FinanceFramework / modelModelAccessible

Capital budgeting

When and how should capital budgeting be applied?

AccessibleStrategicProgram / project3 min read

Contents

To select the best long-term investments, firms rely on a process called ‘capital budgeting’.

Capital budgeting is the disciplined process of identifying, forecasting and evaluating long-term investments. Major projects commit substantial cash under uncertainty, so the analysis converts expected costs, benefits and timing into comparable decision measures. Payback period, net present value and internal rate of return each illuminate a different aspect of the choice.

When to use it

To decide whether a proposed long-term investment is expected to create value.

To compare competing projects when capital, management attention or operating capacity is limited.

To make the assumptions, risks and timing behind an investment case explicit.

Origins

The underlying comparison between resources committed now and benefits received later is ancient. Historian Fritz Heichelheim traced investment-like arrangements in food production to about 5,000 BC: seed, fruit or animals could be advanced for a fixed period and repaid from the later harvest or offspring. Bronze-Age Mesopotamian records include interest of one shekel a month for each mina owed—1/60th per month, or 20 per cent a year.

Formal present-value analysis developed much later through work on interest and investment, including Irving Fisher’s early twentieth-century treatment of intertemporal value. Modern corporate-finance practice then organised discounted cash flow, net present value and internal rate of return into the capital-budgeting toolkit. The methods are more sophisticated than ancient lending, but they retain the same time-value principle: cash available sooner is worth more than the same nominal amount received later.

What it is

Capital projects include purchasing or refurbishing equipment, building a factory and acquiring property for new locations. These expenditures create benefits over several periods, unlike day-to-day operating expenses consumed in the current period.

Capital budgeting estimates the incremental cash outflows and inflows caused by a project and evaluates their timing and risk. Three common measures are:

Payback period: the time required for cumulative cash inflows to recover the initial investment.

Net present value (NPV): the present value of all incremental cash inflows less the present value of all incremental cash outflows.

Internal rate of return (IRR): the discount rate at which the project’s NPV equals zero.

All three consider recovery or return, but they do not answer the same question. Finance theory generally prefers NPV because it measures expected value added in currency terms and incorporates the time value of all forecast cash flows. Payback and IRR remain popular because their outputs are intuitive.

How to use it

Begin with incremental, after-tax cash flows: the initial investment, changes in working capital, operating benefits and costs, terminal proceeds and any opportunity costs. Exclude sunk costs, use a discount rate appropriate to the project’s risk and model uncertainty explicitly.

Consider a manager choosing between refurbishing factory machines for $100,000 and buying new equipment for $200,000. The new machines cost more but are forecast to generate larger cash inflows. The three decision rules reveal different features of that trade-off.

Payback period

The five-year cash-flow comparison is shown below:

Under the payback rule, refurbishment is preferred because its initial cost is recovered in two years, compared with three years for new equipment. The method is quick and highlights liquidity and early exposure. However, it ignores cash flows after the cut-off and, unless discounted payback is used, treats cash received at different dates as equivalent.

Net present value (NPV)

Assume a 10 per cent discount rate. Apply the corresponding factor to each period’s cash flow so every amount is expressed in present-value terms:

The discount factors are 1.000, 0.909, 0.826, 0.751, 0.683 and 0.621 for years zero through five. The resulting NPVs are $29,186 for refurbishment and $53,785 for new equipment. Because the new machines add more present value, NPV reverses the payback decision and selects them. The difference demonstrates what simple payback omits: later cash flows and the required return on capital.

Internal rate of return (IRR)

IRR finds the discount rate that reduces a project’s NPV to zero. It produces a single percentage that can be compared with a required return. In the original cash-flow pattern, refurbishment has an IRR of 24% per cent and new equipment 19% per cent, so IRR selects refurbishment while NPV selects the new machines.

The conflict arises from project scale and the timing of cash flows. Refurbishment generates its largest inflows in years one and two; much of the new-equipment benefit arrives in year three or later. For mutually exclusive projects, a higher percentage return on a smaller investment need not create more total value.

If the sequence is reversed—year one with year five and year two with year four, without changing total cash—the refurbishment IRR becomes 14% per cent and the new-equipment IRR 22% per cent. IRR now favours buying new. At the same 10 per cent discount rate, NPV still selects new equipment, with present values of $13,356 and $61,009 respectively.

Top practical tip

Use NPV as the primary value criterion, then report payback for liquidity and IRR for an intuitive percentage perspective. Where the rankings conflict, examine project scale, timing, discount-rate assumptions and incremental cash flows rather than averaging the answers.

Top pitfall

Do not assume that a high IRR can be earned repeatedly. Interpreting the first result as compound wealth growth would require interim cash flows to be reinvested at 24 per cent, which may be unrealistic; cash may instead repay debt, cover expenses or fund projects with different returns. NPV values cash flows at the firm’s opportunity cost of capital and is usually the safer ranking rule.