Security Analysis and Valuation — Practice

Question 1

Explain the fundamentally different belief about security prices that separates fundamental analysis from technical analysis, and state which specific form of the efficient market hypothesis each approach's premise is in tension with.

Accepted Answer

Fundamental analysis rests on the belief that a security has an intrinsic value determined by underlying economic, industry and company-specific factors, and that market price will converge toward this intrinsic value over time, making the analytical task one of correctly estimating that intrinsic value and identifying temporary mispricing; its premise is in tension with semi-strong form market efficiency, which holds that prices already reflect all publicly available information, implying that analysis based on public financial and economic information cannot reliably generate abnormal returns. Technical analysis rests on the different belief that price and volume data itself, reflecting the aggregate of market participants' actions, contains sufficient information to forecast future price movements through identifiable trends and repeating patterns, without needing to separately estimate intrinsic value from economic fundamentals at all; its premise is in tension with weak form market efficiency specifically, which holds that prices already reflect all past price and volume information, implying that patterns in historical price data carry no genuine predictive power, since any such pattern would already be fully reflected in the current price.

Question 2

A researcher finds that a trading strategy based purely on historical price patterns has consistently generated abnormal returns over several decades of data. Explain what this finding would imply about market efficiency, and which specific form of the EMH it would call into question.

Accepted Answer

If a trading strategy based purely on historical price patterns, with no reference to fundamental company or economic information at all, has consistently generated abnormal returns, this directly contradicts weak form market efficiency, which specifically holds that prices already reflect all past price and volume information, implying that no strategy based solely on such historical data should be able to generate returns in excess of what a passive, randomly selected portfolio of similar risk would achieve. A persistent, genuine ability to profit from historical price patterns alone would suggest that weak form efficiency does not fully hold in this market, at least with respect to the specific pattern this strategy exploits, though this finding would not necessarily say anything definitive about semi-strong or strong form efficiency, which concern the market's incorporation of public and private information respectively, separate questions from whether historical price data alone contains exploitable predictive information.

Question 3

A company's current dividend is ₹5 per share, expected to grow at 20% per year for the next 3 years, then settle into a stable long-run growth rate of 6% thereafter. The required return on equity is 14%. Compute the intrinsic value per share using the two-stage dividend discount model. (Present value factors at 14%: Year 1 = 0.877, Year 2 = 0.769, Year 3 = 0.675.)

Accepted Answer

High-growth phase dividends: Year 1 = ₹5 × 1.20 = ₹6.00; Year 2 = ₹6.00 × 1.20 = ₹7.20; Year 3 = ₹7.20 × 1.20 = ₹8.64. Present values: Year 1 = ₹6.00 × 0.877 = ₹5.26; Year 2 = ₹7.20 × 0.769 = ₹5.54; Year 3 = ₹8.64 × 0.675 = ₹5.83. Sum of explicit phase present values = ₹5.26 + ₹5.54 + ₹5.83 = ₹16.63. Terminal value at end of Year 3 = Dividend in Year 4 ÷ (Ke − g) = [₹8.64 × 1.06] ÷ (0.14 − 0.06) = ₹9.16 ÷ 0.08 = ₹114.50. Present value of terminal value = ₹114.50 × 0.675 = ₹77.29. Total intrinsic value per share = ₹16.63 + ₹77.29 = ₹93.92. This illustrates the two-stage model's structure: explicit, individually discounted dividends during the high-growth phase, plus a single terminal value capturing all subsequent stable-growth-phase dividends as a perpetuity computed at the point the stable phase begins, itself discounted back to the present alongside the explicit-phase cash flows.

Question 4

Explain why free cash flow to equity is discounted at the cost of equity while free cash flow to firm is discounted at the weighted average cost of capital, and what adjustment is needed to move from a firm value (using FCFF) to an equity value.

Accepted Answer

Free cash flow to equity represents the cash flow remaining specifically for equity shareholders after all operating expenses, interest payments to debt holders, taxes, and reinvestment needs have already been met, meaning it is a cash flow stream belonging exclusively to equity holders, and is therefore appropriately discounted at the cost of equity, the return equity holders specifically require. Free cash flow to firm represents the cash flow available to all providers of capital collectively, both debt and equity holders, before any financing costs are deducted, meaning it must be discounted at a rate reflecting the blended, weighted required return of all capital providers together, the weighted average cost of capital, since this FCFF stream has not yet been allocated between the two groups. To move from a firm value computed using FCFF and WACC to an equity value, the value of the firm's outstanding debt must be subtracted from the total firm value, since the firm value computed this way represents the value of the entire enterprise, debt and equity together, and equity value is what remains for shareholders once the debt holders' prior claim is accounted for and removed from that total.

Question 5

A company has preference shares with a face value of ₹100, carrying a fixed dividend rate of 8%, redeemable at par after 5 years. The required return for preference shares of this risk profile is 10%. Compute the value per preference share. (PV annuity factor for 5 years at 10% = 3.791; PV factor for year 5 at 10% = 0.621.)

Accepted Answer

Annual preference dividend = 8% × ₹100 = ₹8 per share. Present value of dividend annuity = ₹8 × 3.791 = ₹30.33. Present value of redemption amount at maturity = ₹100 × 0.621 = ₹62.10. Value per preference share = ₹30.33 + ₹62.10 = ₹92.43. Since the required return (10%) exceeds the fixed dividend rate (8%), the preference share is valued below its face value of ₹100, at ₹92.43, reflecting that the market requires a higher return than this specific share's fixed dividend rate provides, exactly analogous to how a bond with a coupon rate below the market's required yield trades at a discount to its face value.

Question 6

A debenture has a face value of ₹1,000, a coupon rate of 9% paid annually, and 4 years remaining to maturity. If the market's currently required yield for debentures of this risk and maturity is 11%, explain, without computing the exact price, whether this debenture will trade at a premium or a discount to its face value, and why.

Accepted Answer

This debenture will trade at a discount to its face value of ₹1,000. Since the market's currently required yield, 11%, exceeds the debenture's own fixed coupon rate, 9%, investors would not be willing to pay the full face value for a debenture that pays a coupon lower than what the market currently demands for debentures of this specific risk and maturity; instead, the price must fall below face value so that the effective yield an investor achieves, combining the fixed coupon payments and the capital gain from buying below face value and eventually receiving the full face value at maturity, rises to match the market's required 11% yield. This inverse relationship between a bond's price and the market's required yield, whenever the coupon rate and required yield diverge, is a fundamental and frequently tested feature of fixed income valuation: coupon below required yield produces a discount to face value, coupon above required yield produces a premium above face value, and coupon exactly equal to required yield produces a price exactly equal to face value.

Question 7

Explain why fundamental analysis proceeds top-down through economic, industry, and company analysis, rather than starting directly with company-specific financial statement analysis.

Accepted Answer

Fundamental analysis proceeds top-down because a company's own prospects are shaped by, and cannot be properly understood in isolation from, the broader economic and industry context it operates within; a company with excellent management and strong internal fundamentals can still perform poorly if the broader economy enters a downturn that depresses demand across the board, or if its specific industry faces structural decline or intensifying competition regardless of how well the individual company is run relative to its peers. Starting with economic analysis establishes the macroeconomic backdrop (growth, inflation, interest rates) against which any company's performance must be judged; industry analysis then narrows this to the specific competitive and structural dynamics of the company's own industry, since different industries respond very differently to the same macroeconomic conditions; and only once this broader context is established does company analysis meaningfully assess the specific firm's financial statements, competitive position, and growth prospects, since a given set of company financials means something quite different in a favourable economic and industry context than in an unfavourable one, making the top-down sequence a way of properly contextualising company-level analysis rather than treating it in a vacuum.

Question 8

Explain what a support level and a resistance level represent in technical analysis, and why a break through a resistance level, once established, is often read as a bullish signal.

Accepted Answer

A support level is a price level at which a security has historically found sufficient buying pressure to reverse or pause a declining price movement, reflecting a price point where enough market participants have historically been willing to buy, believing the security to be attractively priced at that level; a resistance level is the corresponding price level on the upside, where a security has historically found sufficient selling pressure to reverse or pause a rising price movement, reflecting a price point where enough market participants have historically been willing to sell. A break through an established resistance level, meaning the price moves decisively above a level that previously reliably triggered selling pressure and a reversal, is often read as a bullish signal because it suggests that the balance of buying and selling pressure at that price point has genuinely shifted, with buying demand at that level now overwhelming the selling pressure that previously prevailed there, which technical analysts interpret as evidence that the security's price is likely to continue rising further, since the previous ceiling on its price has now been decisively breached rather than merely tested and rejected again.

Question 9

Explain, without computing figures, why a three-stage dividend discount model (high growth, transitional declining growth, stable growth) might be preferred over a simpler two-stage model for valuing a young, currently fast-growing technology company.

Accepted Answer

A two-stage model assumes growth remains at its (typically high) initial rate throughout the entire explicit forecast period and then drops abruptly to the stable long-run rate at a single specific point, an assumption that can be unrealistic for a young, fast-growing technology company, since such a company's growth rate is more plausibly expected to decline gradually over an extended transitional period, as the company matures, its addressable market becomes more saturated, and competitive pressure intensifies, rather than remaining at its initial high rate right up until an abrupt, single-period drop to the stable rate. A three-stage model, explicitly including a transitional phase where the growth rate is modelled as gradually declining from the initial high rate down to the eventual stable rate over a number of years, more realistically captures this gradual maturation process, reducing the risk that a two-stage model's abrupt transition either overstates value (by assuming high growth persists too long before the drop) or produces an unrealistic single-year discontinuity in the company's own growth trajectory that does not reflect how a maturing company's fundamentals actually tend to evolve in practice.

Question 10

A company's equity has a beta of 1.3. The risk-free rate is 6.5% and the expected market return is 13%. Compute the required return on equity using CAPM, and explain how this figure should then be used within the Gordon growth model.

Accepted Answer

Required return on equity, Ke = Rf + β(Rm − Rf) = 6.5% + 1.3 × (13% − 6.5%) = 6.5% + 1.3 × 6.5% = 6.5% + 8.45% = 14.95%. This CAPM-derived required return of 14.95% is then used as the discount rate, Ke, in the Gordon growth model, P₀ = D₁ ÷ (Ke − g), or in a multi-stage dividend discount model's explicit-phase and terminal-value discounting, representing the return equity investors require for bearing this specific company's systematic risk, as captured by its beta of 1.3, above the risk-free rate; using this CAPM-derived rate, rather than an arbitrarily assumed discount rate, ensures the valuation is grounded in the security's own actual, market-based risk characteristics rather than a generic or unsupported discount rate assumption.

Question 11

A company's net income is ₹50 lakh, depreciation is ₹12 lakh, capital expenditure is ₹18 lakh, increase in working capital is ₹6 lakh, and net new borrowing (new debt raised minus debt repaid) is ₹4 lakh. Compute free cash flow to equity.

Accepted Answer

FCFE = Net income + Depreciation (a non-cash charge added back) − Capital expenditure − Increase in working capital + Net new borrowing (net cash inflow from debt financing, since FCFE is specifically the cash flow available to equity holders after accounting for the net effect of debt-related cash flows) = ₹50 lakh + ₹12 lakh − ₹18 lakh − ₹6 lakh + ₹4 lakh = ₹42 lakh. This ₹42 lakh represents the cash flow genuinely available for distribution to equity shareholders (whether as dividends, buybacks, or simply retained within the company on their behalf) after the company has met all operating, capital reinvestment, and net financing (debt-related) requirements for the period, and is the appropriate cash flow figure to discount at the cost of equity, Ke, to arrive at an equity valuation under the free cash flow to equity approach.

Question 12

Explain why, if weak form market efficiency genuinely holds, a mutual fund manager relying purely on chart patterns and moving average crossovers should not be expected to consistently outperform a passive index fund of comparable risk over the long run.

Accepted Answer

If weak form market efficiency genuinely holds, current security prices already fully reflect all historical price and trading volume information, meaning any pattern, trend, or signal a technical analyst might identify by studying past price charts, including moving average crossovers and other chart patterns, is already embedded in and reflected by the current price, offering no genuinely new, exploitable information about likely future price movements; a strategy built purely on this already-reflected historical data should therefore not be expected to generate returns systematically above what a comparable-risk passive investment would achieve, since there is no informational edge such a strategy could be extracting that the market has not already incorporated into the price. Any apparent short-term outperformance a technically-driven fund manager might show would, under weak form efficiency, be expected to reflect either genuine luck (statistical variation around an expected return of zero abnormal return) or a differing risk exposure (the fund taking on more risk than the comparison benchmark, which should be compensated with a correspondingly higher expected, not abnormal, return) rather than genuine, sustainable skill in extracting predictive information from historical price data alone.

Question 13

A company has irredeemable preference shares with a face value of ₹100 and a fixed dividend rate of 9%. The required return for preference shares of this risk is 12%. Compute the value per share, and explain why the formula used differs from that for a redeemable preference share.

Accepted Answer

Since these preference shares are irredeemable, they represent a perpetuity of fixed dividend payments with no redemption cash flow at any future date, so the value is simply the present value of a perpetuity: Value = Annual dividend ÷ Required return = (9% × ₹100) ÷ 12% = ₹9 ÷ 0.12 = ₹75. This differs from the redeemable preference share formula, which requires computing the present value of the dividend annuity for a finite number of years plus the present value of the redemption amount at a specific future maturity date, because a redeemable share's cash flow stream to the investor terminates at a known point with a lump-sum redemption payment, whereas an irredeemable share's dividend stream, in principle, continues indefinitely with no terminal redemption cash flow at all, making the simpler perpetuity formula the appropriate valuation tool specifically because there is no finite time horizon or redemption amount to separately account for.

Question 14

In the two-stage dividend discount model example from an earlier problem, the terminal value computed at the end of Year 3 (₹114.50) represented a large majority of the total intrinsic value (₹93.92) once discounted back to the present. Explain why terminal value so often dominates a multi-stage valuation's total figure, and the practical implication this has for the reliability of such valuations.

Accepted Answer

Terminal value dominates because it is meant to capture the present value, as of the end of the explicit forecast period, of all subsequent cash flows extending indefinitely into the future under the stable growth assumption, which is inherently a much larger stream of value than the handful of individually forecast years in the explicit phase alone; even after being discounted back several years to the present, this large terminal value component typically still represents the majority of the total computed intrinsic value in most multi-stage valuations, precisely because it stands in for an indefinitely long tail of future cash flows compressed into a single figure. The practical implication is that a multi-stage valuation's reliability depends disproportionately on the assumptions feeding into the terminal value calculation specifically, the assumed long-run stable growth rate and the discount rate applied to it, meaning even a small change in the assumed stable growth rate, say from 6% to 7%, can materially shift the entire valuation's conclusion far more than an equivalent change in any single explicit-phase year's growth assumption would; this is precisely why a careful valuation exercise, and a careful exam answer, should explicitly flag the terminal value assumptions as the single most consequential, and most carefully scrutinised, input to the entire computation, rather than treating all the model's assumptions as equally significant to the final result.

Question 15

If semi-strong form market efficiency genuinely holds in full, explain what this implies about the value of a fundamental analyst reading a company's publicly available annual report to identify undervalued shares, and why fundamental analysis nonetheless remains widely practised despite this implication.

Accepted Answer

If semi-strong form efficiency genuinely holds in full, current security prices already fully reflect all publicly available information, including everything disclosed in a company's annual report and other public filings, meaning an analyst reading and analysing this same publicly available information should not expect to identify genuinely mispriced securities that the broader market, having equal access to the identical information, has not already priced in accurately; under strict semi-strong efficiency, fundamental analysis based purely on public information should not be expected to generate abnormal returns beyond what the security's genuine risk level would justify. Fundamental analysis nonetheless remains widely practised for several reasons even given this theoretical implication: markets may not be perfectly semi-strong efficient in practice, with genuine, if modest and inconsistent, opportunities for skilled analysis to identify temporary mispricing before it is fully corrected; fundamental analysis also serves purposes beyond pure security selection for abnormal returns, including determining appropriate position sizing, risk assessment, and portfolio construction even for securities correctly priced on average; and the very activity of many analysts continuously performing fundamental analysis is itself part of what keeps markets close to semi-strong efficient in the first place, an argument sometimes described as a necessary tension, where markets can only remain efficient because enough analysts keep trying, and sometimes succeeding, to exploit temporary inefficiencies before they persist.

Practice — Security Analysis and Valuation

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities