IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/scaman/v18y2002i3p303-318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Firm valuation: comparing the residual income and discounted cash flow approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Plenborg, Thomas

Abstract

This study compares the discounted cash flow approach and an accrual based valuation approach: the residual income model. Given the theoretical equivalence between the residual income and discounted cash flow approaches this, study examines whether it is possible to infer a valuation approach that is superior to the other from a user perspective. The two valuation approaches are compared on the basis of analytical attractiveness. This study demonstrates that if practitioners introduce simplifying assumptions in their firm valuation, they also introduce biases in their firm value estimates. In some cases the residual income approach yields more accurate firm value estimates, while in others the discounted cash flow approach yields more accurate estimates. Further, the impact of simplifying assumptions on firm value estimates can be significant. Thus, it is important that practitioners introducing simplifying assumptions are aware of the impact on firm value estimates. Finally, since the framework for forecasting is often based on accrual accounting and the budget control is generally based on accounting numbers rather than cash flow numbers, it seems logical to estimate firm values based on concepts known from accrual accounting and financial statement analysis, i.e. the residual income approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Plenborg, Thomas, 2002. "Firm valuation: comparing the residual income and discounted cash flow approaches," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 303-318, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:scaman:v:18:y:2002:i:3:p:303-318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522101000173
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stefan Dierkes & Ulrich Schäfer, 2021. "Valuation of firms with multiple business units," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(4), pages 401-432, May.
    2. César Medeiros Cupertino & Paulo Roberto Barbosa Lustosa, 2004. "Ohlson Model Testability:Empirical Tests Findings," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 1(2), pages 136-150, June.
    3. Shigufta Hena Uzma & J.P. Singh & Naveen Kumar, 2010. "Discounted Cash Flow and Its Implication on Intangible Valuation," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 11(3), pages 365-377, October.
    4. Paweł Mielcarz & Paweł Wnuczak, 2011. "DCF Fair Value Valuation, Excessive Assetes and Hidden Inefficiencies," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 5(4), December.
    5. Nangia, Vinay Kumar & Agrawal, Rajat & Reddy, K. Srinivasa, 2011. "Business Valuation: Modelling Forecasting Hurdle Rate," MPRA Paper 60420, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011.
    6. Cesar Cupertino & Newton Da Costa & Reinaldo Coelho & Emilio Menezes, 2013. "Cash flow, earnings, and dividends: A comparison between different valuation methods for Brazilian companies," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 33(1), pages 309-322.
    7. Hamadi, Hassan & Awdeh, Ali, 2011. "Determining Financial Performance: Evidence from UK and USA Firms," MPRA Paper 121151, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:eee:scaman:v:18:y:2002:i:3:p:303-318. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/872/description#description .

    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.