Project this lesson
← Back to Academy

EV/EBITDA: The Multiple Professionals Reach for First

Valuation • Beginner Investing • 8 min

You already know Enterprise Value adjusts a company's price tag for its debt and cash — EV = Market Cap + Debt − Cash. EV/EBITDA pairs that adjusted price tag with an earnings number built the same way: EBITDA, or Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization, strips a company's operating profit back to what it earned before financing decisions, tax situation, and non-cash accounting charges enter the picture. Put those two together and you get the single multiple professionals reach for first when comparing companies that don't share an identical capital structure — which, in practice, is almost always.

Here's the exact mechanism: interest expense sits between EBITDA and net income on the income statement, meaning it drags down net income (and therefore P/E) for a heavily indebted company without touching EBITDA at all. Picture two companies running an identical operating business, both generating $200 million of EBITDA. Company A has no debt. Company B carries $500 million of debt at 6% interest, costing it $30 million a year. That $30 million comes straight out of Company B's net income, making its P/E look worse than Company A's — even though the two operating businesses are performing identically. EV/EBITDA doesn't have this problem: EBITDA is the same $200 million for both, and EV — which already includes each company's debt — does the adjusting instead, on the price side rather than the earnings side.

Insider Angle: EBITDA also neutralizes differences in depreciation and amortization schedules, which can vary a lot between companies purely due to accounting choices about useful asset life — useful when comparing capital-intensive businesses like telecom or industrial companies, or when comparing across countries with different depreciation and tax conventions. But EBITDA has a real, famous blind spot: it excludes capital expenditures entirely, treating a business that needs to constantly reinvest in equipment just to stay in place the same as one that needs almost no reinvestment at all. Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett's longtime business partner, was famously and repeatedly dismissive of EBITDA for exactly this reason — arguing that ignoring real, necessary capital spending makes reported earnings look better than the business's actual cash reality.
Try This: Find a company with meaningful long-term debt and calculate both its P/E and its EV/EBITDA. Then find a much less indebted direct competitor and calculate the same two ratios for it. Does the debt-heavy company's P/E look worse relative to its competitor than its EV/EBITDA does?

Master this lesson

0
/ 100

Correct moves you up, wrong moves you down — reach 100 to master this lesson.

Log in to save your progress and earn XP.

Related lessons

The Price-to-Sales Ratio: Valuing Companies With No Profits (Yet)
When a company has no earnings, P/E can't be calculated at all — price-to-sales steps in, using the one number almost every company actually has: revenue.
7 min • Intermediate
Price-to-Book Ratio: Essential for Banks, Nearly Useless for Software
The same ratio that's a core tool for valuing a bank tells you almost nothing useful about a company whose real assets never show up on its balance sheet.
7 min • Intermediate
Sum-of-the-Parts Valuation: Pricing a Conglomerate Piece by Piece
A company that runs several unrelated businesses under one roof usually shouldn't get one blended multiple — value each piece on its own terms, then add them up.
8 min • Intermediate