EVA Performance Measurement is Faulty: So You May Be Persuaded to Switch to a Robust OEVA-TEVA Alternative

We argue that the Economic Value Added (EVA) is biased by design and will generally yield distorted assessment of both the operating and overall performance. Fundamentally, the scale of measurement bias depends on the interest tax shield actually obtained in a measurement period and on a book to value ratio, however, there are also other potentially significant sources of distortions induced by the metric design. A robust alternative we propose is a concurrent evaluation of operating and total performance with the two nested metrics, Operating EVA (OEVA) and Total EVA (TEVA). OEVA applies the risk of assets (rather than WACC) to calculates the full capital charge and is unaffected by financing activities. TEVA incorporates financing side effects by explicitly adding interest tax shields to OEVA, but can be calculated as simply as a sum of interest expenses and net income less the full capital charge. The OEVA-TEVA approach is computationally simpler than EVA, the corresponding valuation model is consistent with the cash flow discounting and can be utilized as a self-sufficient instrument for investment project appraisal and business valuation.

[1]  R. Ibragimov Innate Measurement Bias in EVA and How to Fix it: The Total EVA and Operating EVA , 2012 .

[2]  Shannon P. Pratt,et al.  Cost of Capital: Applications and Examples , 2010 .

[3]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Analytical Solution to the Circularity Problem in the Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Framework , 2010 .

[4]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Market value calculation and the solution of circularity between value and the weighted average cost of capital WACC , 2009 .

[5]  James S. Wallace,et al.  Value Based Management with Corporate Social Responsibility , 2009 .

[6]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Constant Leverage and Constant Cost of Capital: A Common Knowledge Half-Truth , 2008 .

[7]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Eva(C) Made Simple: Is it Possible? , 2004 .

[8]  S. Young,et al.  EVA and Value-Based Management: A Practical Guide to Implementation , 2000 .

[9]  Richard S. Ruback,et al.  Capital Cash Flows: A Simple Approach to Valuing Risky Cash Flows , 2000 .

[10]  Robert A. Taggart,et al.  Consistent Valuation and Cost of Capital Expressions with Corporate and Personal Taxes , 1989 .

[11]  J. A. Miles,et al.  Reformulating Tax Shield Valuation: A Note , 1985 .

[12]  Robert S. Harris,et al.  RISK‐ADJUSTED DISCOUNT RATES‐EXTENSIONS FROM THE AVERAGE‐RISK CASE , 1985 .

[13]  Willard T. Carleton,et al.  FINANCING DECISIONS OF THE FIRM , 1966 .

[14]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Company's Valuation in an Emerging Economy - Case Study TIMANCO S.A , 2010 .

[15]  Ignacio Vélez-Pareja,et al.  Principles of Cash Flow Valuation , 2004 .