After 5/6 years — presuming AUM actually doubles, plus the buyback described above — I see no reason one couldn't utilize
the same valuation methodology.
I plan to stick with roughly
the same valuation methodology, so I definitely recommend you revisit my last two posts (linked above).
Not exact matches
The Best Canadian Brands ranking uses the
same brand
valuation methodology as Interbrand's Best Global Brands report.
Then again, my
valuation's a year old now: So applying the
same methodology (as last year's write - up), Applegreen's underlying (i.e. maintenance) free cash flow has increased spectacularly — from $ 35 million to $ 62 million (see p. 80)-- and yes, I still believe it's worth the
same 20.0 P / FCF Fair Value multiple.
The fair value team takes into account the relevant factors and surrounding circumstances, which may include: (i) the nature and pricing history (if any) of the security; (ii) whether any dealer quotations for the security are available; (iii) possible
valuation methodologies that could be used to determine the fair value of the security; (iv) the recommendation of a portfolio manager of the fund with respect to the
valuation of the security; (v) whether the
same or similar securities are held by other funds managed by the Adviser or other funds and the method used to price the security in those funds; (vi) the extent to which the fair value to be determined for the security will result from the use of data or formulae produced by independent third parties and (vii) the liquidity or illiquidity of the market for the security.