Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Internal Rate Of Return: A Simple, Non-Mathematical Explanation

By Thomas C. Klein
October 14, 2004

How do venture investors compare investments in portfolio companies when the amounts invested, the timing of those investments, the returns, and the timing of those returns are all different? The tool venture investors use to compare the rates of return on each investment on an “apples-to-apples” basis is the internal rate of return (also known as the compound annual growth rate or CAGR).

A typical venture investment involves several investments into a portfolio company at various stages of the company's development. From an investment perspective, those investments are considered negative cash flow; that is, cash going out from the venture fund. Of course, the cash goes out from the venture fund at different times. Investing $100 today is more expensive to the venture fund than investing $100 in a Series C Preferred Stock round three years from today because the venture fund would only have to put aside, say, $80 today to grow into the $100 needed in three years for the Series C Preferred Stock investment. This $80 is known as the discounted value or the value in “today's dollars” of the $100 investment that would be made in 3 years. Accordingly, any “apple-to-apples” comparison of investments would have to compare investments based on today's dollars.

Similarly, when the portfolio company is successful, cash is returned to the venture fund. This is positive cash flow for the venture fund. Obviously, it would be better for the venture fund to receive the positive cash flow earlier rather than later for the same reason the venture fund would prefer to have the negative cash flow later rather than earlier. Receiving dollars today is more valuable than receiving the same number of dollars in the future, because if the fund receives the dollars today, it can invest those funds and earn a return on them. Accordingly, an “apples-to-apples” comparison of investments would have to compare investments not just on when the dollars are invested and how much those dollars are, but also on when the returning cash is received and how much it is. Thus, if a venture fund is to compare an investment into one portfolio company versus another, it will want to compare those investments based on outflows of cash in today's dollars and inflows of cash in today's dollars.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.