IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uteexx/v63y2018i3p217-235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Double vision: Insights about the origin and interpretation of multiple IRRs

Author

Listed:
  • Morris G. Danielson

Abstract

The ability of a project's internal rate of return (IRR) to quantify its economic return has been questioned by many scholars over the past 60 years, most recently by Magni (2010, 2013). Although IRR is a plausible—albeit imperfect—measure of a project's economic return when the cash flow stream is conventional, IRR can be an untenable measure of an unconventional project's economic return. The goal of this article is to identify a simple, intuitive explanation of IRR, one that can be applied to any cash flow pattern. To do this, the article shows how a project's IRR systematically changes when it first crosses from the conventional into the unconventional realm (i.e., a small cash outflow is appended to a conventional cash flow stream) and then as it becomes progressively more unconventional. This process reveals that the most robust economic interpretation of IRR—for both conventional and unconventional projects—is that a project's IRRs are external benchmarks that divide the set of all plausible discount rates into positive and negative net present value (NPV) ranges, rather than internally generated returns. Because it can be difficult to estimate a project's cost of capital with precision, this information can help guide the sensitivity analysis of a project.

Suggested Citation

  • Morris G. Danielson, 2018. "Double vision: Insights about the origin and interpretation of multiple IRRs," The Engineering Economist, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(3), pages 217-235, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uteexx:v:63:y:2018:i:3:p:217-235
    DOI: 10.1080/0013791X.2017.1391361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0013791X.2017.1391361
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0013791X.2017.1391361?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uteexx:v:63:y:2018:i:3:p:217-235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTEE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.