The WACC, or Weighted Average Cost of Capital, is an enterprise level discount rate used in capitalizing debt-free income measures and in terminal value calculations for DCF methods. There is virtually no readily available market evidence regarding WACC. On the other hand, there is substantial relative and comparative information available regarding EBITDA multiples. This video post discusses how to convert a WACC, which most market participants and appraisers know little about, into an EBITDA multiple for a company based on its own unique circumstances. And, as promised, we do so in three easy steps.

Today’s valuation video addresses EBITDA, not as a number, but on a conceptual basis. We discuss seven good things that flow from EBTIDA that make it a focal point of analysis for bankers, investment bankers, private equity participants, business owners, and business appraisers.

The last post addressed EBITDA’s “Naughty 11” Problems and What to Do About Them. Today we talk about EBITDA’s “11 goodies” that help counter the “naughty 11” problems and make it a useful tool for analysts, operators, and owners. In the end, there is no single magic measure of cash flow that reveals all about business value. EBITDA, however, is one measure of cash flow that deserves attention in terms of valuation-related analysis, but in the context of solid reviews of historical income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements with insights about history and outlook from management.

EBITDA is at the same time the most discussed and most maligned measure of business cash flow. Simply put, EBITDA is Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization. The problem with EBITDA is that too often analysts or market participants or writers want to think that there is a single measure of cash flow that will reveal all, bringing Utopia to valuation. This post notes 11 things that EBITDA is not or will not do—and compares other cash flow measures according to the same criteria. Utopia does not exist and there is no valuation elixir. Sadly, we actually have to analyze companies to value them or buy them or sell them.

Business owners and their advisers sometimes fixate on the multiples, usually of EBITDA, obtained in transactions. Normally, these are transactions involving other businesses and other owners. However, company owners and managers should focus on building the level, sustainability, and expected growth of their earnings to maximize the value of their businesses.

The relationship between EBITDA and EBIT for any company over time is one measure of the capital intensity of that business. The greater EBITDA is relative to EBIT, the more depreciation and amortization (D&A) that is required to replace existing plant, equipment, and other acquired assets.

Given the transaction and valuation emphasis on EBITDA, it is important for business owners, advisers, and appraisers to develop a better understanding of the relationship between EBITDA and EBIT for individual companies at a point in time and over time, as well as in comparison to other companies.

I have used this blog (and my former blogs) as a place to develop new materials. In late 2014, I began a series of posts to develop a means of building multiples of EBITDA using what I call the Adjusted Capital Asset Pricing Model. After peer review, I was encouraged to submit an article to the Business Valuation Review, which readers of this blog can obtain convenient access to.

This post focuses on some of the potential analytical issues that may be appropriate for consideration, in addition to all of the normal issues in a typical valuation, when capitalizing EBITDA using the ACAPM.

In a recent series of posts, we developed a means to develop direct and credible multiples of EBITDA applicable to specific valuation situations. This is important because EBITDA is part of the universal business language and is a term that appraisers, business owners and market participants understand. It is also important because until now, one way to capitalize EBITDA has been by using (often incomplete and/or dated) guideline transactions in other private or public companies. The other way has been through the use of guideline public companies, which may suffer in comparability based on size and many other differences.

Since writing the posts, I have had a number of opportunities to discuss the methodology with other appraisers and with clients. These conversations have encouraged me to write this single post to summarize this “new” method. In this post, we lay out the methodology for capitalizing EBITDA using the Adjusted CAPM in one place.

A key assumption necessary to develop capitalization rates and valuation multiples for capitalizing EBITDA is that of the EBITDA Depreciation Factor. We begin by examining the relationship between Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT) and Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA). We also test the general discussion with some market evidence.