Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Equity Valuation Using Multiples

Equity Valuation Using Multiples We examine the valuation performance of a comprehensive list of value drivers and find that multiples derived from forward earnings explain stock prices remarkably well: pricing errors are within 15 percent of stock prices for about half our sample. In terms of relative performance, the following general rankings are observed consistently each year: forward earnings measures are followed by historical earnings measures, cash flow measures and book value of equity are tied for third, and sales performs the worst. Curiously, performance declines when we consider more complex measures of intrinsic value based on short‐cut residual income models. Contrary to the popular view that different industries have different “best” multiples, these overall rankings are observed consistently for almost all industries examined. Since we require analysts’ earnings and growth forecasts and positive values for all measures, our results may not be representative of the many firm‐years excluded from our sample. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Accounting Research Wiley

Equity Valuation Using Multiples

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/equity-valuation-using-multiples-WcGCcX2xQf

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
University of Chicago on behalf of the Institute of Professional Accounting, 2002
ISSN
0021-8456
eISSN
1475-679X
DOI
10.1111/1475-679X.00042
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We examine the valuation performance of a comprehensive list of value drivers and find that multiples derived from forward earnings explain stock prices remarkably well: pricing errors are within 15 percent of stock prices for about half our sample. In terms of relative performance, the following general rankings are observed consistently each year: forward earnings measures are followed by historical earnings measures, cash flow measures and book value of equity are tied for third, and sales performs the worst. Curiously, performance declines when we consider more complex measures of intrinsic value based on short‐cut residual income models. Contrary to the popular view that different industries have different “best” multiples, these overall rankings are observed consistently for almost all industries examined. Since we require analysts’ earnings and growth forecasts and positive values for all measures, our results may not be representative of the many firm‐years excluded from our sample.

Journal

Journal of Accounting ResearchWiley

Published: Mar 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.