I understand the logic from a trading perspective of using NAV as a ratio analysis, cos if the share price is trading below the NAV, the share is basically trading at a discount. I personally do not like the net asset value (NAV) as a ratio analysis, these are my reasons. 1. Included in asset value (PPE) are asset of various depreciation ages, establishing fair value for those asset is not always readily available. 2. Depending the company asset procurement policy, if the company has an increased capex budget,this can artifically raise the Net Asset value of the company and thus share prices. 3.My all time favourite , what about all those "Off Balance sheet" activities that nobody know about? In conclusion , i feel liquidation value per share is actually a more realistic indicators.OMO Let hear from the experts. Make me a believer of this ratio
Me thinks a combination of several tools (incl NAV) must be used. NAV certainly has its place. For the keen analyst, a note on financials will reveal off-b/sheet exposure (next 12 months' cash flow towards lease). Anyway, according to your view, should a share trade at a discount, then the off-balance sheet stuff would increase the "gap" thus making the discount bigger?
It is useful if you are looking at the TNAV, for stocks that are trading below it. What Buffet would call the last puff of the cigarette butt, problem is that there is a reason stocks trade at discounts to book value. Google Piotroski if you are looking for a low book to market strategy.