Morgan Chase (JPM), Citi Group (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC) are comparable companies;
- JP Morgan Chase's historical earnings per share (EPS) is $4.37;
- Citi Group's share price is $50.05 and historical EPS is $4.26;
- Wells Fargo's share price is $48.98 and historical EPS is $3.89.
Note: Figures sourced from Google Finance on 24 March 2014.
Which firms tend to have low forward-looking price-earnings (PE) ratios?
Only consider firms with positive earnings, disregard firms with negative earnings and therefore negative PE ratios.
Which of the following investable assets are NOT suitable for valuation using PE multiples techniques?
Estimate the Chinese bank ICBC's share price using a backward-looking price earnings (PE) multiples approach with the following assumptions and figures only. Note that the renminbi (RMB) is the Chinese currency, also known as the yuan (CNY).
- The 4 major Chinese banks ICBC, China Construction Bank (CCB), Bank of China (BOC) and Agricultural Bank of China (ABC) are comparable companies;
- ICBC 's historical earnings per share (EPS) is RMB 0.74;
- CCB's backward-looking PE ratio is 4.59;
- BOC 's backward-looking PE ratio is 4.78;
- ABC's backward-looking PE ratio is also 4.78;
Note: Figures sourced from Google Finance on 25 March 2014. Share prices are from the Shanghai stock exchange.
Which firms tend to have high forward-looking price-earnings (PE) ratios?
Which firms tend to have low forward-looking price-earnings (PE) ratios? Only consider firms with positive PE ratios.
Private equity firms are known to buy medium sized private companies operating in the same industry, merge them together into a larger company, and then sell it off in a public float (initial public offering, IPO).
If medium-sized private companies trade at PE ratios of 5 and larger listed companies trade at PE ratios of 15, what return can be achieved from this strategy?
Assume that:
- The medium-sized companies can be bought, merged and sold in an IPO instantaneously.
- There are no costs of finding, valuing, merging and restructuring the medium sized companies. Also, there is no competition to buy the medium-sized companies from other private equity firms.
- The large merged firm's earnings are the sum of the medium firms' earnings.
- The only reason for the difference in medium and large firm's PE ratios is due to the illiquidity of the medium firms' shares.
- Return is defined as: ##r_{0→1} = (p_1-p_0+c_1)/p_0## , where time zero is just before the merger and time one is just after.
Estimate the French bank Societe Generale's share price using a backward-looking price earnings (PE) multiples approach with the following assumptions and figures only. Note that EUR is the euro, the European monetary union's currency.
- The 4 major European banks Credit Agricole (ACA), Deutsche Bank AG (DBK), UniCredit (UCG) and Banco Santander (SAN) are comparable companies to Societe Generale (GLE);
- Societe Generale's (GLE's) historical earnings per share (EPS) is EUR 2.92;
- ACA's backward-looking PE ratio is 16.29 and historical EPS is EUR 0.84;
- DBK's backward-looking PE ratio is 25.01 and historical EPS is EUR 1.26;
- SAN's backward-looking PE ratio is 14.71 and historical EPS is EUR 0.47;
- UCG's backward-looking PE ratio is 15.78 and historical EPS is EUR 0.40;
Note: Figures sourced from Google Finance on 27 March 2015.
Question 547 PE ratio, Multiples valuation, DDM, income and capital returns, no explanation
A firm pays out all of its earnings as dividends. Because of this, the firm has no real growth in earnings, dividends or stock price since there is no re-investment back into the firm to buy new assets and make higher earnings. The dividend discount model is suitable to value this company.
The firm's revenues and costs are expected to increase by inflation in the foreseeable future. The firm has no debt. It operates in the services industry and has few physical assets so there is negligible depreciation expense and negligible net working capital required.
Which of the following statements about this firm's PE ratio is NOT correct? The PE ratio should:
Note: The inverse of x is 1/x.
Question 749 Multiples valuation, PE ratio, price to revenue ratio, price to book ratio, NPV
A real estate agent says that the price of a house in Sydney Australia is approximately equal to the gross weekly rent times 1000.
What type of valuation method is the real estate agent using?
Itau Unibanco is a major listed bank in Brazil with a market capitalisation of equity equal to BRL 85.744 billion, EPS of BRL 3.96 and 2.97 billion shares on issue.
Banco Bradesco is another major bank with total earnings of BRL 8.77 billion and 2.52 billion shares on issue.
Estimate Banco Bradesco's current share price using a price-earnings multiples approach assuming that Itau Unibanco is a comparable firm.
Note that BRL is the Brazilian Real, their currency. Figures sourced from Google Finance on the market close of the BVMF on 24 July 2015.
Question 989 PE ratio, Multiples valuation, leverage, accounting ratio
A firm has 20 million stocks, earnings (or net income) of $100 million per annum and a 60% debt-to-equity ratio where both the debt and asset values are market values rather than book values. Similar firms have a PE ratio of 12.
Which of the below statements is NOT correct based on a PE multiples valuation?
Question 990 Multiples valuation, EV to EBITDA ratio, enterprise value
A firm has:
2 million shares;
$200 million EBITDA expected over the next year;
$100 million in cash (not included in EV);
1/3 market debt-to-assets ratio is (market assets = EV + cash);
4% pa expected dividend yield over the next year, paid annually with the next dividend expected in one year;
2% pa expected dividend growth rate;
40% expected payout ratio over the next year;10 times EV/EBITDA ratio.
30% corporate tax rate.
The stock can be valued using the EV/EBITDA multiple, dividend discount model, Gordon growth model or PE multiple. Which of the below statements is NOT correct based on an EV/EBITDA multiple valuation?
Read these quotes from Adir Shiffman's 26 July 2021 article in the AFR 'Roll up, roll up and make a mint off Amazon sellers'.
"Amazon sellers outsource their warehousing and logistics to the tech giant in a model known as “fulfilled by Amazon”, or FBA. Joining FBA provides access to one of the world’s largest global warehousing operations and even a fleet of Boeing 747 cargo jets. Just as significantly, FBA sellers can much more easily qualify for Amazon’s Prime program, which guarantees free and fast shipping to members."
"Companies want to acquire and integrate a selection, or in business parlance, do a 'roll-up'."
"More than 100 companies are now racing to roll-up FBA sellers, and almost all have launched since 2017. At least a dozen of these boast war chests of more than $US100 million. The largest, Thrasio, was founded in 2018 and has raised more than $US1.7 billion. Thrasio targets businesses with high quality and differentiated products that generate $US1 to $US100 million in revenue annually" (Shiffman, 2021).
If Thrasio's total funds available to spend on the roll up is $1.7 billion, and it's buying targets at price-to-revenue multiples of 2, what's the largest number of firms with $50 million of annual revenue that it could buy?
Investment bank Canaccord's Think Childcare (TNK) initiation of coverage states: "What's the Differentiator? TNK are operators, not consolidators - Other listed childcare companies have led highly successful consolidation strategies involving multiple arbitrage combined with scale benefits and operating efficiencies. TNK’s focus is on operating the centres to the best of their individual potentials..." (Canaccord, 2016). Multiples arbitrage involves:
Here's an excerpt from an interview between Magellan fund co-founder Hamish Douglass and AFR reporter Vesna Poljak, which appeared in the Australian Financial Review article ‘It's all about interest rates: Hamish Douglass’, 19 July 2019:
Take a business growing at 4 per cent a year, with a cost of equity of 10 per cent based off a 5 per cent risk-free rate and a 5 per cent market risk premium: you would value that at around 16.6 times free cashflow.
Now take a business growing at the same rate, with a 4 per cent risk free rate. At a 9 per cent cost of equity that would command a 20 times multiple, he says.
At a 3 per cent risk-free rate, the cost of equity is 8 per cent, and the multiple is 25.
Finally at 2 per cent – 'which is where the world is at the moment' – the same business would be worth around 33 times free cashflow.
In August 2021, the RBA overnight cash rate and 3 year Australian government treasury bond yield were both 0.1% pa. If this low risk-free yield was expected to persist forever, what approximate equity price-to-cashflow multiple would that imply for a business expected to grow at 4% pa in perpetuity with a 5% equity risk premium?
Question 1068 Multiples valuation, price to revenue ratio, operating leverage
Read this excerpt from AFR journalist Sue Mitchell's article 'How online retailers Kogan, Adore and Cettire got it terribly wrong' from 1 September 2022:
In the six months ending June, sales and earnings at omni-channel retailers with physical and online stores rebounded, while sales growth at pure-play e-commerce retailers slowed sharply or, in the case of Kogan, went backwards, decimating profits as operating leverage unwound.
“Hindsight is a beautiful thing and [it] turns out we were wrong,” Kogan told investors after the company delivered a bottom-line loss of $35.5 million and a 69 per cent drop in underlying earnings to $18.9 million. Sales revenue fell 8 per cent, despite the acquisition of New Zealand e-tailer Mighty Ape.
“Based on the data at the time, we predicted the trend would not stop or slow,” he said. “As the pandemic settled, e-commerce didn’t grow as expected, we were left with too much inventory and warehousing costs.”
Pure-plays are now prioritising profits over sales by culling staff and cutting back on investment – moves that could affect customer acquisition and sales.
Kogan, for example, is cutting marketing spend, reducing headcount, clearing excess and underperforming inventory to reduce warehouse costs, and raising the price of its loyalty program, Kogan First.
Kogan hopes to return to profitable growth this year, but the damage for shareholders has been done. The share price has plunged 86 per cent since pandemic-fuelled highs, dropping to $3.40 this week from a peak of $24.76 in September 2020.
Investors are now asking whether pulling back on investment will reduce addressable markets and questioning whether some pure-play online retailers will ever achieve scale.
Multiples for pure-plays have fallen to about 0.7 times revenue after reaching more than two times revenue at the height of the pandemic.
Which of the following statements about this quote is NOT correct? The pure-play online retailers:
Question 1069 Multiples valuation, venture capital, elasticity, DuPont formula, multi stage growth model
Read the below excerpt of AFR journalist Vesna Poljak's article 'What’s a start-up really worth' from 24 November 2020:
If Charlie Munger is right that earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation are “bullshit earnings”, and presenting adjusted EBITDA is “basic intellectual dishonesty”, someone should ask the 96-year-old Berkshire Hathaway vice-chairman what he thinks of revenue multiples.
It’s a necessary evil of this bull market that so many companies are now valued on multiples of their sales, as opposed to profits, typically because they don’t have any of the latter. It’s also impossible to ignore that real money investors are backing businesses at “multi-unicorn” valuations, meaning that capital is being allocated on an assumption lying somewhere between a considered ability to correctly recognise future growth, and magical thinking.
The idea is that, eventually, these businesses will arrive at a point where their constant reinvestment in sales and marketing, customer acquisition, and systems and process (all items that appear below the revenue line) will no longer be necessary, thereby allowing profits to suddenly crystallise.
Our baby unicorn is now a cloud-based workhorse with stunning margins, low operational costs, a market-dominant position and loyal customers totally insensitive to price increases.
Forecasts and evangelical founders are the natural enemies of a sound mind. “These businesses are very different compared to the typical mature business,” says PwC partner Richard Stewart. “They’re very heavily intangible-asset focused so traditional accounting doesn’t describe the performance of the business well.
“They’re also very risk intensive: it’s a bit like they’re climbing Everest, they’ve got halfway and there’s still a long way to the summit. The start-up sees how far they’ve come from base camp, the investor sees how far they have to go.”
EY partner Michael Fenech said that once upon a time, revenue multiples were used to value companies in very limited circumstances. “Now, revenue multiples have emerged as one of the primary valuation methodologies that people are using, which concerns people like myself.”
A robust valuation should be underpinned, wherever possible, by cash-flow forecasts, Fenech says. “So if we see companies relying on revenue multiples, our level of scepticism is often heightened and we start asking other questions.”
Which of the below statements is NOT correct?
Question 1070 Multiples valuation, duration, DuPont formula, WACC, mispriced asset
Adam Schwab wrote an article titled 'Why Atlassian is one of the world’s most overvalued businesses' on 15 August 2022. He stated that:
Atlassian is one of the world’s most overvalued businesses by almost any metric. Even though it loses money, Atlassian trades on a multiple of price to sales of a comical 25 times. Stern did a comparison of price-sales multiples in January 2022, noting that the multiple for the entire market was 2.88 and for software (this was before the bubble popped) was 16 times (Schwab, 2022)
Which of the following explanations is NOT correct? Atlassian's stock may be fairly priced if investors beleive that its expected future: