1 / 71

# CFA Society Phoenix Wendell Licon, CFA

CFA Society Phoenix Wendell Licon, CFA. CFA Level I Exam Tutorial 2019 Corporate Finance Power Point Slides. Financial Management. Agency Problems Bondholders vs. stockholders (managers) Occur when debt is risky Managerial incentives to transfer wealth Management vs. stockholders

Télécharger la présentation

## CFA Society Phoenix Wendell Licon, CFA

E N D

### Presentation Transcript

1. CFA Society PhoenixWendell Licon, CFA CFA Level I Exam Tutorial 2019 Corporate Finance Power Point Slides

2. Financial Management Agency Problems • Bondholders vs. stockholders (managers) • Occur when debt is risky • Managerial incentives to transfer wealth • Management vs. stockholders • Occur when corporate governance system does not work perfectly • Managerial incentives to extract private benefits

3. Financial Management Agency Problems • Mechanisms to align management with shareholders • Compensation: Directly or through Capital Structure or even Dividend Policy • Threat of firing • Direct intervention by shareholders (CalPERS) • Takeovers

4. Cost of Capital WACC =

5. Cost of Capital kd(1-Tc) • Where do we get kd from?

6. Cost of Capital (debt) Example: First find the market determined cost of issued debt: 10-yr, 8% coupon bond, trades at \$1,050, TC = .4 1,050 = kd/2 = 3.644%, so kd = 7.288% kd/2(1-Tc)= 3.644%(1-.4) = 2.1864% (semi-annual rate) kd(1-Tc)=2.1864% * 2 = 4.3728% (annualized)

7. Cost of Capital (debt with flotation costs) Flotation Costs Example: 2% of issue amount, coupon = 7.288% if issued at par (which is usually safe to assume), then coupon rate = investor’s YTM 980 = kd/2= 3.7885% kd/2(1-Tc)= 3.7885%(1-.4) = 2.2731% (semi-annual rate) kd(1-Tc)=2.2731% * 2 = 4.5462% (annualized)

8. Cost of Capital (Preferred Shares) Already in after-tax form • Flotation Costs (F): kps= Divps/{P(1-F)} • Example: P= 100, Divps= 10, F= 5% • kps= 10/{100(1-.05)}= 10.526%

9. Cost of Capital (Common) Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) • Simple g assumption? • Cost of CS = Dividend Yield + Growth • Example: D1= 3/yr, P0 = 100, g= 12% kcs = 15% • What about flotation costs? Multiply P0 by (1 – F)

10. Cost of Capital (Common) What about g? g = ROE x (plowback ratio) or g = ROE x (1 – payout rate)

11. Cost of Capital (Common) Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) • kcs = krf + cs(km – krf)

12. WACC • The market is impounding the current risks of the firm’s projects into the components of WACC • Say Coca Cola’s WACC is 15%, which would be the rate associated with non-alcoholic beverages • Can Coke use 15% to discount the cash flows for an alcoholic beverage project?

13. WACC Coke Example cont’d • Say alcoholic beverage projects require 22% returns • Security market line

14. WACC

15. WACC Can be used for new projects if: • New project is a carbon copy of the firm’s average project • Capital structure doesn’t materially change – look at the WACC formula

16. WACC • Don’t think of WACC as a static hurdle rate of return which, if cleared, then the project decision is a “go” • If the firm changes its project mix, the WACC will change but the risk level of the projects already in progress will not & neither do the required rates of return for those projects

17. Cost of Capital- MCC Step 1: Calculate how far the firms retained earnings will go before having to issue new common stock (layer 1) • Example: Simple capital structure • LT Debt = 60% (yielding 8%) • CS = 40% (Kcs = 15%) • New Retained earnings (RE) = 1,000,000 (over and above the 40%) • Marginal Tax Rate = 40% • Debt Flotation Costs = 1% per year • CS Flotation Costs = 1% per year

18. Cost of Capital- MCC Concept: Keep our capital structure of 60%/40% in balance while utilizing our retained earnings slack matched with new debt, which is not in a slack condition • Current WACC: .6*(.08)*(1-.4) + .4*(.15) = 8.8%

19. Cost of Capital- MCC How far can we go with Layer 2? 1,000,000/.4 = 2,500,000 of new projects costs of which 2,500,000 * .6 = 1,500,000 in new issue debt and 1,000,000 = use of retained earnings • Layer 2 WACC: .6*(.09)*(1-.4) + .4(.15) = 9.24% • Layer 3 would include new projects over 2,500,000 with flotation costs for equity and flotation costs for debt

20. Cost of Capital- MCC Layer 3 WACC: .6*(.09)*(1-.4) + .4(.16) = 9.64%

21. Cost of Capital Factors Not in the firm’s control • Interest rates • Tax rates Within the firm’s control • Capital structure policy • Dividend policy • Investment policy

22. Capital Budgeting Payback Period • The amount of time it takes for us to recover our initial outlay without taking into account the time value of money. • The decision rule is to accept any project that has a payback period <= critical payback period (maximum allowable payback period), set by firm policy.

23. Capital Budgeting Payback Period • Assume our maximum allowable payback period is 4 years (nothing magical about 4 years as it is set by management): YearAccum. Cash Flows 1 5MM < 20MM 2 5MM + 7 MM = 12MM <20MM 3 12MM + 7MM = 19 MM <20MM 4 19MM + 10MM = 29 MM >20MM

24. Capital Budgeting Payback Period • Get paid back during the 4th year. We need \$1MM entering yr 4, and get \$10MM for the whole year. If we assume \$10MM comes evenly throughout the year, then we reach \$20MM in {1MM/10MM} or .1 yrs. • So, payback = 3.1 years. • Do we accept or reject the project? Accept, since 3.1 < 4.

25. Capital Budgeting Discounted Payback Period • Discount each year’s cash flow to a present day valuation and then proceed as with Payback Period.

26. Capital Budgeting – Net Present Value NPV = PV (inflows) - PV(outflows) NPV =  ACFt / (1 + k)t - IO , where, • IO = initial outlay • ACFt = after-tax CF at t • k = cost of capital (cost of capital for the firm) • n = project’s life Decision rule: Accept all projects with NPV >= 0

27. Capital Budgeting - NPV Accepting + NPV projects increases the value of the firm (higher stock value/equity), kind of like you are outrunning the cost of capital

28. Capital Budgeting - NPV Invest \$100 in your 1-yr business. My required rate of return is 10%. What would be the CF be at the end of year 1 such that the NPV = 0? • ACF1 = 100(1.1) = 110 (just the FV!) • If NPV > 0, it is the same as ACFt > 110.

29. Capital Budgeting - NPV Ex: 120. Now, what’s the investment worth? • Just PV of \$120 = 120/1.1 = 109.09. • My stock is now worth 109.09, a capital gain of 9.09 due to you accepting the project. (the 9.09 is the NPV = 120/1.1 - 100 = 9.09)

30. Capital Budgeting - IRR IRR is our estimate of the return on the project. The definition of IRR is the discount rate that equates the present value of the project’s after-tax cash flows with the initial cash outlay. • In other words, it’s the discount rate that sets the NPV equal to zero. NPV =  ACFt / (1 + IRR)t - IO = 0, or  ACFt / (1 + IRR)t = IO • The decision criterion is to accept if IRR >= discount rate on the project.

31. Capital Budgeting - IRR Are the decision rules the same for IRR & NPV? Think about a project that has an IRR of 15% and a required rate of return (cost of capital) of 10%. So, we should accept the project. NPV and IRR will accept and reject the same projects – the only difference is when ranking projects.

32. Capital Budgeting - IRR Case 2 Uneven CF’s - even worse • Trial and Error! • Ex: IO = 20,000, CF1 = 5,000, CF2 = 7,000, CF3 = 7,000, CF4 = 10,000, CF5 = 10,000 • We have to find IRR such that • 0 = 5,000 (1+IRR)1 + 7,000 (1+IRR)2 + 7,000 (1+IRR)3 + 10,000 (1+IRR)4 + 10,000 (1+IRR)5 – 20,000

33. Capital Budgeting - IRR • NPV at 25% is -563. So, should we try a higher or lower rate? Lower (==> higher NPV) If we try 24%, we get NPV = -102.97, at 23%, we get NPV = 375 ==> it’s between 23 & 24%. A final answer gives 23.8%.

34. Capital Budgeting - IRR IRR has same advantages as NPV and the same disadvantages, plus • Multiple IRRs: IRR involves solving a polynomial. There are as many solutions as there are sign changes in the cash flows. In our previous example, one sign change. If you had a negative flow at t6 ==> 2 changes ==> 2 IRRs. Neither one is necessarily any good. 2. Reinvestment assumption: IRR assumes that intermediate cash flows are reinvested at the IRR. NPV assumes that they are reinvested at k (Required Rate of Return). Which is better? Generally k. Can get around the IRR problem by using the Modified IRR, MIRR.

35. Capital Budgeting - IRR • Multiple IRRs: 2. Reinvestment assumption:

36. Capital Budgeting – Modified IRR • Used when reinvestment rate especially critical • Idea: instead of assuming a reinvestment rate = IRR, use reinvestment rate = k (kind of do this manually), then solve for rate of return. • 1st: separate outflows and inflows • Take outflows back to present at a k discount rate • Roll inflows forward - “reinvest” them - at the cost of capital, until the end of the project (n) - now just have one big terminal payoff at n. • The Modified IRR is the rate that equates the PV of the outflows with the PV of these terminal payoffs.

37. Capital Budgeting - MIRR

38. Capital Budgeting - MIRR  ACOFt/(1 + k)t = ( ACIFt* (1 + k) n-t) / (1 + MIRR) n where ACOF = after-tax cash outflows, ACIF = after-tax cash inflows. Solve for MIRR. MIRR >= k (cost of capital) ==> accept

39. Capital Budgeting - MIRR • Notice, now just one sign change with no multiple rate problems – one positive MIRR • Plus, no reinvestment problem • Still expressed as a % which people like • Also, much easier to solve

40. Capital Budgeting - MIRR Ex: Initial outlay = 20,000, plus yr. 5 CF = -10,000. We’ll use k=12% Draw timeline 1. PV of outflows = 20,000 + 10,000(1/1.12)5 = 25,674 2. FV of inflows: yr. 1 CF = 5,000; yr. 2 and 3 CF = 7,000; yr. 4 CF = 10,000; YR FV 1 5,000(1.12 ) 5-1 = 5,000(1.12 )4 = 7,868 2 7,000 (1.12 ) 5-2 = 7,000(1.12 )3 = 9,834 3 7,000 (1.12 ) 5-3 = 7,000(1.12 )2 = 8,781 4 10,000(1.12 ) 5-4 = 10,000(1.12 )1 = 11,200 ------------- Sum 37,683

41. Capital Budgeting Decision Criteria • So, NPV and IRR all give same accept/reject decisions. But, they will rank projects differently • When is ranking important? • Capital rationing - firm has fixed investment budget, no matter how many + NPV projects there are out there.

42. Capital Budgeting Decision Criteria Ex. firm has \$5MM • If firm used IRR to rank, would pick highest IRR projects, next highest, etc., until spent \$5MM. With NPV, pick projects to maximize total NPV subject to not spending more than \$5MM. Mutually exclusive projects - just means can’t do both. Which do we pick - highest NPV or IRR?

43. Capital Budgeting Decision Criteria • It’s easiest to see ranking problems through NPV profile - just a graph of NPV vs. discount rates: • By NPV: for k < 10%, pick A. For k > 10% pick B

44. Capital Budgeting Decision Criteria • IRR: always pick B • NPV better: it incorporates our k, it’s how much we’re adding to shareholder value. If k < 10%, IRR gives wrong decision.

45. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting • Incremental Cash Flows are what is important • Ignore sunk costs • Don’t include financing effects • Don’t ignore opportunity costs (think of next best alternative) • What about externalities (the effect of this project on other parts of the firm), and cannibalization • Don’t forget shipping and installation (capitalized for depreciation)

46. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting Rev - Cash Exp - DeprecExp = EBIT • Tax (.4) = OperInc After Tax + DeprecExp • WC Changes - FA Purchases

47. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting Changes in Net Working Capital • Remember to reverse this out at the end of the project • Example: think of petty cash

48. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting Projects with Unequal lives – 2 solutions • Replacement Chain – like finding lowest common denominator • Equivalent annual annuity – like finding how fast the cash is flowing in to the firm

49. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting What if projects have different lives? Machine #1: cost = 24,000, life 4 yrs, net benefits = \$8,000/year Machine #2: cost = 12,000, life 2 yrs, net benefits = \$7,400/year k = 10% NPV1 = -24,000 + 8,000 PVIFA( 10%,4)= 1,359 NPV2 = -12,000 + 7,400 PVIFA(10%,2)= 843 We cannot compare these like this, since have unequal lives.

50. Cash Flows in Capital Budgeting 1. Replacement chain approach. Construct a chain of #2’s to get the same number of years of benefits (like finding least common denominator): Year 0 1 2 3 4 Inflows 7400 7400 7400 7400 Outflows -12000 -12000 Net CF -12000 7400 -4600 7400 7400 NPV2 = 1,540 - so we choose machine #2, not #1

More Related