1、 外文翻译 原文 Economic Value Added Material Source:Financial Strategies for the Manager Author:Jincheng wang,Charles Priester The use of EVA as a yardstick of a companys financial performance has been steadily increasing in recent years.It is probably true that currently (in 2007) the majority of financi
2、al analysts still focus mainly on the widely known DuPont ratios.That is,“the ability of assets to generate sales“ (Trev/Assets) and “the ability of those sales to generate profits“ (NIAT/Trev) and “the degree that assets are financed with investors funds“ (Assets/Equity); and by combining those thr
3、ee ratios calculating “the returns that those investors funds generate“ i.e. (NIAT/equity) or roe (i.e. Return of Equity). But, the use of EVA as a financial performance indicator is growing steadily.to put it in simple words, EVA measures a companys ability to obtain economic benefits that exceed t
4、he “rent“ that such a company pays for the use of the owners and lenders resources employed. EVA, therefore, is a powerful measure of managerial performance. To understand the meaning of EVA it is useful to look at the Balance Sheet of a company in a new light. From this NOPAT the company has to pay
5、 a Weighted Average Rent for the use of those two sources of funds (Liabilities and Equity). Let us call this weighted average rent percentage, the weighted average cost of capital or WACC%. Multiplying WACC% by the total amount of assets employed gives us the “dollar value of WACC“ or WACC$. To cal
6、culate EVA, we simply subtract from the NOPAT generated by the companys Assets, the WACC$ (i.e.the dollar value of the weighted Average Cost of Capital) which the company owes lenders and investors for the use of their money. To state it symbolically: EVA = NOPAT WACC$ Which can be written as: EVA =
7、 (EBIY TAX) (WACC% ASSETS) From this equation we can immediately see that EVA levels are powerfully influenced by a companys ability to earn operating profits (EBIT), its taxation, its cost of funds, and the amount of Assets that the company employs. It should be obvious that the better a company is
8、 at maximizing its NOPAT and at minimizing its WACC$, the higher the companys EVA level will be and the more a company “justifies its economic existence“ so to speak.Of course, one could also say that when a companys NOPAT is less than its WACC$, the profits that the companys assets generate fail to
9、 reach the dollar rent that company pays for the use of those assets, with the result that the company causes economic value to disappear. Such a company fails to justify its economic existence during the time that this situation prevails. Of course, a companys EVA level tends to fluctuate from year
10、 to year. It is quite possible that unfavourable circumstances can produce low or even negative EVA value. But, sustained negative and/or low EVA value clearly signal the need for a re examination of the companys direction, policies, operations, and goals. The goal of management should be to raise a
11、nd/or sustain high levels of EVA in a corporation over the long run. Traditionally, in our attempt to maximize EVA, most attention has been paid to the left side of the Balance Sheet; i.e. Maximizing Asset Productivity and Asset Profitability with the goal of raising NOPAT = (EBIT TAX). But, the rig
12、ht side of the Balance Sheet should not be ignored. Remember that the dollar value of a companys cost of capital WACC$ is the product of the WACC% multiplied by the dollar value of the Asset Employed. It is important to note that, the WACC% is strongly influenced by a companys “Debt to Equity“ mix.
13、To put it symbolically: WACC% = (After Tax Cost of Debt (Debt/Assets) + (After Tax Cost of Equity (Equity/Assets) As you can see, those (Debt/Assets) and (Equity/Assets) Rations play an important role. As stated earlier, the interest that a company pays on its corporate debit is a tax deductible exp
14、ense. This makes the After Tax Cost of Debt percentage significantly less than a companys before tax borrowing rate. In fact, a companys After Tax Cost of Debt% equals the (Before Tax Borrowing Rate%) (1 tax rate). For example, a company that borrows money from a bank at 8% and pays a 40% Corporate
15、Tax Rate has an After Tax Cost of Debt of 8% (1 40%) = 4.8%.However, when it comes to calculating a companys Cost of Equity, this favourable tax treatment does Not apply. The dividends that investors receive for providing the company with Equity funds and which form part of the Cost of Equity, are n
16、ot a tax deductible expense to the company paying those dividends. Hence, in calculating the Cost of Equity% we do Not multiply a percentage by the term (1 tax rate). In addition, given that the risk associated with providing Equity Capital is higher than that associated with providing Debt Capital,
17、 there is a second reason why a companys Cost of Equity% is significantly higher than its Cost of Debt%. In this book we shall use as a rough approximation the following relationship: it is assumed that the Cost of Equity% equals the Before Tax Borrowing Rate plus 10%. This rough approximation does
18、not apply to large, publicly traded corporations.But, since this books focus is on smaller companies the (before tax borrowing rate + 10%) as a rough estimate for the cost of common share capital is surprisingly realistic. These small firms face considerable discrimination in financial markets as th
19、ey seek to raise capital and this rough approximation works surprisingly well. For example, a company whose average before tax borrowing rate is 8% is assumed to have a Cost of Equity of 8% + 10% = 18%. More accurate methods of estimating cost of Equity exists. To demonstrate the powerful effect tha
20、t a companys “Debt to Equity“ mix has on its WACC%, let us use the following examples. Assume the following: Example 1.A companys average before tax borrowing rate is = 8%, Its Corporate Tax Rate = 40%, Therefore its Approx. Cost of Equity Capital = 8% +10% = 18%. Suppose this companys Debt to Equit
21、y mix is $4 million to $6 million. First, we calculate the Cost of Debt Capital = 8% (1 40%) = 4.8%. Now, we calculate the weighted average cost of capital percentage. WACC% = 4.8% Debt/Assets ($4/$10) + 18% EQ./Assets ($6/$10) 12.72% = 1.92% + 10.8% Example 2.Let us now assume that the companys Deb
22、t to Equity mix is $6 M to $4 M This WACC% = (4.8% $6 M/$10 M) + (18% $4 M/$10 M) 10.08% = 2.88% + 7.2% We can label debt as relatively cheap money and equity as expensive money.We see in examples #1 and #2 that the company can lower its WACC% quite significantly (i.e. nearly 21% = (10.8/12.72) 1 by
23、 using more cheaper debt financing and less expensive equity financing to finance its assets. Of course, we should immediately note that in these two examples we assumed that the companys Borrowing Rate of 8% did not change when the companys reliance on debt financing increased. This is not necessar
24、ily true. Corporate Lenders, once a companys reliance on debt financing reaches the end of their comfort level, will often dramatically raise the Average Borrowing Rate of such a company. But, it is equally true that until the end of the lenders comfort level has been reached, a company can often si
25、gnificantly raise its reliance on debt financing without having to pay higher borrowing rates, nor higher Costs of Equity. In such circumstances, using more debt can significantly lower a companys WACC% and thereby lower its WACC$ and thus raise its EVA, assuming that this causes no significant nega
26、tive impacts on NOPAT levels aside from higher interest expenses. Aside from the strategy of lowering WACC$ by manipulating the companys Debt/Equity Mix which we just covered, there are three other approaches to raise EVA. They are: Get your existing assets to work harder A company can try to raise
27、its Asset Productivity and thereby, hopefully, the Asset Profitability of the companys existing stock of Assets. We define Asset Productivity as (Trev/Assets) i.e., the volume factor in the DuPont model and Asset Profitability as (Ebit/Assets) i.e. Asset yield. Buy new, harder-working assets A compa
28、ny can acquire additional Assets whose Productivity and Profitability promises to be higher than that produced by the companys existing stock of Assets, or Get rid of lazy assets A company can dispose of certain Assets those Productivity and profitability is significantly below the prevailing levels
29、 attained by the companys other assets. Of course, in the real world of practical financial management we do not neatly compartmentalize the four approaches. Most decision that aim to improve a companys financial performance are a combination of two or more of the four approaches. The three importan
30、t measures of performance that play a role in our search for superior EVA figures are: Asset Productivity (Trev/Assets): It measures the Assets ability to generate sales and/or revenues. (Previously referred to as asset turnover or the volume factor.) Asset profitability or Asset Yield (Ebit/Assets)
31、: It measures the Assets ability to generate profits, before interest and taxation charges. Operating Efficiency (OP.EXP./TREV): It measures the portion of each sales and Revenue dollar that is absorbed by the companys expenses (except for Interest and Taxation changes which are removed later). Reme
32、mber that the lower (OP.EXP./TREV), the better the operating efficiency of a company is. While these three measures inter-relate, they do not necessarily improve simultaneously. For example: It is quite possible for a company to aggressively “push its sales“thereby raising its (Trev/Assets) while th
33、is causes negative consequences on the cost front and thus see its (Ebit/Assets) and/or (OP.EXP./TREV) weaken. Ideally, one would like all three performance measures to improve as a result of a newly adopted course of action by the management. Failing that, where there is a trade-off between two or
34、more of the performance measures, one should at least aim for a positive trade-off. In such a trade-off the relative improvement in one measure outweighs the negative change in the other measure(s). 译文 经济附加值 资料来源：财务管理策略 作者：王锦程，普莱斯特 在最几年中，作为一项公司财务业绩的指标， EVA 的运用已经是稳步提高。目前（ 2007 年）大多数金融分析师的焦点还主要集中在广泛认知
35、的杜邦比率上。资产产生销售的能力（收入 /资产），销售额产生利润的能力（税后净收益 /收入），资产来自于投资者资金的程度（资产 /所有者权益）以及通过这三个比率计算投资者资金回报产生的效益（税后净收益 /所有者权益）或 净资产收益率 。 然而， EVA 作为一个财务绩效指标的运用正在稳步增长。 简单地说， EVA衡量一个企业的能力是所获得的经济效益超出公司支付的利用所有者和债权人资源的费用。所以 EVA 是一个有力的业绩管理措施。 从一个新的视角看资产负债表对于明白 EVA 的含义是有用的。 从税后净利润（ NOPAT）看，这家公司因使用两种资金（负债和所有者权益）支付了加权平均租赁费。我们称
36、之为加权平均租金，加权平均资本成本或WACC%。将 WVCC%乘以资产总额得到“ WACC 的价值”或 WACC$。 对于计算 EVA，我们简单地用公司资产产生的 NOPAT减去 WACC$。即：EVA = NOPAT WACC$，也可以写成 EVA =（ EBIY TAX） （ WACC% ASSETS）。从上述方程我们可以看到一个公司的营业利润，税费，资金成本和资产数额对 EVA 水平有极大影响。 很明显的，一家公司在 NOPAT最大化和 WACC$最小化方面做的越好，它的 EVA 水平会越高，也更能证明它的经济存在。当一家公司的 NOPAT 低于WACC$时，这家公司产生的利润低于使用资
37、产的租金，因此该公司引进经济价值消失。当上述情形存在时这样的公司是无法证明其经济存在的。 一家公司的 EVA 水平年年都在变化波动。不利情况下很有可能会产生低的甚至是负面的 EVA 价值。但是，持续的负面或低的 EVA 价值清楚地标志着这家公司的方案、政策、运营和目标都有复审的必要。在一家企业的长期发展中，管理人员的目标应是提高或保持高 EVA 水平。 从传统上来说，对于我们努力实现 EVA 最大化，大多数人已经注意到资产负债表的左边，即以提高 EVA 为目的的资产生产力和资产收益最大化。但是，资产负债表的右边不应被忽视。记住一家公司的资金成本的价值是加权平均资本成本乘以资本价值的产物。值得注
38、意的是，一家公司的债务和权益对加权平均资本成本有很大影响。用符号表示如下： WACC% =（ After Tax Cost of Debt （ Debt/Assets） +（ After Tax Cost of Equity （ Equity/Assets） 。正如你所看到的，那些（负债 /资产）和（股本 /资产）比例发挥了重要作用。 如前所述 ,公司因借款而支付的利息是一项可免税费用。这使得税后负债成本比例显著低于税前借款利率。实际上，公司的税后债务成本百分比等于税前借款利率百分比乘以（ 1 税率）。 例如，一家以 8%的利率贷款，并支付 40%的公司税率的公司的税后债务成本百分比是 4.8
39、%。但是，当涉及到 计算股权成本，这种税收优惠待遇是不适用的。投资者因提供作为股权成本的股票资金而收到的红利不是一项可免税费用。因此，在计算股本成本时我们不以（ 1 税率）乘以百分比。 此外，考虑到提供股权资本的风险要高于提供债权成本，一个公司的股权成本为什么会显著高于债权成本有着第二个原因。在这本书中，我们粗略地估计如下关系：假定股权成本百分比等于税前借款利率加上 10%。 这种粗糙的近似并不适用于大型上市公司。但是，由于本书的重点是小规模公司， （税前借贷利率 +10%）作为普通股资本成本的粗略估计是惊人现实的。这些小企业在金融市场里面临着相当大的歧视因为他们需要筹集资金，这项粗略的近似出
40、奇的好。例如，一家税前平均借贷利率是 8%的公司会被认为它的股本成本是 18%。存在着更多精确计算股本成本的方法。 为了证明一家公司的“债转股”对 WACC%有强大的影响，让我们举几个例子。假设如下： 例子 1：公司的税前平均贷款利率 =8，其企业税率 = 40， 因此，股权资本成本 = 8 + 10 = 18。 假设该公司的债务转移为 400 万至 600 万美元。 首先，我们计算了债务资本成本 = 8（ 1 40） = 4.8。 现在，我们计算加权平均资本成本百分比。 WACC = 4.8%债务 /资产 (约合 4 / 10美元 )+18%等值 /资产(约合 6 / 10 美元 )， 12
41、.72 = 1.92 + 10.8。 例子 2：现在让我们假设公司的债务股本组合为 6 美元至 4 美元。 WACC =（ 4.8 $ 6M/ $ 10M） +（ 18 $ 4M / $ 10M），10.08 = 2.88 + 7.2 我们可以标记负债是相对便宜的钱而股权是昂贵的钱。在例子 1 和例子 2中我们可以看到公司通过使用更便宜的债务融资和低成本的股权融资成本来筹集资金以达到显著降低 WACC%的目的。 当然，我们应该立即注意到我们假设这两个例子中当公司依赖于债务融资时公司的借贷利率是 8%。这不一定是真的。企业债权人，一旦公司对债务融资的依赖达到他们舒适度的极限时，通常会大大提高这种
42、公司的平均借贷利率。人，一旦公司的债务融资的依赖达到自己的舒适级别后，往往会大大提高平均借贷利率这样的公司。但是，直至贷款人 的舒适度已经达到，它同样是正确的，一个公司往往可以显著的提高对债务融资的依赖而无需支付较高的贷款利率，也无需较高成本的股票。在这种情况下，使用更多的负债可以有效地降低公司的 WACC%，从而降低 WACC$和提高 EVA，假设这不会对税后净利润水平产生显著负面影响除了高利息费用。 除了通过操纵公司债务 /股本组合来降低 WACC$的策略，有另外三个提升EVA 的方法。如下： 让你现有的资产更努力工作 一家公司可以试图提高生产力从而希望提升该公司现存资产的盈利能力。我们定
43、义生产力为（收入 /资产）即杜邦模型的盈利系数，定义 资产盈利能力为（息税前利润 /资产）为资产收益率。 购买新的营运资产 当生产力和盈利能力都高于公司现存资产时，该公司可以获得额外价值。 丢弃老化的资产 当一些资产的生产力和盈利能力显著低于公司其他资产所达到的普通水平，该公司可以处理到这些资产了。 当然，现实世界里的实际财务管理我们不需要整齐地划分为四个步骤。大多数改善一家公司财务状况的决定是两个或两个以上方法的结合体。 这三项对我们搜寻高 EVA 起重要作用的措施如下： 资产生产率（收入 /资产）：它衡量资产产生销售或收入的能力。（以前被称为资产周转率或体积系数） 资产盈利能力或资产收益率
44、（息税前利润 /资产）：它衡量资产在扣除利息和税费前产生利润的能力。 运营效率（费用 /收入）：它测量被吸收为公司费用的那部分销售和收入（除了被删除后的利息和税费变化）。记住（费用 /收入）越低，公司的运营效率就越好。 虽然这三项措施相互联系，但他们不一定同时提升。 例如：这很可能使公司积极地“推销”从而提高它的（收入 /资产），而这将导致对成本的消极影响从而使（息税前利润 /资产）和（费用 /收入）削减。 理想的情况下，人们会想要所有的措施来改进一项新采取的方案。如果做不到这一点，两个或两个 以上业绩评估方法之间会有一个权衡，至少要以一个积极的权衡为目标。在这样一个权衡里一项相对改进的措施要比其他措施的消极变化重要。
