本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

dcf-modeling

Wing-4 valuation cognition for a CFO / finance-partner. Use when a deal, internal investment, or board ask names DCF, intrinsic value, WACC, terminal value, or 'what's it worth on a 5-year hold'.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md4.8 KB
  • evals/domain-truth.json1.6 KB
  • evals/evals.json996 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

dcf-modeling

When to use

  • A buy-build-or-partner decision needs an intrinsic-value anchor, not just a multiple.
  • A board pack asks for sensitivity to discount rate or terminal-growth assumptions.
  • An acquisition target's seller-deck IRR claims need a counter-model.

Do NOT use for revenue forecasting alone, market-sizing, or comp-multiple-only screens — those route elsewhere (see Related Skills).

Procedure

Step 0: Inspect

  1. Confirm the target has ≥3 years of audited or reviewed financials, or a clearly-labelled forecast that names every assumption.
  2. Note the cognition cluster: this is intrinsic-value cognition, not multiple-arbitrage.

Step 1: Lock the assumption table

  1. Pull or estimate the five drivers — revenue growth (per year, declining to terminal), EBIT margin path, tax rate, capex/sales, change in net working capital/sales.
  2. Decompose WACC: cost of equity (CAPM — risk-free + β × ERP), cost of debt (after-tax), capital structure target weights.
  3. Pick a terminal-value method once — either Gordon-growth (FCFF_t+1 / (WACC − g)) or exit-multiple. Naming both inflates spurious precision.

Step 2: Project free cash flow

  1. Build a 5-year FCFF row: EBIT × (1 − t) + D&A − Capex − ΔNWC.
  2. Discount each year by 1 / (1 + WACC)^t.
  3. Compute terminal value at year 5, discount back.
  4. Sum PV(FCFF) + PV(TV) = enterprise value. Subtract net debt → equity value.

Step 3: Sensitivity grid

  1. Build a 5×5 grid: WACC ±200 bps × terminal growth ±100 bps (or exit multiple ±2 turns).
  2. Flag the corner cells where equity value flips sign or moves >25% from base — those are the load-bearing assumptions.

Step 4: Validate

  1. Cross-check implied EV/EBITDA against trading comps. If your DCF prints 22× and the sector trades at 11×, the assumptions are wrong, not the market.
  2. State the two assumptions that drive >50% of the valuation. If you can't name them, the model is undisciplined.

Gotcha

  • Terminal value usually carries 60–80% of total PV. Treating TV as a footnote is the most common DCF malpractice.
  • WACC sensitivity is non-linear near WACC ≈ g; the Gordon formula explodes. Cap displayed cells; don't pretend the corner is a real number.
  • Forecasted FCFF that grows faster than revenue forever implies infinite margin expansion — the model will silently smuggle it in unless you bound EBIT margin at a stated ceiling.
  • Synergies in an M&A DCF belong in a separate column. Comingling them with standalone FCFF is how acquirers overpay.

Do NOT

  • Do NOT use a DCF as the sole valuation when the business is < 3 years old or has negative operating cash flow — uncertainty bands swamp the signal.
  • Do NOT discount levered cash flow by WACC. Use FCFF↔WACC or FCFE↔Ke; never cross.
  • Do NOT report a point estimate without the sensitivity grid. A single number is a prediction, not a valuation.

Related Skills

WHEN to use this

  • The decision needs intrinsic value, not relative value.
  • The asset has a multi-year cash-flow profile worth modelling explicitly.
  • The board wants an answer to "what assumption breaks the deal?"

WHEN NOT to use this

When the agent should load this

  • "What's this acquisition worth on a 5-year hold?"
  • "Build me a DCF on these financials."
  • "How sensitive is the valuation to WACC?"
  • "What discount rate does the seller's IRR imply?"
  • "Counter-model this seller deck."

Output

  1. assumptions.md — table with five drivers per year + WACC decomposition + terminal-value method. One row per assumption, one column per year.
  2. fcff-projection.md — 5-year FCFF + discount factors + PV column + terminal-value PV + bridge to equity value.
  3. sensitivity-grid.md — 5×5 markdown table (WACC × terminal growth or exit multiple). Bold the cells where equity value flips sign or moves >25% from base.
  4. valuation-narrative.md — three paragraphs: (a) point estimate + range, (b) the two load-bearing assumptions, (c) cross-check against trading comps with named delta.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when reviewing UI for accessibility — WCAG 2.2 AA, keyboard nav, focus, ARIA, contrast, screen-reader semantics — even on 'is this a11y-OK?' or 'mach das barrierefrei'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

Use when defining or auditing the activation event — aha-moment selection, retention correlation, falsifiable definition. Triggers on 'what is our aha moment', 'redefine activation'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

Use when capturing an architectural decision — file naming, next ADR number, Status / Context / Decision / Consequences, index regen; fires even without saying 'ADR'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

Adversarial critique — devil's advocate, stress-test, honest teardown ('poke holes', 'be brutal', 'was hältst du davon'); explicit request only. Routine code or design review → code-review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

Use when reading, creating, or updating agent documentation, module docs, roadmaps, or AGENTS.md. Understands the full .augment/, agents/, and copilot-instructions structure.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

Use for an adversarial red-team / blue-team / auditor review of an AI agent's CONFIG + behaviour (rules, skills, MCP, hooks, permissions) — attack-chain → defensive-gap list, not a code audit.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

event4u-app/agent-config112026年10月11日 更新

event4u-app のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する