Capital Budgeting W10
Capital Budgeting W10
Capital Budgeting W10
Review Implementation
Proposal Decision
& and
Generation Making
Analysis Follow-up
• Sunk costs
– These refer to costs that have already been paid or been committed to, regardless of whether a
project is taken on or not. For instance, consulting fees paid to prepare a report on the feasibility of
a project is a sunk cost! These should not to be included as a cost.
• Opportunity costs
– These refer to the cash flows that could be generated from an asset if it was not used in the project.
For example, if a project is going to use premises that could be used for other purposes by the
company. Opportunity costs should be taken into account in the cash flows used.
• Externalities
– The impact of a project on other parts of a firm should be taken into account, whether positive or
negative. This includes cannibalization, when sales of another side of the firm will be switched to
the new area if a new project goes ahead.
Both project A and B generate total cash inflows of $2.1m and cost $1m.
However, project A generates larger inflows at the early stages of project
as compared project B. NPV method favors project A over project B.
NPV ignores embedded options in the project
IRR for project A will be the rate of return that satisfies the
following equation:.
800, 000 600, 000 400, 000 200, 000 100, 000
1, 000, 000 0
(1 IRR) (1 IRR) 2 (1 IRR)3 (1 IRR) 4 (1 IRR)5
$800,000.00
$600,000.00
Net Present Value
$200,000.00
$0.00
0.325
0.75
0.05
0.15
0.25
0.35
0.45
0.55
0.65
0.85
0.075
0.1
0.125
0.175
0.2
0.225
0.275
0.3
0.375
0.4
0.425
0.475
0.5
0.525
0.575
0.6
0.625
0.675
0.7
0.725
0.775
0.8
0.825
0.875
0.9
($200,000.00)
($400,000.00)
Expected Rate of Return/Discount Rate
Graphically IRR is the rate of return at the point the line crosses the
horizontal axis. At this point NPV=0 INVESMENT RULE: Invest
when IRR>Cost of Capital
The IRR Rule
0 1 2 3 4 5
• The NPV and IRR, which consider all of a project ’ s cash flows, do not
suffer from this problem.
• Unlike the other capital budgeting criteria AAR is based on accounting numbers, not on
cash flows. This is an important conceptual and practical limitation.
• The AAR also does not account for the time value of money, and there is no conceptually
sound cutoff for the AAR that distinguishes between profitable and unprofitable
investments.
• The AAR is frequently calculated in different ways, so the analyst should verify the
formula behind any AAR numbers that are supplied by someone else.
• Analysts should know the AAR and its potential limitations in practice, but they should
rely on more economically sound methods like the NPV and IRR.
• The profitability index (PI) is the present value of a project’s future cash
flows divided by the initial investment.
Project E Project H
-1,000,000 -1,000,000
325,000 100,000
325,000 100,000
325,000 100,000
325,000 150,000
325,000 1,500,000
Note that Project E has higher IRR than Project H. However, project H higher
NPV when cost of capital is below 12.94%. If the cost of capital is below 12.94%
as in this example, NPV and IRR rules conflict!
The NPV Profiles of Investments E and H.
Investment E is better than H only
Low IRR High NPV if the cost of capital (assumed to be
the same for both projects) is
higher than the value of the
discount rate at which the NPV
profiles of E and H intersect
(Fisher’s intersection).
Unconventional cash flows where the sign of cash flows change more
than once, produce multiple IRRs. For instance the following cash flow
pattern leads and IRR of 100% and 200%.
In this case NPV profile of the project intersects the horizontal line twice:
at discount rate 100% and discount rate 200%.
100% 200%
No IRR Problem
In some cases, NPV profile may never cross the horizontal axis.
Survey Evidence