IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v17y2005i2p32-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Real Options: Meeting the Georgetown Challange

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas E. Copeland
  • Vladimir Antikarov

Abstract

In response to the demand for a single, generally accepted real options methodology, this article proposes a four‐step process leading to a practical solution to most applications of real option analysis. The first step is familiar: calculate the standard net present value of the project assuming no managerial flexibility, which results in a value estimate (and a “branch” of a decision tree) for each year of the project's life. The second step estimates the volatility of the value of the project and produces a value tree designed to capture the main sources of uncertainty. Note that the authors focus on the uncertainty about overall project value, which is driven by uncertainty in revenue growth, operating margins, operating leverage, input costs, and technology. The key point here is that, in contrast to many real options approaches, none of these variables taken alone is assumed to be a reliable surrogate for the uncertainty of the project itself. For example, in assessing the option value of a proven oil reserve, the relevant measure of volatility is the volatility not of oil prices, but of the value of the operating entity—that is, the project value without leverage. The third step attempts to capture managerial flexibility using a decision “tree” that illustrates the decisions to be made, their possible outcomes, and their corresponding probabilities. The article illustrate various kinds of applications, including a phased investment in a chemical plant (which is treated as a compound option) and an investment in a peak‐load power plant (a switching option with changing variance, which precludes the use of constant risk‐neutral probabilities as in standard decision tree analysis). The fourth and final step uses a “no‐arbitrage” approach to form a replicating portfolio with the same payouts as the real option. For most corporate investment projects, it is impossible to locate a “twin security” that trades in the market. In the absence of such a security, the conventional NPV of a project (again, without flexibility) is the best candidate for a perfectly correlated underlying asset because it represents management's best estimate of value based on the expected cash flows of the project.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas E. Copeland & Vladimir Antikarov, 2005. "Real Options: Meeting the Georgetown Challange," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 17(2), pages 32-51, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:17:y:2005:i:2:p:32-51
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6622.2005.00030.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2005.00030.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2005.00030.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lei Zhu & ZhongXiang Zhang & Ying Fan, 2011. "An evaluation of overseas oil investment projects under uncertainty using a real options based simulation model," Economics Study Area Working Papers 121, East-West Center, Economics Study Area.
    2. Fan, Ying & Zhu, Lei, 2010. "A real options based model and its application to China's overseas oil investment decisions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 627-637, May.
    3. Guthrie, Graeme, 2023. "Optimal adaptation to uncertain climate change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    4. Atul Chandra & Peter R. Hartley & Gopalan Nair, 2022. "Multiple Volatility Real Options Approach to Investment Decisions Under Uncertainty," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 79-98, June.
    5. Marc Fréchet & Hassen Raîs, 2015. "Les managers raisonnent-ils par options réelles ? Une étude exploratoire des déterminants," Post-Print hal-01764120, HAL.
    6. Chai Bin‐Feng & Sultan Sikandar Mirza & Tanveer Ahsan & Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, 2024. "How uncertainty can determine corporate ESG performance?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 2290-2310, May.
    7. Heidari, Mohammad Reza & Heravi, Gholamreza, 2024. "Development of flexible supportive policy with real options for renewable energy projects: Case of photovoltaic systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    8. Rocío Sáenz‐Diez & Ricardo Gimeno & Carlos De Abajo, 2008. "Real Options Valuation: A Case Study of an E‐commerce Company," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 20(2), pages 129-143, March.
    9. Zhang, Mingming & Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, Peng, 2014. "A real option model for renewable energy policy evaluation with application to solar PV power generation in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 944-955.
    10. Luiz E. Brandão & James S. Dyer & Warren J. Hahn, 2005. "Response to Comments on Brandão et al. (2005)," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 103-109, June.
    11. Pendharkar, Parag C., 2010. "Valuing interdependent multi-stage IT investments: A real options approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 847-859, March.
    12. Guj, Pietro & Chandra, Atul, 2019. "Comparing different real option valuation approaches as applied to a copper mine," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 180-189.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:17:y:2005:i:2:p:32-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.