Relevering beta (for the @CFA Level 1)

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 20

  • @pietrosilingardi
    @pietrosilingardi ปีที่แล้ว +9

    It’s crazy how this channel is so underrated

    • @letmeexplaincfa
      @letmeexplaincfa  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks Pietro … spread the word please, so that we can do more🙏

    • @Alpha-kv3ou
      @Alpha-kv3ou ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Exactly

    • @signaturemams
      @signaturemams ปีที่แล้ว

      I couldn't agree more. And the production quality is up there. Good job sir!

  • @pratyushpathak2968
    @pratyushpathak2968 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Thank you so much sir, watched both the videos and the concept for levering and delivering beta is crystal clear for me now. Appreciate your efforts!

    • @letmeexplaincfa
      @letmeexplaincfa  2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I am very happy to hear this. Thank you for reaching out🙏

  • @saltyYagi_
    @saltyYagi_ ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The best! What a great example

  • @andyir___
    @andyir___ ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Man you're the best, you could sell anything! ✨

  • @NhanTran-daily98
    @NhanTran-daily98 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    thank for your work ❤❤❤

  • @modus7169
    @modus7169 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Really nice video, the explanation is amazing. quick question: In university I've learned two different types of WACC. One where the tax shield is included and one without it. When calculating the FCF via the NOPAT we used the WACC with the tax shield to discount and when calculating from the EBI we used the WACC without the tax shield. How do we know in this example which WACC to use? or am I missing something else? thanks in advance

  • @ferdyuploader5180
    @ferdyuploader5180 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    thanks for the amazing video, one question, why do we assume that Beta Debt = 0? In my opinion that dosn't make sense if we assume that companies with a higher D/E ratio correlate stronger with the marked portfolio - best regards Ferdy

    • @letmeexplaincfa
      @letmeexplaincfa  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Hi Ferdy, thanks for your comment. I see where you are coming from :) Let me try to make this clear: we assume that debt has a beta of zero, as debt securities in terms of their price fluctuations do not really correlate much with general market factors as illustrated by a broad market index such as the S&P500. Equities typically do, which is why they have beta of more than zero.
      Your confusion comes from the distinction between unlevered and levered beta. If a company is in a cyclical industry (one that is highly sensitive to market factors), say construction, it will have a high beta, even if it is financed with equity ONLY. However, if such a business is also to some extent funded by debt, i.e. it is lever, its equity beta (the sensitivity experienced by its shareholders) will be higher due to the presence of debt. Debt introduces an element of fixed cost which makes earnings, cash flows and, as a result, the share price - more volatile.
      In other words, adding debt will always make the beta associated with a company's shares higher than what it would be if the business were unlevered. Debt makes the share pice more volatile. However, this does not mean that the performance of debt itself is volatile. Debt investors enjoy a smooth ride ... at the expense of shareholders who take the resulting volatility hit.
      Hope this helps!

  • @ek6356
    @ek6356 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you!

  • @ivandi3448
    @ivandi3448 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    📈🧠💪

  • @Jayplay17
    @Jayplay17 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Is it just me that is super impressed that this guy can write backwards?? or am I seeing some computer magic going on here

    • @letmeexplaincfa
      @letmeexplaincfa  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      :) I write normally but flip the image in post-production (using software)