Startseite Understanding the Firm Specific Risk Premium
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Understanding the Firm Specific Risk Premium

  • Stan Feldman EMAIL logo und Todd Feldman
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 9. Mai 2023

Abstract

We seek to determine whether a firm specific risk premium (FSRP) exists for private firms. We show that private equity investors price firm specific risk as part of establishing the expected rate of return hurdle rate. Our research is based on survey data constructed by the Private Capital Markets Project. We decompose the rate of return into its component parts-market risk premium, size premium, liquidity premium and firm specific risk premium (FSRP). We find that on average PE FSRP varies between zero and six percent. These findings indicate that the cost of capital buildup used in valuing private firms should include a premium for firm specific risk unless facts and circumstances suggest otherwise.

JEL Codes: G31; G32

Corresponding author: Stan Feldman, Axiom Valuation, Wakefield, MA 01880, USA, E-mail:
We would like to thank Olivia Zhao for her work as a research assistant on the paper. We also thank the anonymous referee for clarifying comments and suggestions. We retain sole responsibility for remaining idiosyncrasies and errors.

References

Ang, A., B. Chen, W. Goetzmann, and L. Phalippou. 2013. Estimating Private Equity Returns from Limited Partner Cash Flows. Working Paper. Columbia University.10.2139/ssrn.2356553Suche in Google Scholar

Axelson, U., M. Sorensen, and P. Stromberg. 2013. The Alpha and Beta Of Buyout Deals. Working Paper. Columbia.Suche in Google Scholar

Berger, A. N., and G. F. Udell. 1998. “The Economics of Small Business Finance: The Roles of Private Equity and Debt Markets in the Financial Growth Cycle.” Journal of Banking & Finance 22 (6–8): 613–73, https://doi.org/10.17016/feds.1998.15.Suche in Google Scholar

Buchner, A. 2014. The Alpha and Beta Of Private Equity Investments. Passau: Working Paper, University of Passau.10.2139/ssrn.2549705Suche in Google Scholar

Chen, H., J. Miao, and N. Wang. 2010. The Review of Financial Studies, Vol. 23, 4348–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/rfs/hhq122Suche in Google Scholar

Cochrane, J. 2005. “The Risk and Return on Venture Capital.” Journal of Financial Economics 75: 3–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.03.006.Suche in Google Scholar

Cole, R. A., J. D. Wolken, and R. L. Woodburn. 1996. “Bank and Nonbank Competition for Small Business Credit: Evidence from the 1987 and 1993 National Surveys of Small Business Finances.” Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.) 82 (Nov): 983–95, https://doi.org/10.17016/bulletin.1996.82-11.Suche in Google Scholar

Ewens, M. 2009. A New Model of Venture Capital Risk and Return. Working Paper. San Diego: University of California.10.2139/ssrn.1356322Suche in Google Scholar

Franzoni, F., E. Nowak, and L. Phalippou. 2012. “Private Equity Performance and Liquidity Risk.” The Journal of Finance 67 (6): 23412373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2012.01788.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Fugazy, D. 2017. Special Report On Private Equity: 7 Ways PE Firms are Evolving, Vol. 1. New York: Mergers and Acquisitions.Suche in Google Scholar

Gentry, W. M., and R. G. Hubbard. 2004. “Entrepreneurship and Household Saving.” Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy 4 No. 1, Article. https://doi.org/10.2202/1538-0637.1053.Suche in Google Scholar

Gupta, A., and S. V. Nieuwerburgh. 2019. Valuing Private Equity Investments Strip by Strip, CBS, NBER, and CEPR.10.3386/w26514Suche in Google Scholar

Heaton, J. C., and D. J. Lucas. 2004. Capital Structure: Hurdle Rates, and Portfolio Choice Interactions in an Entrepreneurial Firm. Working Paper. Northwestern University.Suche in Google Scholar

Korteweg, A., and M. Sorensen. 2010. “Risk and Return Characteristics of Venture Capital Backed Entrepreneurial Companies.” Review of Financial Studies 23 (10): 37383772. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhq050.Suche in Google Scholar

Lehmann, B. 1990. “Residual Risk Revisited.” Journal of Econometrics 45: 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(90)90094-a.Suche in Google Scholar

Liu, W. 2004. “Liquidity Premium and a Two-Factor Model.” In EFA 2004 Maastricht Meetings Paper No. 2678. Also available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=559407.10.2139/ssrn.559407Suche in Google Scholar

Merton, R. 1987. “A Simple Model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information.” The Journal of Finance 42 (3): 483–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1987.tb04565.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Moskowitz, T., and A. Vissing-Jrgensen. 2002. “The Returns to Entrepreneurial Investment: A Private Equity Premium Puzzle?” The American Economic Review 92 (4): 745–78. https://doi.org/10.1257/00028280260344452.Suche in Google Scholar

Novak, N. 2016. Measuring the Discount for Lack Of Marketability for Noncontrolling, Nonmarketable Ownership Interests, 37–51. Willamette: Insights, Winter.Suche in Google Scholar

Petersen, M. A., and R. G. Rajan. 1994. “The Benefits of Lending Relationships: Evidence from Small Business Data.” The Journal of Finance 49: 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb04418.x.Suche in Google Scholar

The Kroll (Duff & Phelps). 2022. Valuation Handbook Cost of Capital. New York: Kroll.Suche in Google Scholar

Tinic, S., and R. West. 1986. “Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: A Revisit.” Journal of Political Economy 94 (1): 126–47.10.1086/261365Suche in Google Scholar

US PE Breakdown. 2019. Annual Report. Pitchbook.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-01-18
Accepted: 2023-03-13
Published Online: 2023-05-09

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 24.10.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jbvela-2023-0004/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen