Select Page

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting

finance
Quote: Benjamin Graham – The “father of value investing”

Quote: Benjamin Graham – The “father of value investing”

“The worth of a business is measured not by what has been put into it, but by what can be taken out of it.” – Benjamin Graham – The “father of value investing”

The quote, “The worth of a business is measured not by what has been put into it, but by what can be taken out of it,” is attributed to Benjamin Graham, a figure widely acknowledged as the “father of value investing”. This perspective reflects Graham’s lifelong focus on intrinsic value and his pivotal role in shaping modern investment philosophy.

Context and Significance of the Quote

This statement underscores Graham’s central insight: the value of a business does not rest in the sum of capital, effort, or resources invested, but in its potential to generate future cash flows and economic returns for shareholders. It rebuffs the superficial appeal to sunk costs or historical inputs and instead centres evaluation on what the business can practically yield for its owners—capturing a core tenet of value investing, where intrinsic value outweighs market sentiment or accounting measures. This approach has not only revolutionised equity analysis but has become the benchmark for rational, objective investment decision-making amidst market speculation and emotion.

About Benjamin Graham

Born in 1894 in London and emigrating to New York as a child, Benjamin Graham began his career in a tumultuous era for financial markets. Facing personal financial hardship after his father’s death, Graham still excelled academically and graduated from Columbia University in 1914, forgoing opportunities to teach in favour of a position on Wall Street.

His career was marked by the establishment of the Graham–Newman Corporation in 1926, an investment partnership that thrived through the Great Depression—demonstrating the resilience of his theories in adverse conditions. Graham’s most influential works, Security Analysis (1934, with David Dodd) and The Intelligent Investor (1949), articulated the discipline of value investing and codified concepts such as “intrinsic value,” “margin of safety”, and the distinction between investment and speculation.

Unusually, Graham placed great emphasis on independent thinking, emotional detachment, and systematic security analysis, encouraging investors to focus on underlying business fundamentals rather than market fluctuations. His professional legacy was cemented through his mentorship of legendary investors such as Warren Buffett, John Templeton, and Irving Kahn, and through the enduring influence of his teachings at Columbia Business School and elsewhere.

Leading Theorists in Value Investing and Company Valuation

Value investing as a discipline owes much to Graham but was refined and advanced by several influential theorists:

  • David Dodd: Graham’s collaborator at Columbia, Dodd co-authored Security Analysis and helped develop the foundational precepts of value investing. Together, they formalised the empirical, research-based approach to identifying undervalued securities, prioritising intrinsic value over market price.
  • Warren Buffett: Perhaps Graham’s most renowned protégé, Buffett adapted value investing by emphasising the durability of a business’s economic “moat,” management quality, and long-term compounding, steering the discipline toward higher-quality businesses and more qualitative evaluation.
  • John Templeton: Known for global value investing, Templeton demonstrated the universality and adaptability of Graham’s ideas across different markets and economic conditions, focusing on contrarian analysis and deep value.
  • Seth Klarman: In his book Margin of Safety, Klarman applied Graham’s strict risk-aversion and intrinsic value methodologies to distressed investing, advocating for patience, margin of safety, and scepticism.
  • Irving Kahn and Mario Gabelli: Both disciples of Graham who applied his principles through various market cycles and inspired generations of analysts and fund managers, incorporating rigorous corporate valuation and fundamental research.

Other schools of thought in corporate valuation and investor returns—such as those developed by John Burr Williams and Aswath Damodaran—further developed discounted cash flow analysis and the quantitative assessment of future earnings power, building on the original insight that a business’s worth resides in its capacity to generate distributable cash over time.

Enduring Relevance

Graham’s philosophy remains at the core of every rigorous approach to corporate valuation. The quote is especially pertinent in contemporary valuation debates, where the temptation exists to focus on investment scale, novelty, or historical spend, rather than sustainable, extractable value. In every market era, Graham’s legacy is a call to refocus on long-term economic substance over short-term narratives—“not what has been put into it, but what can be taken out of it”.

read more
Term: Return on Net Assets (RONA), also commonly referred to as Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)

Term: Return on Net Assets (RONA), also commonly referred to as Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)

Return on Net Assets (RONA), also commonly referred to as Return on Invested Capital (ROIC), is a profitability ratio that measures how efficiently a company generates net operating profit after tax (NOPAT) from its invested capital. The typical formula is:

RONA (or ROIC) = NOPAT ÷ Invested Capital
where invested capital is defined as fixed assets plus net working capital.

This metric assesses the return a business earns on the capital allocated to its core operations, excluding the effect of financial leverage and non-operating items. NOPAT is used as it reflects the after-tax profits generated purely from operations, providing a cleaner view of value creation for all providers of capital. Invested capital focuses on assets directly tied to operational performance: fixed assets such as property, plant and equipment, and net working capital (current operating assets less current operating liabilities). This construction ensures the measure remains aligned with how capital is deployed within the firm.

RONA/ROIC enables investors, managers, and analysts to judge whether a company is generating returns above its cost of capital—a key determinant of value creation and strategic advantage. The ratio also acts as a benchmark for performance improvement and capital allocation decisions.

Arguments for Using RONA/ROIC

  • Comprehensive Operational Measurement: As it focuses on NOPAT and invested capital, it reflects returns from the actual deployment of resources, independent of capital structure or accounting artefacts.
  • Alignment with Value Creation: ROIC is a foundational building block in value-based management, reliably indicating whether growth creates or destroys shareholder value. Returns above the cost of capital are indicative of a firm’s competitive advantage and its ability to reinvest profitably.
  • Benchmarking Capability: This measure enables robust comparison of performance across industries, companies, and geographies, particularly where capital intensity varies significantly.
  • Management Discipline: Emphasising RONA/ROIC encourages effective capital allocation and ongoing scrutiny of operational efficiency, discouraging unproductive investment.

Criticisms and Limitations

  • Potential for Manipulation: Definitions of invested capital and NOPAT can vary between organisations. Differences in accounting policies (e.g., capitalisation vs expensing, asset write-downs) may distort comparisons.
  • Ignores Future Investment Needs: As a static measure, RONA/ROIC reflects past or current performance, not the changing investment requirements or growth opportunities facing a business.
  • May Penalise Growth: High growth companies with significant recent capital expenditure may report lower RONA/ROIC, even if those investments will yield future returns.
  • Industry Differences: Utility is often highest in mature businesses—RONA/ROIC may be less relevant or comparable for asset-light or intangible-driven business models.

Leading Theorists and Strategic Foundations

Aswath Damodaran and the authors of Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies—Tim Koller, Marc Goedhart, and David Wessels—are directly associated with the development, articulation, and scholarly propagation of concepts like RONA and ROIC.

Tim Koller, Marc Goedhart, and David Wessels

As co-authors of the definitive text Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies (first published in 1990, now in its 7th edition), Koller, Goedhart, and Wessels have provided the most detailed and widely adopted frameworks for calculating, interpreting, and applying ROIC in both academic and practitioner circles.

Their work systematised the relationship between ROIC, cost of capital, and value creation, embedding this metric at the heart of modern strategic finance and value-based management. They emphasise that only companies able to sustain ROIC above their cost of capital create lasting economic value, and their approach is rigorous in ensuring clarity of calculation (advocating NOPAT and properly defined invested capital for consistency and comparability). Their text is canonical in both MBA programmes and leading advisory practices, widely referenced in strategic due diligence, private equity, and long-term corporate planning.

Aswath Damodaran

Aswath Damodaran, Professor of Finance at the NYU Stern School of Business, is another seminal figure. His textbooks, including Investment Valuation and Damodaran on Valuation, champion the use of ROIC as a core measure of company performance. Damodaran’s extensive public lectures, datasets, and analytical frameworks stress the importance of analysing returns on invested capital and understanding how this interacts with growth and risk in both investment analysis and strategic decision-making.

Damodaran’s work is highly practical, meticulously clarifying issues in the calculation and interpretation of ROIC, especially around treatment of operating leases, goodwill, and intangibles, and highlighting the complexities that confront both value investors and boards. His influence is broad, with his online resources and publications serving as go-to technical references for professionals and academics alike.

Both Damodaran and the Valuation authors are credited with shaping the field’s understanding of RONA/ROIC’s strategic implications and embedding this measure at the core of value-driven management and investment strategy.

read more
Quote: Aswath Damodaran – Professor, Valuation authority

Quote: Aswath Damodaran – Professor, Valuation authority

“There is a role for valuation at every stage of a firm’s life cycle.” – Aswath Damodaran – Professor, Valuation authority

The firm life cycle—from inception and private ownership, through growth, maturity, and ultimately potential decline or renewal—demands distinct approaches to appraising value. Damodaran’s teaching and extensive writings consistently stress that whether a company is a start-up seeking venture funding, a mature enterprise evaluating capital allocation, or a business facing restructuring, rigorous valuation remains central to informed strategic choices.

His observation is rooted in decades of scholarly analysis and practical engagement with valuation in corporate finance—arguing that effective valuation is not limited to transactional moments (such as M&A or IPOs), but underpins everything from resource allocation and performance assessment to risk management and governance. By embedding valuation across the firm life cycle, leaders can navigate uncertainty, optimise capital deployment, and align stakeholder interests, regardless of market conditions or organisational maturity.

About Aswath Damodaran

Aswath Damodaran is universally acknowledged as one of the world’s pre-eminent authorities on valuation. Professor of finance at New York University’s Stern School of Business since 1986, Damodaran holds the Kerschner Family Chair in Finance Education. His academic lineage includes a PhD in Finance and an MBA from the University of California, Los Angeles, as well as an early degree from the Indian Institute of Management.

Damodaran’s reputation extends far beyond academia. He is widely known as “the dean of valuation”, not only for his influential research and widely-adopted textbooks but also for his dedication to education accessibility—he makes his complete MBA courses and learning materials freely available online, thereby fostering global understanding of corporate finance and valuation concepts.

His published work spans peer-reviewed articles in leading academic journals, practical texts on valuation and corporate finance, and detailed explorations of topics such as risk premiums, capital structure, and market liquidity. Damodaran’s approach combines rigorous theoretical frameworks with empirical clarity and real-world application, making him a key reference for practitioners, students, and policy-makers. Prominent media regularly seek his views on valuation, capital markets, and broader themes in finance.

Leading Valuation Theorists – Backstory and Impact

While Damodaran has shaped the modern field, the subject of valuation draws on the work of multiple generations of thought leaders.

  • Irving Fisher (1867–1947): Fisher’s foundational models on the time value of money underlie discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis, still core to valuation[3 inferred].
  • John Burr Williams (1900–1989): Williams formalised the concept of intrinsic value through discounted cash flow models, notably in his 1938 work “The Theory of Investment Value”, establishing principles that support much of today’s practice[3 inferred].
  • Franco Modigliani & Merton Miller: Their Modigliani–Miller theorem (1958) rigorously defined capital structure irrelevance under frictionless markets, and later work addressed the link between risk, return, and firm value. While not strictly about valuation methods, their insights underpin how financial practitioners evaluate cost of capital and risk premiums[3 inferred].
  • Myron Scholes & Fischer Black: The Black–Scholes option pricing model introduced a quantitative approach to valuing contingent claims, fundamentally expanding the valuation toolkit for both corporate finance and derivatives[3 inferred].
  • Richard Brealey & Stewart Myers: Their textbooks, such as “Principles of Corporate Finance”, have helped standardise and disseminate best practice in valuation and financial decision-making globally[3 inferred].
  • Shannon Pratt: Known for his influential books on business valuation, Pratt synthesised theory with actionable methodologies tailored for private company and litigation contexts[3 inferred].

Damodaran’s Place in the Lineage

Damodaran’s distinctive contribution is the synthesis of classical theory with contemporary market realities. His focus on making valuation relevant “at every stage of a firm’s life cycle” bridges the depth of theoretical models with the dynamic complexity of today’s global markets. Through his teaching, prolific writing, and commitment to open-access learning, he has shaped not only valuation scholarship but also the way investors, executives, and advisors worldwide think about value creation and measurement.

read more
Term: EBITDA multiple

Term: EBITDA multiple

The EBITDA multiple, also known as the enterprise multiple, is a widely used financial metric for valuing businesses, particularly in mergers and acquisitions and investment analysis. It is calculated by dividing a company’s Enterprise Value (EV) by its Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation, and Amortisation (EBITDA). The formula can be expressed as:

EBITDA Multiple = Enterprise Value (EV) ÷ EBITDA.

Enterprise Value (EV) represents the theoretical takeover value of a business and is commonly computed as the market capitalisation plus total debt, minus cash and cash equivalents. By using EV (which is capital structure-neutral), the EBITDA multiple enables comparison across companies with differing debt and equity mixes, making it particularly valuable for benchmarking and deal-making in private equity, strategic acquisitions, and capital markets.

Arguments for Using the EBITDA Multiple

  • Neutral to Capital Structure: Since it uses enterprise value, the EBITDA multiple is not affected by the company’s financing decisions, allowing for more accurate comparison between firms with different levels of debt and equity.
  • Cross-Industry Applicability: It provides a standardised approach to valuation across industries and geographical markets, making it suitable for benchmarking peer companies and sectors.
  • Proxy for Operating Performance: EBITDA is seen as a reasonable proxy for operating cash flow, as it excludes interest, tax effects, and non-cash expenses like depreciation and amortisation, thus focusing on core earning capacity.
  • Simplicity and Practicality: As a single, widely recognised metric, the EBITDA multiple is relatively easy for investors, analysts, and boards to understand and apply—particularly during preliminary assessments or shortlisting of targets.

Criticisms of the EBITDA Multiple

  • Ignores Capex and Working Capital Needs: EBITDA does not account for capital expenditures or changes in working capital, both of which can be significant in assessing the true cash-generating ability and financial health of a business.
  • Can Obscure True Profitability: By excluding significant costs (depreciation, amortisation), EBITDA may overstate operational performance, particularly for asset-intensive businesses or those with aging fixed assets.
  • Susceptible to Manipulation: Since EBITDA excludes interest, tax, and non-cash charges, it can be vulnerable to window dressing and manipulation by management aiming to present better than actual results.
  • Limited Relevance for Highly Leveraged Firms: For businesses with high levels of debt, focusing solely on EBITDA multiples may underplay the risks associated with financial leverage.

Related Strategy Theorist: Michael C. Jensen

The evolution and widespread adoption of EBITDA multiples in valuation is closely linked to the rise of leveraged buyouts (LBOs) and private equity in the 1980s—a movement shaped and analysed by Michael C. Jensen, a foundational figure in corporate finance and strategic management.

Michael C. Jensen (born 1939):
Jensen is an American economist and Professor Emeritus at Harvard Business School, widely recognised for his work on agency theory, corporate governance, and the market for corporate control. He is perhaps best known for his groundbreaking 1976 paper with William Meckling, “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure,” which fundamentally shaped understanding of firm value, ownership, and managerial incentives.

During the 1980s, Jensen extensively researched the dynamics of leveraged buyouts and the use of debt in corporate restructuring, documenting how private equity sponsors used enterprise value and metrics like EBITDA multiples to value acquisition targets. He advocated for the use of cash flow–oriented metrics (such as EBITDA and free cash flow) as better indicators of firm value than traditional accounting profit measures, particularly in contexts where operating assets and financial structure could be separated.

His scholarship not only legitimised and popularised such metrics among practitioners but also critically explored their limitations—addressing issues around agency costs, capital allocation, and the importance of considering cash flows over accounting earnings.
Jensen’s influence persists in both academic valuation methodologies and real-world transaction practice, where EBITDA multiples remain central.

In summary, the EBITDA multiple is a powerful and popular tool for business valuation—valued for its simplicity and broad applicability, but its limitations require careful interpretation and complementary analysis. Michael C. Jensen’s scholarship frames both the advantages and necessary caution in relying on single-value multiples in strategy and valuation.

read more
Quote: Bill Miller – Investor, fund manager

Quote: Bill Miller – Investor, fund manager

“One of the most powerful sources of mispricing is the tendency to over-weight or over-emphasize current conditions.” – Bill Miller – Investor, fund manager

Bill Miller is a renowned American investor and fund manager, most prominent for his extraordinary tenure at Legg Mason Capital Management where he managed the Value Trust mutual fund. Born in 1950 in North Carolina, Miller graduated with honours in economics from Washington and Lee University in 1972 and went on to serve as a military intelligence officer. He later pursued graduate studies in philosophy at Johns Hopkins University before advancing into finance, embarking on a career that would reshape perceptions of value investing.

Miller joined Legg Mason in 1981 as a security analyst, eventually becoming chairman and chief investment officer for the firm and its flagship fund. Between 1991 and 2005, the Legg Mason Value Trust—under Miller’s stewardship—outperformed the S&P 500 for a then-unprecedented 15 consecutive years. This performance earned Miller near-mythical status within investment circles. However, the 2008 financial crisis, where he was heavily exposed to collapsing financial stocks, led to significant losses and a period of high-profile criticism. Yet Miller’s intellectual rigour and willingness to adapt led him to recover, founding Miller Value Partners and continuing to contribute important insights to the field.

The context of Miller’s quote lies in his continued attention to investor psychology and behavioural finance. His experience—through market booms, crises, and recoveries—led him to question conventional wisdom around value investing and to recognise how often investors, swayed by the immediacy of current economic and market conditions, inaccurately price assets by projecting the present into the future. This insight is rooted both in academic research and in practical experience during periods such as the technology bubble, where the market mispriced risk and opportunity by over-emphasising prevailing narratives.

Miller’s work and this quote sit within the broader tradition of theorists who have examined mispricing, market psychology, and the fallibility of investor judgement:

  • Benjamin Graham, widely considered the father of value investing, argued in “The Intelligent Investor” (1949) and “Security Analysis” (1934) that investors should focus on intrinsic value, patiently waiting for the market to correct its mispricings rather than being swayed by current market euphoria or fear. Graham’s concept of “Mr Market” personifies the emotional extremes that create opportunity and danger through irrational pricing.

  • John Maynard Keynes provided foundational commentary on the way markets can become speculative as investors focus on what they believe others believe—summed up in his famous comparison to a “beauty contest”—leading to extended periods of mispricing based on the prevailing sentiment of the day.

  • Robert Shiller advanced these insights with his work on behavioural finance, notably in “Irrational Exuberance” (2000), where he dissected how overemphasis on current positive trends can inflate asset bubbles far beyond their underlying value.

  • Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, pioneers of behavioural economics, introduced the psychological mechanisms—such as recency bias and availability heuristic—that explain why investors habitually overvalue current conditions and presume their persistence.

  • Howard Marks, in his memos and book “The Most Important Thing”, amplifies the importance of second-level thinking—moving beyond the obvious and questioning whether prevailing conditions are likely to persist, or whether the crowd is mispricing risk due to their focus on the present.

Bill Miller’s career is both a case study and a cautionary tale of these lessons in action. His perspective emphasises that value emerges over time, and only those who look beyond the prevailing winds of sentiment are positioned to capitalise on genuine mispricing. The tendency to overvalue present conditions is perennial, but so too are the opportunities for those who resist it.

read more
Term: Growth

Term: Growth

In financial and strategic disciplines, “growth” denotes the rate at which a company’s profits, revenues, dividends, or overall enterprise value are expected to increase over time. Growth is a central theme in corporate valuation, capital allocation, and competitive positioning, with foundational financial models and strategic frameworks prioritising a granular understanding of its drivers, sustainability, and impact.

Financial Theories Relating to Growth

Value = Profit × (1 – Reinvestment Rate) / (Cost of Capital – Growth)

This advanced valuation expression, as presented by David Wessels, Marc Goedhart, and Timothy Koller in Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies (McKinsey & Co.), formalises the interplay between profitability, reinvestment, and growth. Here:

  • Reinvestment Rate = Growth / ROIC, quantifies how much of generated profit must be reinvested to achieve a given growth rate, where ROIC is Return on Invested Capital. The formula demonstrates that value is maximised not simply by growth, but by growth achieved with high capital efficiency and without excessive reinvestment.

Gordon Growth Model (GGM) / Dividend Discount Model (DDM)
The Gordon Growth Model, developed by Myron J. Gordon and Eli Shapiro, is a foundational method for valuing equity based on the present value of an infinite stream of future dividends growing at a constant rate. Its formula is:

Intrinsic Value = Next Period DPS ÷ (Required Rate of Return – Dividend Growth Rate).

This model is widely used for established, dividend-paying businesses and illustrates how even modest changes in growth (g) can have an outsized effect on equity valuation, due to its presence in the denominator of the formula.

Aswath Damodaran’s Contributions

Aswath Damodaran, a leading academic on valuation, argues that sustainable growth must be underpinned by a firm’s investment returns exceeding its cost of capital. He emphasises that aggressive revenue growth without returns above the cost of capital destroys value, a critical principle for both analysts and executives.

Strategic Frameworks Involving Growth

Growth-Share Matrix (BCG Matrix)
A seminal business tool, the Growth-Share Matrix—developed by the Boston Consulting Group—categorises business units or products by market growth rate and relative market share. The framework, popularised by strategy theorist Bruce Henderson, divides assets into four quadrants:

  • Stars (high growth, high share)
  • Question Marks (high growth, low share)
  • Cash Cows (low growth, high share)
  • Dogs (low growth, low share)

This framework links growth directly to expected cash flow needs and capital allocation, guiding portfolio management, investment decisions, and exit strategies.

Richard Koch’s Insights
Richard Koch, strategy theorist and author, is best known for popularising the Pareto Principle (80/20 Rule) in business. Koch has demonstrated that a focus on fast-growing 20% of activities, customers, or products can disproportionately drive overall company growth and profitability, reinforcing the importance of targeted rather than uniform growth efforts.

Leading Strategy Theorist: Bruce Henderson

Bruce D. Henderson (1915–1992) was the founder of the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and a seminal figure in the evolution of corporate strategy. Henderson introduced the Growth-Share Matrix in the early 1970s, giving managers a visual, analytic tool to allocate resources based on market growth’s effect on competitive dynamics and future cash requirements. His insight was that growth, when paired with relative market strength, dictates an organisation’s future capital needs and investment rationales—making disciplined analysis of growth rates central to effective strategy.

Henderson’s wider intellectual legacy includes the principles of the experience curve, which postulates that costs decline as output increases—a direct link between growth, scale, and operational efficiency. He founded BCG in 1963 and led it to become one of the world’s most influential strategy consultancies, shaping both practical and academic approaches to long-term value creation, competitive advantage, and business portfolio strategy. His contributions permanently altered how leaders assess and operationalise growth within their organisations.

Conclusion

“Growth” embodies far more than expansion; it is a core parameter in both the financial valuation of firms and their strategic management. Modern frameworks—from the value formulae of leading financial economists to the matrix-based guidance of strategic pioneers—underscore that not all growth is positive and that sustainable, value-accretive growth is predicated on return discipline, resource allocation, and market context. The work of thinkers such as Wessels, Goedhart, Koller, Damodaran, Koch, and Henderson ensures that growth remains the subject of rigorous, multidimensional analysis across finance and strategy.

read more
Quote: Naved Abdali – Investor, noted commentator

Quote: Naved Abdali – Investor, noted commentator

“If investors do not know or never attempt to know the fair value, they can pay any price. More often, the price they pay is far greater than the actual value.” – Naved Abdali – Investor, noted commentator

Naved Abdali is an investor and noted commentator on investment theory, recognised for his clarity on the psychological underpinnings of market behaviour and the critical role of value discipline in investment. Abdali’s work often addresses the emotional and behavioural biases that cloud investor judgment and drive irrational market actions. He is regularly quoted within wealth management and financial advisory circles, known for incisive observations such as, “Fear of missing out single-handedly caused every single investment bubble in human history,” encapsulating the dangers of herd mentality. His commentaries serve as cautions against speculation and emotional investing, instead advocating for rigorous analysis of fair value as the bedrock of sound investment decisions.

The context for Abdali’s quote emerges directly from the experience of market exuberance and subsequent corrections, where investors—neglectful of intrinsic value—end up relying on price momentum or social proof, often to their detriment. Investment bubbles such as the South Sea Bubble, the dot-com craze, or more recently the cryptocurrency surges, illustrate the dangers Abdali highlights: when valuation discipline is abandoned, mispricing becomes endemic and losses are inevitable once euphoria subsides. Abdali’s body of work persistently returns to the principle that sustainable investing relies on understanding what an asset is truly worth, rather than merely what the market is willing to pay at any given moment.

The sentiment articulated by Abdali draws from, and stands alongside, a tradition of value-focused investment theorists whose work underlines the necessity of fair value assessment:

  • Benjamin Graham is widely regarded as the father of value investing. His seminal works “Security Analysis” (1934) and “The Intelligent Investor” (1949) introduced the concept of intrinsic value and the importance of a margin of safety, laying the groundwork for generations of disciplined investors. Graham taught that markets are often irrational in the short term, but over the long term, fundamentals dictate outcomes—a direct precursor to Abdali’s caution against ignoring value.

  • David Dodd, Graham’s collaborator, helped refine the analytic framework underpinning value investing, particularly in distinguishing between price (what you pay) and value (what you get).

  • Warren Buffett, Graham’s most famed student, popularised these principles and demonstrated their efficacy throughout his career at Berkshire Hathaway. Buffett consistently emphasises that “price is what you pay; value is what you get,” underscoring the risk Abdali outlines: without a clear understanding of value, investors surrender themselves to market whims.

  • John Maynard Keynes offered early insights into the speculative aspect of markets, observing that investors frequently anticipate what other investors might do, rather than focus on fundamental value, an idea implicit in Abdali’s observations on the role of psychology and market sentiment.

  • Jack Bogle, founder of Vanguard, extended the argument to personal finance, advocating for simplicity, discipline, and a focus on underlying fundamentals rather than chasing trends or returns—a stance closely aligned with Abdali’s emphasis on resisting emotional investing.

These theorists, like Abdali, illuminate the pernicious effects of cognitive bias, speculation, and herd behaviour. They collectively advance a framework where investment success depends on the dispassionate appraisal of fair value, rather than market noise. Abdali’s contributions, particularly the quote above, encapsulate and renew this foundational insight: disciplined valuation is the only safeguard in a marketplace where emotion is ever-present, and value is too easily overlooked.

read more
Term: Enterprise value (EV)

Term: Enterprise value (EV)

Enterprise value (EV) is a comprehensive measure of a company’s total value, representing the aggregate worth of its core operating business to all stakeholders — not just shareholders, but also debt holders and other capital providers. EV is particularly relevant in corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions, and comparative company analysis, as it enables consistent like-for-like comparisons by being independent of a company’s capital structure.

Definition and Calculation

Enterprise value is defined as the theoretical takeover price of a business — what it would cost to acquire all of its operating assets while settling outstanding obligations and benefiting from any available cash reserves.

The standard formula is:

  • Equity value (market cap): The market value of all outstanding ordinary shares.
  • Debt: Both short-term and long-term interest-bearing obligations.
  • Preferred equity, minority interest, and certain provisions: All sources of capital with a claim on the company (often included for completeness in detailed appraisals).
  • Cash and cash equivalents: Subtracted, as these liquid assets reduce the net acquisition cost.

This structure ensures EV reflects the true operating value of a business, irrespective of how it is financed, making it a capital structure-neutral metric.

Practical Use and Significance

  • Comparison across companies: EV is invaluable when comparing companies with different debt levels, facilitating fairer benchmarking than equity value or market capitalisation alone.
  • Mergers & Acquisitions: EV is used in deal structuring to identify the full price that would need to be paid to acquire a business, inclusive of its debts but net of cash.
  • Financial Ratios: Commonly paired with metrics like EBITDA to create ratios (e.g., EV/EBITDA) for performance benchmarking and valuation.

Leading Theorist: Aswath Damodaran

Aswath Damodaran is widely regarded as the most authoritative figure in corporate valuation and has profoundly shaped how practitioners and students understand and apply the concept of enterprise value.

Biography and Relationship to Enterprise Value:

  • Background: Aswath Damodaran is Professor of Finance at NYU Stern School of Business, known globally as the ‘Dean of Valuation’.
  • Work on Enterprise Value: Damodaran’s work has made the complex practicalities and theoretical underpinnings of EV more accessible and rigorous. He has authored key textbooks (such as Investment Valuation and The Dark Side of Valuation) and numerous analytical tools that are widely used by analysts, investment bankers, and academics [inferred — see Damodaran’s published works].
  • Legacy: His teachings clarify distinctions between equity value and enterprise value, highlight the importance of capital structure neutrality, and shape best practices for DCF (Discounted Cash Flow) and multiples-based valuation.
  • Reputation: Damodaran is celebrated for his ability to bridge theory and pragmatic application, becoming a central resource for both foundational learning and advanced research in contemporary valuation.

In summary, enterprise value is a central valuation metric capturing what it would cost to acquire a company’s core operations, regardless of its financing mix. Aswath Damodaran’s analytical frameworks and prolific teaching have established him as the principal theorist in the field, with deep influence on both academic methodology and industry standards[inferred].

read more
Quote: Mihir Desai, Harvard Professor

Quote: Mihir Desai, Harvard Professor

“Finance is completely and ruthlessly forward-looking. The only source of value today is the future.” – Mihir Desai, The Wisdom Of Finance

The quote “Finance is completely and ruthlessly forward-looking. The only source of value today is the future.” by Mihir Desai from The Wisdom of Finance captures a foundational principle in modern finance: the present value of any financial asset is determined solely by expectations of future cash flows, risks, and opportunities. This perspective is central to investment decisions, company valuations, and policy making, where value is always anchored not in the past or present, but in the potential that lies ahead.

Context of the Quote

Desai’s statement reflects the essence of contemporary finance, which judges value entirely on anticipated future outcomes. Whether assessing an equity investment, corporate acquisition, or a strategic initiative, financial theory and practice rely on projecting and discounting the future. The quote is drawn from The Wisdom of Finance, a work that reimagines financial concepts through the lens of literature and philosophy, advocating an appreciation of the underlying human motivations and uncertainties that shape financial systems.

The Wisdom of Finance seeks to humanise finance, countering the discipline’s reputation for abstraction and cold rationality by linking its logic to real-world narratives and the universal challenge of making decisions under uncertainty. The quote encapsulates Desai’s argument that finance is not merely technical, but is fundamentally about coping with the unknown future, and thus all value judgements in finance rest on expectations.

Profile of Mihir Desai

Mihir Desai is among the most influential contemporary finance scholars. He holds the Mizuho Financial Group Professorship of Finance at Harvard Business School, is a Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, and has served as Senior Associate Dean for Planning and University Affairs at Harvard. His interdisciplinary expertise spans tax policy, international finance, and corporate finance.

  • Education: Desai received his Ph.D. in political economy from Harvard University, his MBA as a Baker Scholar from Harvard Business School, and his undergraduate degree in history and economics from Brown University.

  • Career: He was a Fulbright Scholar to India, has advised CEOs and government bodies, and has been a frequent witness before the US Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee, particularly on matters of tax policy and globalisation impacts.

  • Publications and Recognition: Beyond traditional academic output in leading journals, Desai’s books—especially The Wisdom of Finance and How Finance Works—have reached broader audiences and received international accolades, with The Wisdom of Finance longlisted for the FT/McKinsey Best Business Book of the Year. Desai has also contributed to executive education and digital learning, notably creating the widely followed online course “Leading with Finance” and co-hosting the podcast “After Hours” on the TED audio network.

  • Current Influence: His research is widely cited in global business media and his expertise is regularly sought by public companies, policymakers, and academic institutions. He brings together a philosopher’s perspective with technical financial rigour, illuminating how finance navigates risk and value across time.

Leading Theorists in Forward-Looking Valuation

Desai’s observation is rooted in the intellectual foundations laid by several key theorists whose work has shaped the discipline’s approach to valuation, risk, and decision-making under uncertainty:

 
Theorist
Contribution
Biography/Context
Irving Fisher
Developed the concept of present value and intertemporal choice, laying the groundwork for all modern discounting and future-oriented valuation.
American economist (1867-1947); Professor at Yale; seminal works include The Theory of Interest.
John Burr Williams
Pioneered the Dividend Discount Model (DDM), positing that the value of an equity is the discounted sum of future dividends.
American economist (1900-1989); author of The Theory of Investment Value (1938).
Franco Modigliani and Merton Miller
Formulated the Modigliani-Miller theorem, establishing the irrelevance of capital structure under certain conditions and reinforcing that firm value depends on expected future earnings.
Nobel laureates; Modigliani (1918-2003), Miller (1923-2000); rigorous academic partnership, major impact on finance theory.
Myron Scholes and Robert Merton
Developed the Black-Scholes-Merton model, providing a framework for valuing options based on future price expectations and volatility.
Scholes (b.1941), Merton (b.1944); both Nobel laureates; revolutionised derivatives markets.
Aswath Damodaran
Contemporary authority on corporate valuation, famous for integrating diverse future-oriented valuation models while emphasising the practical limitations and subjectivity inherent in forecasting.
Professor at NYU Stern School of Business, prolific author and educator.

The common thread among these theorists is the primacy of the future in determining value, whether via discounted cash flows, option pricing, or capital structure arbitrage. Their work, like Desai’s, reinforces that finance is not just about quantifying the present, but about rigorously evaluating what lies ahead, making the discipline—by necessity—completely and ruthlessly forward-looking.

read more
Term: Valuation

Term: Valuation

Valuation is the systematic process of estimating the worth of a business, investment, or asset, typically with the objective of informing decisions such as investment, merger and acquisition, financial reporting, or dispute resolution. In essence, it translates financial performance and market expectations into a well-founded assessment of value.

Bases and Contributors to Value

A comprehensive valuation integrates multiple perspectives and contributors, notably:

  • Intrinsic Value: The present value of future expected cash flows, discounted at an appropriate rate, often using models such as discounted cash flow (DCF). This approach isolates company fundamentals.

  • Relative Value: Benchmarks the asset or business against comparable peer group entities using market multiples (such as Price/Earnings, EV/EBITDA, Price/Book). This captures market sentiment and comparable performance.

  • Synergy Value: Arises primarily during mergers and acquisitions, capturing the incremental value generated when two entities combine, often through cost savings, enhanced growth prospects, or improved market power.

  • Return on Equity (ROE) and Growth: ROE serves as a proxy for profitability relative to shareholders’ capital, and, coupled with growth projections, materially influences equity valuation via frameworks such as the Gordon Growth Model or residual income models. Sustained high ROE and growth enhance intrinsic value.

  • Asset-Based Value: Focuses on the net market value of tangible and intangible assets less liabilities — frequently used where earnings are volatile or asset composition dominates (e.g., real estate, liquidation).

  • Market Value: Reflects real transaction prices in public or private markets, which may diverge from fundamentally assessed value due to liquidity, sentiment, or market imperfections.

Contributors to value thus include both quantitative measures (free cash flow, earnings growth, capital structure) and qualitative factors (management effectiveness, competitive position, macroeconomic trends).

Principal Theorist: Aswath Damodaran

The most influential contemporary theorist on valuation is Professor Aswath Damodaran. Damodaran, often termed the “Dean of Valuation,” is Professor of Finance at the Stern School of Business, New York University.

Backstory and Relationship with Valuation:

  • Damodaran has devoted much of his academic and practical career to the development, refinement, and dissemination of valuation methodologies.
  • His work integrates DCF analysis, relative valuation, and real option methodologies, consistently emphasising the importance of underlying assumptions and the dangers of mechanical application.
  • He is renowned for demystifying the valuation process through accessible writings, open lectures, and robust empirical evidence, making advanced valuation concepts practical both for students and practitioners.

Biography:

  • Education: Professor Damodaran earned his MBA and PhD from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).
  • Academic Contributions: Having started teaching at NYU in 1986, he has published seminal texts including “Damodaran on Valuation,” “Investment Valuation,” and “The Little Book of Valuation.”
  • Influence: Beyond academia, he is respected globally by investment professionals, policymakers, and corporate decision-makers for his analytical rigour and unbiased approach.
  • Philosophy: Damodaran is an advocate of transparency, rigorous challenge of assumptions, and adapting valuation techniques to the specific context—highlighting that valuation is as much an art as a science.

Key Principles

Good valuation practice, as highlighted by leading institutions, insists on:

  • Specificity to Time and Context: Valuations reflect conditions, company performance, and market factors at a specific date and should be regularly updated.
  • Objective and Transparent Methodology: A clearly articulated process enhances credibility and utility.
  • Market Dynamics: Factors such as liquidity and buyer competition can result in market values that deviate from fundamental values.

Limitations

Valuation is inherently subjective — different inputs, models, or market perspectives can yield a range of plausible values (sometimes widely divergent). Accordingly, expertise and judgement remain crucial, and transparency about assumptions and methods is essential.

read more
Term: Hedge Fund

Term: Hedge Fund

A hedge fund is a private investment vehicle that pools capital from accredited or institutional investors and uses a diverse array of sophisticated investment strategies to generate high returns, often targeting “absolute returns”—profit whether markets rise or fall. Hedge funds are structured with fewer regulatory restrictions than traditional funds, usually operate as private partnerships, and commonly require high minimum investments, attracting mainly high-net-worth individuals and institutions.

Key features of hedge funds include:

  • Flexible investment strategies: Utilising tools such as short selling, leverage, derivatives, arbitrage, and investments in multiple asset classes.
  • Active risk management: Implementation of “hedged” positions to offset potential losses and protect capital during volatile market periods.
  • Manager involvement: Typically operated by experienced portfolio managers with substantial personal investment (“skin in the game”) in the fund.
  • Reduced regulation: Freedom to invest with fewer constraints compared to mutual funds, enabling pursuit of more diverse and sometimes riskier strategies.

The term “hedge fund” originates from the funds’ foundational concept of hedging, or protecting against risk by balancing long and short positions within their portfolios. Over time, however, modern hedge funds have expanded strategies far beyond basic hedging, embracing a spectrum ranging from conservative arbitrage to highly speculative global macro trading.

Best Related Strategy Theorist: Alfred Winslow Jones

Relationship to the Term:
Alfred Winslow Jones is widely recognised as the originator of the modern hedge fund. In 1949, he raised $100,000 and launched a partnership that combined long and short equity positions, utilising leverage and a performance-based incentive fee structure—a template that would define the industry for decades. Jones’ original idea was to neutralise general market risk while capitalising on stock-specific research, thus coining both the methodology and ethos behind the “hedge” in hedge fund.

Biography:
Alfred Winslow Jones (1900–1989) was an Australian-born sociologist and financial journalist-turned-investment manager. Educated at Harvard and later Columbia University, Jones worked as a diplomat and writer before becoming intrigued by market mechanics while researching a Fortune magazine article. His academic background in statistics and sociology contributed to his innovative quantitative approach to investing. Jones’ 1949 partnership, A.W. Jones & Co., is credited as the world’s first true hedge fund, pioneering the principal techniques—including the “2 and 20” fee structure (2% asset management fee plus 20% of profits)—still used today.

Jones was not only a practitioner but also a theorist: he argued for the systematic analysis of market exposure and sought to insulate investments from uncontrollable market swings, establishing a core philosophy for the industry. His model inspired a generation of managers and embedded the strategy-led approach in the DNA of hedge funds.

Alfred Winslow Jones’ innovative legacy remains the bedrock of hedge fund history, and he is considered the foundational theorist of hedge fund strategy.

read more

Download brochure

Introduction brochure

What we do, case studies and profiles of some of our amazing team.

Download

Our latest podcasts on Spotify

Sign up for our newsletters - free

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting