Discounted Cash Flow Methods and the Capital Asset Pricing Model

Mineral valuation may appear to be a special field of financial valuation when in fact it is a subset of general investment decision theory. The only significant difference in mineral valuation is that in the case of valuing an on-going mineral asset, ie a mine, often there is no initial capital outlay involved. One is required to determine what the mineral asset as it stands is worth. But this is the same problem as determining the maximum one could pay today and not incur a loss over the life of the asset. In other words one needs to determine the Net Present Value (NPV) of the asset. The two most widely used discounted cash flow methods, NPV and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) came of age with the rapid adoption of the personal computer and spreadsheet programs. The two methods are directly related as the IRR is a special case of NPV. NPV measures the absolute increase in real wealth that can be expected from a certain investment, which makes it particularly suitable for mineral asset valuation, but ignores the efficiency of the investment. In contrast, IRR gives the expected efficiency of the investment but ignores the increase in wealth aspect. IRR has two serious theoretical weaknesses; multiple IRR's and a very rigid assumption about the rate of return of reinvested proceeds, plus if no initial equity expenditure is involved there is no IRR. The choice of the ""hurdle"" rate can also be a problem and in certain circumstances one can obtain different rankings of mutually exclusive projects using IRR and NPV. Although NPV and IRR supposedly measure financial risk, in fact they only address a very narrow area of risk, namely the time value of money given the real discount rate. They side step the issue of what the real discount rate should be and varying degrees of risk. The classical way to establish the real discount rate is to use the weighted average cost of capital.