II.
Invested Capital
In
most financial computations, when given a
choice between market value and book value,
we choose to proceed with market value. Thus,
the cost of capital is computed using market
value weights for debt and equity and betas
are levered and unlevered using market values.
The accounting return computation is perhaps
the only place in finance where we revert
back to book value, and the reason we do it
is simple. We are trying to compute the return
earned on the capital invested in existing
assets and we are assuming that the book values
of debt and equity effectively measures this
capital investment. The market value of equity
has two problems that make it inappropriate
for this computation:
(1)
The market value of equity includes the expected
value of growth assets, which cannot generate
operating income today. Consequently, the
return on capital computed using market values
of debt and equity for a growth firm will
be biased downwards, not because the firm
has taken poor investments but because its
market value incorporates expectations for
the future. Consider, for instance, that the
market value of Google in 2007 was approximately
$ 150 billion, much of which was due to growth
potential. Dividing Google's operating income
of $ 3 billion in that year by the market
value would generate a return on capital of
2%, but that would not be a fair measure of
the quality of Google's investments. Dividing
instead by Google's book value of $15 billion
yields the more reasonable estimate of return
of 20% on its existing investments.
(2)
The market value marks up the value of existing
assets to reflect their earning power. In
other words, even if there were no growth
assets, using the market value of existing
investments in this computation will generate
the unsurprising result that the return on
capital is equal to the cost of capital. Consider
a firm that has only one project and no expected
future investments, and assume that the capital
invested in the project was $50 million and
that the project is expected to generate $10
million in annual earnings / cash flow in
perpetuity. Finally, assume that the cost
of capital for this project is 10% and that
the market values it fairly, giving it a value
of $100 million (the present value of $10
million as a perpetuity, discounted back at
10%). Now, consider the options when it comes
to computing return on capital. If you divide
the earnings by the book value of $50 million,
you arrive at a return on capital of 20% and
the fair conclusion that the firm is generating
excess returns on its only investment. If
you divide the earnings by the market value
of $100 million, the return on capital is
10% and the conclusion that you would draw
is that the firm invested in a neutral project,
which is not a fair assessment.5
The
reason we net out cash is to be consistent
with the use of operating income as our measure
of earnings. The interest income from cash
is not part of operating income. Consequently,
dividing the operating income by the total
book value of debt and equity will yield too
low a return on capital for companies with
significant cash balances. We could, of course,
add back interest income from cash to the
numerator but that would muddy the waters
since cash is generally invested in low-risk,
low-return investments.
While
the computation that we have used begins with
the book values of debt and equity, we could
arrive at a similar result using the book
values of the assets of the firm. In fact,
the equivalence of the balance sheet can be
used to arrive at the following measure of
invested capital:

The
two approaches will generally give you equivalent
results with two exceptions. The first is
when the firm has minority holdings in other
companies that are classified as assets on
a balance sheet. Since these assets are not
viewed as operating assets, they will be excluded
from the invested capital computation when
we use the asset-based approach but will be
implicitly included in it when we use the
capital computation. The second is when the
firm has long-term liabilities that are not
categorized as debt - unfunded pension or
health care obligations, for instance. They
will be excluded from the invested capital
computation when we use the capital approach
since we consider only equity and interest
bearing debt but will be included in the computation
when we use the asset approach.
5
If the market is not efficient, this computation
will become even noisier, pushing down the
return on capital if the market is overvaluing
the firm and pushing it up, if the firm is
under valued.