The problem with any measure from the P&L statement (such as EBITDA, EBIT and NPAT) is that they rarely represent cash flow. Cash flow is important because we like to understand returns from a cash, rather than paper, perspective.
However, measuring maintainable cash flow from the financial statements can be inaccurate and difficult, especially with public companies. Therefore, we are often relegated to using P&L measures.
EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortization) shows operating profit without the non-cash charges. It is what purists might call a measure of pure operating profitability.
EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Tax) includes depreciation and amortization, so it partially accounts for capital intensity.
In practice, here is what matters: EBITDA has no provision for capital expenditure. For a capital-intensive business, EBITDA can be wildly misleading. That m EBITDA figure means little if the company needs m in annual capex just to maintain its assets.
EBIT is better because depreciation often approximates smoothed capex over time. It is not perfect, but it is closer to economic reality.
The classic error is using EBITDA for capital-intensive businesses. I have seen deals where headline EBITDA looked attractive, but maintenance capex consumed nearly all of it. The real cash generation was a fraction of the reported number.
Another mistake is ignoring working capital changes. Neither EBITDA nor EBIT captures the cash tied up in inventory, receivables, or payables.
Explore more on free cash flow analysis and capex considerations.
Tags
Due Diligence, EBITDA
I recently posted a primer on FCF (Free Cash Flow). In that post I discussed why FCF was a superior measure of profitability (compared to NPAT), but I also warned it isn’t a perfect measure. Its virtue is that it better reflects reality by undoing the manipulation of accrual accounting. So, in theory, FCF should
Read MoreIt is often mused that the success of an investment is directly proportionate to the rigor of the initial analysis. Whether this is true or not (there’s always the risk of analysis paralysis), private equity firms expend an inordinate amount of effort on determining the viability of a potential investment. The following list, although not
Read More