7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
1/58
Copyright 2012 Pearson Education
Chapter 10
Capital
Budgeting
Techniques
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
2/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-2
Learning Goals
LG1 Understand the key elements of the capital budgeting
process.
LG2 Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the payback period.
LG3 Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the net present value
!"#$ and economic value added %#&$
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
3/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-3
Learning Goals (cont.)
LG' Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the internal rate of
return ())$.
LG* Use net present value profiles to compare !"# and()) techni+ues.
LG -iscuss !"# and ()) in terms of conflicting
rankings and the theoretical and practical strengths ofeach approach.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
4/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-4
Overview of Capital Budgeting
Capital budgetingis the process of evaluating and
selecting long/term investments that are consistent 0ith
the firms goal of maimiing o0ner 0ealth.
& capital expenditureis an outlay of funds by the firmthat is epected to produce benefits over a period of time
greater than1 year.
&n operating expenditureis an outlay of funds by thefirm resulting in benefits received within1 year.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
5/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-5
Overview of Capital Budgeting:
Steps in the rocess
4he capital budgeting processconsists of five steps5
Proposal generation."roposals for ne0 investment pro6ects are made at alllevels 0ithin a business organiation and are revie0ed by financepersonnel.
Review and analysis.7inancial managers perform formal revie0 andanalysis to assess the merits of investment proposals
Decision making.7irms typically delegate capital ependiture decisionmaking on the basis of dollar limits.
Implementation.7ollo0ing approval, ependitures are made and pro6ects
implemented. %penditures for a large pro6ect often occur in phases.
Follow-up.)esults are monitored and actual costs and benefits arecompared 0ith those that 0ere epected. &ction may be re+uired if actualoutcomes differ from pro6ected ones.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
6/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-!
Overview of Capital Budgeting:
Basic !er"inolog#
(ndependent versus 8utually %clusive "ro6ects
Independent projectsare pro6ects 0hose cash flo0s are
unrelated to or independent of$ one another9 the acceptance of
one does not eliminatethe others from further consideration. Mutually exclusive projectsare pro6ects that compete 0ith one
another, so that the acceptance of one eliminatesfrom further
consideration all other pro6ects that serve a similar function.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
7/58 2012 Pearson Education 10-"
Overview of Capital Budgeting:
Basic !er"inolog# (cont.)
Unlimited 7unds versus Capital )ationing
Unlimited fundsis the financial situation in 0hich a firm is
able to accept all independent pro6ects that provide an
acceptable return. Capital rationingis the financial situation in 0hich a firm has
only a fied number of dollars available for capital
ependitures, and numerous pro6ects compete for these dollars.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
8/58 2012 Pearson Education 10-#
Overview of Capital Budgeting:
Basic !er"inolog# (cont.)
&ccept/)e6ect versus )anking &pproaches
&n acceptreject approachis the evaluation of capital
ependiture proposals to determine 0hether they meet the firms
minimum acceptance criterion. & ranking approachis the ranking of capital ependiture
pro6ects on the basis of some predetermined measure, such as
the rate of return.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
9/58 2012 Pearson Education 10-$
Capital Budgeting !echni$ues
:ennett Company is a medium sied metal fabricator that is
currently contemplating t0o pro6ects5 "ro6ect & re+uires an
initial investment of ;'2,
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
10/58 2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10.1 Capital &'penditure
ata for Bennett Co"pan#
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
11/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
igure 10.1 Bennett Co"pan#*s
ro+ects , and B
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
12/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
a#%ac- eriod
4he payback methodis the amount of time re+uired for afirm to recover its initial investment in a pro6ect, ascalculated from cash inflo0s.
-ecision criteria5 4he length of the maimum acceptable payback period is
determined by management.
(f the payback period is less thanthe maimum acceptable
payback period, acceptthe pro6ect. (f the payback period isgreater thanthe maimum acceptable
payback period, rejectthe pro6ect.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
13/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
a#%ac- eriod (cont.)
=e can calculate the payback period for :ennett Companys pro6ects &and : using the data in 4able 1
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
14/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
a#%ac- eriod: ros and Cons
of a#%ac- ,nal#sis
4he payback method is 0idely used by large firms to evaluate small
pro6ects and by small firms to evaluate most pro6ects.
(ts popularity results from its computational simplicity and intuitive
appeal.
:y measuring ho0 +uickly the firm recovers its initial investment,
the payback period also gives implicit consideration to the timing
of cash flo0s and therefore to the time value of money.
:ecause it can be vie0ed as a measure of risk eposure, many firmsuse the payback period as a decision criterion or as a supplement to
other decision techni+ues.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
15/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
a#%ac- eriod: ros and Cons
of a#%ac- ,nal#sis (cont.)
4he ma6or 0eakness of the payback period is that the appropriate
payback period is merely a sub6ectively determined number.
(t cannot be specified in light of the 0ealth maimiation goal because it is
not based on discounting cash flo0s to determine 0hether they add to the
firms value.
& second 0eakness is that this approach fails to take fully into
account the time factor in the value of money.
& third 0eakness of payback is its failure to recognie cash flo0s
that occur after the payback period.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
16/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
ocus on ractice
Limits on "ayback &nalysis
=hile easy to compute and easy to understand, the paybackperiod simplicity brings 0ith it some dra0backs.
=hatever the 0eaknesses of the payback period method ofevaluating capital pro6ects, the simplicity of the method doesallo0 it to be used in con6unction 0ith other, more sophisticatedmeasures.
(n your vie0, if the payback period method is used incon6unction 0ith the !"# method, should it be used before orafter the !"# evaluation
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
17/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
ersonal inance &'a"ple
Deema 8ehdi is considering investing ;2
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
18/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
ersonal inance &'a"ple
(cont.)
Deema 8ehdi is considering investing ;2
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
19/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10. /elevant Cash lows and a#%ac-
eriods for ear"an &nterprises* ro+ects
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
20/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10. Calculation of the a#%ac- eriod for
/ashid Co"pan#*s !wo ,lternative 2nvest"ent
ro+ects
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
21/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34)
Net present value (N!"is a sophisticated capital
budgeting techni+ue9 found by subtracting a pro6ects initial
investment from the present value of its cash inflo0s
discounted at a rate e+ual to the firms cost of capital.!"# F "resent value of cash inflo0s (nitial investment
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
22/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34) (cont.)
-ecision criteria5
(f the !"# isgreater than;
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
23/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
igure 10. Calculation of 34s for Bennett
Co"pan#*s Capital &'penditure ,lternatives
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
24/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34) (cont.)
"ro6ect & "ro6ect :
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
25/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34) (cont.)
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
26/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34):
34 and the rofita%ilit# 2nde'
7or a pro6ect that has an initial cash outflo0 follo0ed bycash inflo0s, the profitability inde "($ is simply e+ual tothe present value of cash inflo0s divided by the initial cashoutflo05
=hen companies evaluate investment opportunities usingthe "(, the decision rule they follo0 is to invest in the
pro6ect 0hen the inde is greater than 1.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
27/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34): 34 and
the rofita%ilit# 2nde' (cont.)
=e can refer back to 7igure 1 ;'*,
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
28/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34): 34
and &cono"ic 4alue ,dded
%conomic #alue &dded or %#&$, a registered trademark ofthe consulting firm, Dtern Dte0art J Co., is another closecousin of the !"# method.
4he %#& method begins the same 0ay that !"# doesKbycalculating a pro6ects net cash flo0s.
Eo0ever, the %#& approach subtracts from those cash flo0sa charge that is designed to capture the return that the firmsinvestors demand on the pro6ect.
%#& determines 0hether a pro6ect earns a pure economicprofita profit above and beyond the normal competitiverate of return in a line of business.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
29/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
3et resent 4alue (34): 34
and &cono"ic 4alue ,dded
Duppose a certain pro6ect costs ;1,
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
30/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
2nternal /ate of /eturn (2//)
4he Internal #ate of #eturn (I##"is a sophisticated
capital budgeting techni+ue9 the discount rate that e+uates
the !"# of an investment opportunity 0ith ;< because the
present value of cash inflo0s e+uals the initial investment$9it is the rate of return that the firm 0ill earn if it invests in
the pro6ect and receives the given cash inflo0s.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
31/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
2nternal /ate of /eturn (2//)
-ecision criteria5
(f the ()) isgreater thanthe cost of capital, acceptthe pro6ect.
(f the ()) is less thanthe cost of capital, rejectthe pro6ect.
4hese criteria guarantee that the firm 0ill earn at least its
re+uired return. Duch an outcome should increase the market
value of the firm and, therefore, the 0ealth of its o0ners.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
32/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
igure 10.a Calculation of 2//s for Bennett
Co"pan#*s Capital &'penditure ,lternatives
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
33/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
igure 10. Calculation of 2//s for Bennett
Co"pan#*s Capital &'penditure ,lternatives
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
34/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
2nternal /ate of /eturn (2//):
Calculating the 2// (cont.)
4o find the ()) using the preprogrammed function in a financialcalculator, the keystrokes for each pro6ect are the same as those forthe !"# calculation, ecept that the last t0o !"# keystrokespunching ( and then !"#$ are replaced by a single ()) keystroke.
Comparing the ())s of pro6ects & and : given in 7igure 1
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
35/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
2nternal /ate of /eturn (2//):
Calculating the 2// (cont.)
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
36/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
2nternal /ate of /eturn (2//):
Calculating the 2// (cont.)
(t is interesting to note in the preceding eample that the()) suggests that pro6ect :, 0hich has an ()) of 21.HB,is preferable to pro6ect &, 0hich has an ()) of 1I.IB.
4his conflicts 0ith the !"# rankings obtained in anearlier eample.
Duch conflicts are not unusual.
4here is no guarantee that !"# and ()) 0ill rank
pro6ects in the same order. Eo0ever, both methods shouldreach the same conclusion about the acceptability ornonacceptability of pro6ects.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
37/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
ersonal inance &'a"ple
4ony -iLoreno is evaluating an investment opportunity. Eefeels that this investment must earn a minimum compoundannual after/ta return of IB in order to be acceptable.4onys initial investment 0ould be ;H,*
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
38/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues: 3et
resent 4alue rofiles
Net present value profilesare graphs that depict a pro6ects
!"#s for various discount rates.
4o prepare !"# profiles for :ennett Companys pro6ects &
and :, the first step is to develop a number of discount rate/!"# coordinates and then graph them as sho0n in the
follo0ing table and figure.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
39/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10.5 iscount /ate634
Coordinates for ro+ects , and B
i 10 5
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
40/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
igure 10.5
34 rofiles
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
41/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2//
!echni$ues: Conflicting /an-ings
Conflicting rankingsare conflicts in the ranking given apro6ect by !"# and ()), resulting from differences in themagnitude and timing of cash flo0s.
Ane underlying cause of conflicting rankings is theimplicit assumption concerning the reinvestment ofintermediate cash inflo$sKcash inflo0s received priorto the termination of the pro6ect.
!"# assumes intermediate cash flo0s are reinvested atthe cost of capital, 0hile ()) assumes that they arereinvested at the ()).
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
42/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues:
Conflicting /an-ings (cont.)
& pro6ect re+uiring a ;1H
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
43/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10.7 /einvest"ent /ate
Co"parisons for a ro+ect
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
44/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues:
Conflicting /an-ings (cont.)
(f the future value in each case in 4able 1
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
45/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10.8 ro+ect Cash lows
,fter /einvest"ent
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
46/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues:
!i"ing of the Cash low
¬her reason 0hy the ()) and !"# methods may providedifferent rankings for investment options has to do 0ithdifferences in the timing of cash flo0s.
=hen much of a pro6ects cash flo0s arrive early in its life, thepro6ects !"# 0ill not be particularly sensitive to the discountrate.
An the other hand, the !"# of pro6ects 0ith cash flo0s thatarrive later 0ill fluctuate more as the discount rate changes.
4he differences in the timing of cash flo0s bet0een the t0opro6ects does not affect the ranking provided by the ())method.
! %l 10 9 / -i + t , d
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
47/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
!a%le 10.9 /an-ing ro+ects , and
B sing 2// and 34 ;ethods
C i 34 d 2// ! h i
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
48/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues:
;agnitude of the 2nitial 2nvest"ent
4he scale problem occurs 0hen t0o pro6ects are verydifferent in terms of ho0 much money is re+uired to invest
in each pro6ect.
(n these cases, the ()) and !"# methods may rank pro6ectsdifferently.
4he ()) approach and the "( method$ may favor small pro6ects
0ith high returns like the ;2 loan that turns into ;3$.
4he !"# approach favors the investment that makes theinvestor the most money like the ;1,
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
49/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
Co"paring 34 and 2// !echni$ues:
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
50/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
;atter of act
=hich 8ethods -o Companies &ctually Use
& recent survey asked Chief 7inancial Afficers C7As$ 0hat
methods they used to evaluate capital investment pro6ects.
4he most popular approaches by far 0ere ()) and !"#, used byHB and H*B respectively$ of the C7As responding to the
survey.
4hese techni+ues en6oy 0ider use in larger firms, 0ith the
payback approach being more common in smaller firms.
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
51/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
ocus on &thics
!onfinancial Considerations in "ro6ect Delection 7or most companies ethical considerations are primarily concerned 0ith the reduction
of potential risks associated 0ith a pro6ect.
Eo0ever, 4he Mu0ait 7und 0as established as the first institution in the 8iddle %astthat took an active role in international development efforts. 4he fund finances
development pro6ects and their feasibility studies in developing countries. Ane of the ma6or ob6ectives of the Mu0ait 7und is to build a solid bridge of friendship
and solidarity bet0een the state of Mu0ait and the developing nations.
4he success of the Mu0ait 7und in achieving this ob6ective helped the state of Mu0aitto get the necessary votes in the United !ations and the U.!. Decurity Council for the0ar against (ra+ to liberate Mu0ait in 1II1.
4he Mu0ait 7und offers many forms of assistance, including direct loans or theprovision of guarantees, and grants/in/aid to finance technical, economic, and financialstudies.
"hat are the potential #eneits to the state o $uwait o the ethical #ehavior o the$uwait Fund%
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
52/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
LG1 Understand the key elements of the capital budgeting process.
Capital budgeting techni+ues are the tools used to assess pro6ect
acceptability and ranking. &pplied to each pro6ects relevant cash flo0s,
they indicate 0hich capital ependitures are consistent 0ith the firms
goal of maimiing o0ners 0ealth.
/eview of Learning Goals
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
53/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
(cont.)
LG2 Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the payback period.
4he payback period is the amount of time re+uired for the firm to
recover its initial investment, as calculated from cash inflo0s. Dhorter
payback periods are preferred. 4he payback period is relatively easy to
calculate, has simple intuitive appeal, considers cash flo0s, andmeasures risk eposure. (ts 0eaknesses include lack of linkage to the
0ealth maimiation goal, failure to consider time value eplicitly, and
the fact that it ignores cash flo0s that occur after the payback period.
/eview of Learning Goals
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
54/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
(cont.)
LG3 Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the net present value !"#$and economic value added %#&$.
!"# measures the amount of value created by a given pro6ect9 onlypositive !"# pro6ects are acceptable. 4he rate at 0hich cash flo0s arediscounted in calculating !"# is called the discount rate, re+uired
return, cost of capital, or opportunity cost. :y 0hatever name, this raterepresents the minimum return that must be earned on a pro6ect to leavethe firms market value unchanged.
4he %#& method begins the same 0ay that !"# doesKby calculating apro6ects net cash flo0s. Eo0ever, the %#& approach subtracts from
those cash flo0s a charge that is designed to capture the return that thefirms investors demand on the pro6ect. 4hat is, the %#& calculationasks 0hether a pro6ect generates positive cash flo0s above and beyond0hat investors demand. (f so, then the pro6ect is 0orth undertaking.
/eview of Learning Goals
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
55/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
(cont.)
LG' Calculate, interpret, and evaluate the internal rate of return())$.
Like !"#, ()) is a sophisticated capital budgeting techni+ue. ()) is
the compound annual rate of return that the firm 0ill earn by investing
in a pro6ect and receiving the given cash inflo0s. :y accepting onlythose pro6ects 0ith ())s in ecess of the firms cost of capital, the firm
should enhance its market value and the 0ealth of its o0ners.
/eview of Learning Goals
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
56/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
(cont.)
LG* Use net present value profiles to compare !"# and ())techni+ues.
& net present value profile is a graph that depicts pro6ects !"#s for
various discount rates. 4he !"# profile is prepared by developing a
number of Ndiscount ratenet present valueO coordinates includingdiscount rates of < percent, the cost of capital, and the ()) for each
pro6ect$ and then plotting them on the same set of discount rate!"#
aes.
/eview of Learning Goals
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
57/58
2012 Pearson Education 10-
/eview of Learning Goals
(cont.)
LG -iscuss !"# and ()) in terms of conflicting rankings and thetheoretical and practical strengths of each approach.
Conflicting rankings of pro6ects fre+uently emerge from !"# and ())as a result of differences in the reinvestment rate assumption, as 0ell asthe magnitude and timing of cash flo0s. !"# assumes reinvestment of
intermediate cash inflo0s at the more conservative cost of capital9 ())assumes reinvestment at the pro6ects ()). An a purely theoretical basis,!"# is preferred over ()) because !"# assumes the moreconservative reinvestment rate and does not ehibit the mathematicalproblem of multiple ())s that often occurs 0hen ())s are calculatedfor nonconventional cash flo0s. (n practice, the ()) is more commonlyused because it is consistent 0ith the general preference of businessprofessionals for rates of return, and corporate financial analysts canidentify and resolve problems 0ith the ()) before decision makers useit.
Chapter /esources on
7/25/2019 Sesi1 Cap Budgeting Technique
58/58
Chapter /esources on
;#inanceLa%
Chapter Cases
Group %ercises
Critical 4hinking "roblems
Top Related