What is interest, if not an expense? What is tax, if not an expense? What is depreciation if not an expense? Alright, amortization, yeah, that one could get added back in – I buy that.
Whenever someone starts talking about EBITDA, check your wallet.
> What is interest, if not an expense? What is tax, if not an expense? What is depreciation if not an expense? Alright, amortization, yeah, that one could get added back in – I buy that.
2) There is a specific reason these get taken out, because they generally represent values that the company either has little control over (taxes) or represent episodic expenditures (capital purchases, or debt raises) that have meaningful life greater than 1 year. D/A are essentially synonymous. So, no, D/A are not expenses, because they are simply representations of capital expenditures shown as expenses (the distinction is important) throughout the useful life the asset (intangible or tangible).
Easy way to illustrate this is an airline who buys an airplane in year 1 and then uses that plane for 30 years. If EBITDA wasn't useful, then calculating their earnings over a period time won't tell you anything about trends of the business health.
The devil is in the details. EBITDA is not all that bad, it's just not a "one figure to rule them all", especially since most firms create an "Adjusted" version of it to fit some narrative (and they always do).
To your point. The cashflow statement is much more important IMHO.
Then, people just sort of adopted EBITDA as shorthand for “FCF from operations” and then companies like Allbirds took advantage of that to do whatever they want with it.
Very true.
> then companies like Allbirds took advantage of that to do whatever they want with it.
Here's an insider secret - everyone manipulates Adj. EBITDA (not just "Allbirds like companies"). It's part of the game of business sellers, which is why buy-side auditing is so important to get right. This is more or less why public security analysts exist - to keep pressure on proper reporting from the company. If WeWork actually went public every analyst worth a salt would basically throw out their "Community Adjusted EBITDA" and the term would be rendered meaningless.
Interest could be irrationally expensive for a business, taxes could be higher than they should be if the entity is not setup correctly, Amortization represents assets which could be sold off.
These are all things that PE firms can fix/work on to one extent or another with financial engineering. They can't really grow cash flow.
And you're also right in that it's useful for comparing with similar companies. It's greatest value is in the variety of ratios that it slots into.
If 2 similar companies have very different EBITDA/Revenue ratios, e.g., that would indicate that the company with the lower EBITDA/rev ratio is probably less efficiently run.
What.
You 100% can make investing decisions in isolation. I don't think this is what you meant you say, because this makes absolutely no sense at all. If someone comes to me and says "if you give me a dollar today, I'll give you $10 tomorrow" I really don't need to consider anything else. Sure, someone else might say "I'll give you $11 instead", but if the deal is there and I can analyze that the risk of default is minimal, then I can absolutely make that decision in isolation.
And even so, how would you construct a life such that you were naive to all investment opportunities until this single one arises? It doesn't make sense.
Clearly.
I said: - EBITDA is used for both comparison and YoY trends
You replied: - YoY trends don't matter in isolation
All of my clients (PEGs) used EBITDA both as a tool to normalize YoY trends and to do like for like comparisons of comparable assets. Ultimately this is to evaluate whether they want to make an investment or not.
Since you cared to provide some contradictory clarification to my comment, I can only assume you were disagreeing that EBITDA can only be used for comparative measures, which is 100% not true as per practice. Hence my example was that in theory you could make an investment decision in isolation (as naive as that might be).
All I was saying is that you have to have context and something to compare the YoY to and you can't simply look at a YoY growth rate. It's literally meaningless to do so without comparables. It's like saying the velocity of something is 50, ok who cares unless you can tell me how it relates to some other thing. If a company grows 100% YoY I don't care without information relating it to other investment options. 100% could very well be really bad unless I know what is normal, below average, above average, etc.
So idk what's really going on here anymore. I think something has become confused that's causing this conversation to go in useless circles.
These metrics companies like to put out there, not surprisingly, tend to be something along the lines of “look at all the profit we’re making if you for a moment ignore all the reasons why our business model is not profitable.”