Intrinsic value is the amount a rational buyer would pay for a business if they were purchasing the entire enterprise — not a stock ticker, but the business itself, with all its future cash flows. It's the number that makes the investment case either obvious or obviously wrong.
“Intrinsic value can be defined simply: it is the discounted value of the cash that can be taken out of a business during its remaining life.”
— Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway Annual Letter (1994)
Why you can't calculate it precisely — and don't need to
Intrinsic value requires predicting future cash flows, which requires assuming a growth rate for years into the future. Get the growth rate wrong by 2%, and the resulting valuation can differ by 40%. This uncertainty is not a bug in the concept — it's a feature. It tells you that precise calculation is the wrong goal. The right goal is to identify when the price is obviously, uncomfortably below what the business is worth.
Buffett has repeatedly said that he doesn't use a DCF model in the classical sense — he looks for businesses where the future is predictable enough that precision isn't necessary. A business growing 8–10% per year for the last 20 years, with strong free cash flow, is worth more than its P/E times earnings. By how much? Precisely? Impossible. But "more than 15× earnings" — often obvious.
Graham's net asset value approach
Graham focused less on future earnings and more on balance sheet value — the "net-net" approach. If a company's current assets minus all liabilities exceeded the stock's market price, Graham considered it a safe purchase regardless of earnings. The logic: you're buying the assets for less than liquidation value; anything the business earns is gravy.
Pure net-nets are almost extinct in modern markets. But the underlying principle — asking "what would a private buyer pay for this?" — remains the most grounding question in investing.
A practical framework for most investors
For a mature, dividend-paying business with a 20+ year track record, intrinsic value can be approximated as follows:
- 1Find the normalised earnings per share — average EPS over 5–7 years to smooth cycles.
- 2Apply a P/E multiple you'd be comfortable paying permanently — typically 12–18× for conservative businesses.
- 3Compare the result to the current price. If the stock is trading at 60–70% of your estimate, you have a margin of safety.
- 4Cross-check: is the current P/E in the bottom 20–30% of the stock's own 10-year history? That's independent confirmation.
The danger of precision
The biggest mistake value investors make is becoming attached to a specific intrinsic value estimate. If you've decided a stock is worth exactly $180, and it's trading at $164, you might convince yourself that's enough margin of safety. But your $180 estimate is itself uncertain — ±20% is a good baseline assumption for even the most thorough analysis. Build humility into your framework by requiring larger discounts than feel necessary.
“I would rather be approximately right than precisely wrong.”
— Attributed to John Maynard Keynes (also used by Buffett)
For each stock on Sixtycents, you can see where the current P/E, P/B, and EV/EBITDA sit relative to the stock's own 10-year range. When all three are in the bottom quartile simultaneously, that's as close to a screaming "below intrinsic value" signal as systematic tools can provide.
Screen stocks by historical valuation →