Tell me about the main valuation methods.
The three main valuation methods are DCF (discounts projected free cash flows to intrinsic value), comparable companies (applies trading multiples from similar public firms), and precedent transactions (applies multiples from prior M&A deals, typically yielding the highest values due to control premiums).
Intuition
Each method triangulates value from a different angle: comps reflect current market sentiment, precedent transactions reflect what buyers actually paid (including control premiums and synergies), and DCF reflects intrinsic value independent of market conditions. You use all three because no single method captures the full picture — together they create a valuation range that brackets the likely fair value.
Watch
A common follow-up is 'Which method gives the highest value?' The typical answer is precedent transactions (due to control premiums), but interviewers may push back — in distressed markets, precedent transactions can actually be lower than trading comps if deals closed during downturns. Know the WHY behind the ranking, not just the ranking itself.
Deep Dive
Explain the core valuation methodologies, how each mechanically produces a value, and how they relate to each other.
Three primary methods, each attacking value from a different angle:
1. Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) — Intrinsic Value
What it does: Projects the company's future free cash flows and discounts them back to today at the weighted average cost of capital (WACC).
Steps:
- Project unlevered free cash flow (UFCF) for 5–10 years:
- Calculate a terminal value at the end of the projection period, using either:
- Gordon Growth:
- Exit Multiple:
- Discount all cash flows and TV back to present:
- Bridge to equity value:
- Divide by diluted shares → price per share
Key sensitivity: Small changes in WACC or terminal growth rate (g) swing value dramatically, which is why you always present a sensitivity table on those two inputs.
2. Comparable Companies ("Comps") — Relative Market Value
What it does: Prices the target based on how the market currently values similar public companies.
Steps:
- Select a peer universe (same industry, similar size/margins/growth)
- For each peer, calculate trading multiples:
- , , etc.
- Derive a range (typically 25th–75th percentile or mean/median)
- Apply that multiple range to the target's corresponding metric:
- Bridge to equity value per share as above
Produces a value anchored to current market sentiment — if the market is overheated, comps will be high.
3. Precedent Transactions ("Precedents") — Acquisition Value
What it does: Looks at multiples paid in prior M&A deals for similar companies.
Steps:
- Identify relevant closed transactions (same sector, recent vintage)
- Calculate transaction multiples: , etc.
- Derive a range and apply to target's metrics — same math as comps
Key difference from comps: Precedent multiples include a control premium (typically 20–40% above unaffected trading price), so precedent values usually come in higher than comps.
How They Rank (Typical Relationship)
| Method | Basis | Usually Produces | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comps | Current market pricing | Lowest range | No control premium, reflects current sentiment |
| DCF | Intrinsic cash flow | Middle range | Depends entirely on assumptions |
| Precedents | Actual deal prices | Highest range | Includes control premium + synergy expectations |
You present all three as a valuation football field — horizontal bar chart showing the range from each method — so the client sees where they overlap and where the defensible negotiation zone sits.
Shortcut: If asked "which is most important," the answer is context-dependent: DCF for a standalone/fairness opinion view, comps for market-based pricing, precedents when an actual sale is being negotiated.