Overview of Economic Value Added (EVA) and Market Value Added (MVA)

Overview of Economic Value Added (EVA) and Market Value Added (MVA)

In finance, two measures often used to evaluate firm performance are Economic Value Added (EVA) and Market Value Added (MVA). These metrics help investors and business leaders understand the economic value created by firms over time. However, there are some key differences between these concepts.

Economic Value Added (EVA)

Economic Value Added is a measure of financial performance calculated as net operating profit after tax (NOPAT) minus a charge for capital employed. This formula requires data from the company's income statement and balance sheet. In essence, it calculates how much money a firm makes beyond its cost of capital. Companies with high EVA are generally considered better investments.

Market Value Added (MVA)

Market Value Added, on the other hand, is the difference between market capitalization and invested capital. It reflects the change in shareholder wealth during the year and attempts to quantify the incremental increase in market capitalization due to the operations of the firm. Unlike EVA, which uses accounting numbers, MVA relies on market prices of a firm's securities. For example, if a company has $1 million in invested capital and its stock price rises by $10 million, its MVA would be $9 million ($10 million - $1 million = $9 million).

Differences Between EVA and MVA

While both EVA and MVA aim to measure the economic value generated by companies, they do so using different approaches and based on different information sources. EVA uses accounting data to calculate the excess earnings a company generates over its weighted average cost of capital (WACC), whereas MVA uses current market values instead of historical costs. Additionally, since EVA takes into account various metrics such as NOPAT, the WACC, and capital charged, it can provide more specific insights into a company's true performance.

Common Size Analysis

Common size analysis involves expressing all items in the financial statements as a percentage of total assets, liabilities or equity. By standardizing the figures in this manner, investors can obtain a clearer understanding of each component's relative importance within the overall financial structure of the firm.

For instance, if one company had $10 million in sales, $5 million in expenses, and $5 million in profits, while another company had $100 million in sales, $50 million in expenses, and $50 million in profits, it might seem like the first company was far more profitable. But when these figures are expressed as percentages, you see that both companies have the exact same return on investment.

The common size analysis thus helps in comparing firms of varying sizes and magnitudes, providing a more accurate assessment of their financial health and profitability.

In summary, both EVA and MVA attempt to quantify the value a company creates or destroys, albeit through different methods and data points. Understanding these concepts can aid in making informed decisions about investments and corporate strategy.