Editing Oracle Corporation

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 947: Line 947:
== Comparable Company Analysis ==
== Comparable Company Analysis ==
Our second method for valuing Oracle was comparable company analysis. Price/earnings, Enterprise Value/EBITDA, and Enterprise Value/Revenue ratios were used. The companies selected were the direct competitors, as mentioned above.
Our second method for valuing Oracle was comparable company analysis. Price/earnings, Enterprise Value/EBITDA, and Enterprise Value/Revenue ratios were used. The companies selected were the direct competitors, as mentioned above.
[[File:Screenshot 2023-08-23 3.jpg|thumb|994x994px|Comparables table|left]]
[[File:Screenshot 2023-08-23 3.jpg|thumb|989x989px|Comparables table]]


To begin, the EV/Sales metric was employed. This involved taking the revenue from the past year and multiplying it by the median EV/Sales ratio of competing firms. As a result, the estimated enterprise value stood at $278,895 million. After accounting for net debt, it became evident that the equity value equated to $193,752 million or $71.38 per share. Consequently, based on this ratio, the company appears to be overvalued compared to its peers.
To begin, the EV/Sales metric was employed. This involved taking the revenue from the past year and multiplying it by the median EV/Sales ratio of competing firms. As a result, the estimated enterprise value stood at $278,895 million. After accounting for net debt, it became evident that the equity value equated to $193,752 million or $71.38 per share. Consequently, based on this ratio, the company appears to be overvalued compared to its peers.
Line 975: Line 975:


The company's debt level is really high compared to its competitors, which can be seen by its debt to equity and debt to capital ratios. This is a result of its share repurchase program as well as the aggressive acquisition strategy which involves a lot of debt. The company might have to suspend its repurchase program or reduce its capital expenditures in order to be able to reduce its debt levels. S&P has assigned a credit rating of BBB, which is low when compared to its competitors (e.g. Microsoft, Salesforce). Such a low credit rating can potentially lead to higher cost of debt moving forward<ref name=":0" />.
The company's debt level is really high compared to its competitors, which can be seen by its debt to equity and debt to capital ratios. This is a result of its share repurchase program as well as the aggressive acquisition strategy which involves a lot of debt. The company might have to suspend its repurchase program or reduce its capital expenditures in order to be able to reduce its debt levels. S&P has assigned a credit rating of BBB, which is low when compared to its competitors (e.g. Microsoft, Salesforce). Such a low credit rating can potentially lead to higher cost of debt moving forward<ref name=":0" />.




<references />
<references />
Please note that all contributions to Stockhub may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Stockhub:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)