Você está navegando em métodos de avaliação para mesclar entidades. Como conciliar as diferenças?

Reconciling differences in market valuation involves adjusting multiples to account for unique characteristics of the merging entities. This ensures a tailored and accurate valuation, reflecting the specific attributes and financial health of each company. Precision in these adjustments fosters fairer assessments and more informed investment decisions.

A abordagem de avaliação de mercado baseada em múltiplos, como o preço-lucro (P/L), é uma técnica comum para avaliar o valor de uma empresa em relação ao mercado. O múltiplo P/L é calculado dividindo o preço atual da ação pelo lucro por ação, proporcionando uma medida de quanto os investidores estão dispostos a pagar por cada unidade de lucro. Essa abordagem permite comparações rápidas entre empresas do mesmo setor e ajuda a identificar se uma empresa está sub ou supervalorizada em relação aos seus concorrentes. Contudo, é essencial considerar fatores externos, como condições econômicas e perspectivas de crescimento, para uma análise precisa e completa.

Identify Valuation Methods Used: • Discounted cash flow (DCF) • Comparable company analysis(CCA) • Precedent transactions. • Asset-based valuation(NAV) Align key assumptions: • Growth rates • Discount rates • Market conditions across all valuation methods to ensure consistency. Context and purpose of each method. • DCF might be more relevant for future potential • CCA reflects current market conditions. Weight the Methods: Relevance and reliability. If future CF is highly uncertain, less weight to DCF. Calculate an Average or Range: Combine the weighted valuations that reflect different perspectives. Incorporate potential synergies or integration costs. Consult for an independent assessment & reconcile differences. Negotiate & Agree.

The market approach to valuation is a method where you determine the value of a target company by comparing it to similar companies that have been sold recently or are publicly traded. This comparison often uses financial multiples, like the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio, to understand what investors are willing to pay for similar companies. The challenge with this approach arises when the companies involved have unique characteristics that don't easily compare to others. To address these differences and achieve a more accurate valuation, you may need to adjust the financial multiples to better reflect the specific features and circumstances of the companies in the merger.

Although many would project future cash flows as far as they can, this is not necessarily the best way to build a credible DCF. For most of the businesses, the best predictor of the future performance is current performance. So first of all, a DCF model should explain in details the current/actual financial performance and it should be linked to the operating model. Without this, any further cash flow projection will have little validity. But once you have a detailed and credible model of current performance, you can now consider various assumptions and debate about the future (market factors, sources of income, costs, rates etc.).

The income approach to valuation is centered on the principle that a business's value is equivalent to the present value of its future cash flows. This method frequently employs discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis, which involves predicting future cash flows and identifying an appropriate discount rate. To reconcile differences, you must ensure that your cash flow forecasts are realistic and that the discount rate accurately represents the risk profile of the merging entities. This process requires striking a delicate balance between optimism and conservatism.

This is less popular method than DCF or peer valuation, but in some specific industries this could still be quite popular. For instance, in resource businesses, where the value of assets deriving from natural resources could be way more important than the annual cash-flows, or in regulated industries where asset base determines the amount of regulated profits.

The asset approach to valuation focuses on the company's net asset value, calculated as the difference between its total assets and total liabilities. This method is relatively straightforward when valuing tangible assets and liabilities. However, challenges arise with intangible assets such as intellectual property or goodwill, which are more difficult to quantify. To address these challenges, a careful evaluation and sometimes creative methods are required to assign a fair value to these intangible assets, ensuring a more accurate overall valuation.

The structure of a deal can greatly impact valuations. Whether it's a stock purchase, an asset purchase, or a merger of equals, each structure has distinct implications for valuation. For example, in an asset purchase, the buyer may not assume the target company's debt, which affects the overall valuation. To reconcile differences in valuation methods due to deal structure, it's essential to thoroughly understand how each structure influences the financial outlook of the merged entity. This includes considering the liabilities, tax implications, and overall financial health under each deal type to ensure a fair and accurate valuation.

It is important to understand that the downside (failure to find synergies) is as likely (if not more) as the upside coming from potential synergies. Moreover, post-deal execution issues may impair the realization of synergies too. Especially when we are considering the merger of two different businesses which means, there will be gaps in the managerial knowledge and post-deal integration difficulties.

Synergies—where the combined value and performance of two companies exceed the sum of their individual parts—can significantly impact valuation. Identifying and quantifying these synergies is subjective but crucial for reconciling differences in valuation methods. It's important to carefully evaluate how operational efficiencies, expanded market reach, and other synergistic benefits can be realistically achieved and incorporated into the valuation. This involves a thorough analysis of potential cost savings, revenue enhancements, and strategic advantages to ensure that the anticipated synergies are accurately reflected in the overall valuation.

The only right valuation is the one that has a buyer. Having worked in Private Equity and now in Equity Team, there is no 'one size fits all'. If you have a buyer at a valuation, that is the right method.