Relative Valuation Model Guide: P/E, P/B, EV/EBITDA TTM
1466 reads · Last updated: February 28, 2026
The Relative Valuation Model is a financial analysis method that assesses a company's market value by comparing its valuation metrics with those of other companies in the same industry. Common valuation metrics used in relative valuation models include Price-to-Earnings ratio (P/E), Price-to-Book ratio (P/B), Price-to-Sales ratio (P/S), and Enterprise Value-to-EBITDA ratio (EV/EBITDA). This method assumes that the market has relatively consistent valuation standards for companies within the same industry or with similar characteristics.Key characteristics include:Comparative Approach: Evaluates the target company's value by comparing its valuation metrics with those of other companies in the same industry.Common Metrics: Includes P/E, P/B, P/S, and EV/EBITDA ratios.Market Consistency: Assumes that companies in the same industry or with similar characteristics should have relatively consistent valuation standards.Simple and Quick: The relative valuation model is generally simple and quick to use and understand.Example of Relative Valuation Model application:Suppose an investor wants to evaluate the value of a tech company. They can select several companies in the same industry, calculate their P/E ratios, and take the average. If these companies have an average P/E ratio of 20 and the target company's earnings per share (EPS) is $5, then the target company's valuation would be 20 * 5 = $100. Through this comparative approach, the investor can determine whether the target company is overvalued or undervalued.
Core Description
- A Relative Valuation Model estimates what an asset may be worth by comparing it with similar companies or assets using market-based multiples such as P/E, EV/EBITDA, and P/S.
- The method is widely used because it is fast, intuitive, and grounded in observable prices, but it can be misleading when peers are poorly chosen or fundamentals differ.
- Used correctly, a Relative Valuation Model can serve as a practical “pricing map” that helps investors frame expectations, test assumptions, and identify cases where the market prices similar risks very differently.
Definition and Background
What a Relative Valuation Model means
A Relative Valuation Model (also called comparables valuation or multiples-based valuation) is an approach that values a company by comparing it to other, similar companies (its “peer group”) and applying a valuation multiple derived from the market.
Instead of asking “What is this business worth based on its future cash flows?” (as in discounted cash flow), the Relative Valuation Model asks a more market-anchored question: “What are investors paying for comparable businesses today?”
Why markets use it so often
The Relative Valuation Model is widely used by:
- Equity research teams to sanity-check intrinsic valuation results
- Corporate finance professionals when discussing deal ranges
- Investors screening for potentially mispriced securities
- Portfolio managers comparing valuation across sectors or regions
It became a common tool because multiples are easy to communicate and quick to compute from public filings, earnings releases, and market data.
The “relative” part is the point
A Relative Valuation Model does not claim to find a single true value. It produces a value that is conditional on:
- The chosen peer set
- The chosen multiple(s)
- How “normalized” earnings and financials are
- Current market sentiment and interest-rate conditions
That conditional nature is a feature, not a flaw, provided the user is explicit about assumptions.
Calculation Methods and Applications
Step-by-step workflow
A practical Relative Valuation Model is typically built in 5 steps:
- Define the target (the company you want to value)
- Select peers (similar industry, business model, margin structure, growth, risk profile)
- Pick appropriate multiples (based on what drives value in that industry)
- Normalize the financial metric (TTM vs forward, one-time items, cyclical effects)
- Apply multiples to the target to estimate implied value, then cross-check
Common multiples used in a Relative Valuation Model
Below are widely used multiples and what they “pay for.”
| Multiple | In plain English | Best when | Key caveat |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | Price per $1 of earnings | Profitable firms with stable accounting | Can be distorted by one-offs, buybacks, and leverage differences |
| EV/EBITDA | Enterprise value per $1 of operating cash-like profit | Comparing firms with different capital structures | EBITDA can understate reinvestment needs (capex) |
| EV/EBIT | EV per $1 of operating profit | Capex matters and depreciation is meaningful | EBIT can still be affected by accounting policies |
| P/S | Price per $1 of revenue | Early-stage or low-profit sectors | Ignores margins, so a “low” P/S can still be a value trap |
| P/B | Price per $1 of book equity | Banks, insurers, asset-heavy models | Book value quality varies with accounting and cycles |
Minimal formulas (only what you need)
A Relative Valuation Model typically uses 2 relationships:
- Enterprise value identity
\[\text{EV}=\text{Market Cap}+\text{Total Debt}-\text{Cash and Cash Equivalents}\]
- Implied valuation from a multiple (generic form)
If a peer multiple is \(M\) and the target metric is \(X\), then implied value is:
- For equity multiples (e.g., P/E): \(\text{Implied Market Cap}=M \times X\)
- For EV multiples (e.g., EV/EBITDA): \(\text{Implied EV}=M \times X\), then convert EV to equity value by subtracting net debt
These are standard finance relationships used in corporate finance and investment analysis.
Where the Relative Valuation Model is applied
Screening and triage
When you have many candidates, a Relative Valuation Model helps you quickly classify names as:
- Within peer range
- Premium to peers
- Discount to peers
This is not a buy or sell signal. It is a research prioritization tool.
Cross-checking intrinsic valuation
A DCF may yield a value that appears “too high” or “too low.” A Relative Valuation Model can help diagnose why:
- Are your growth assumptions too aggressive?
- Are you using a margin profile inconsistent with peers?
- Is the market paying a premium for a specific feature (brand, network effects, regulation)?
Communicating valuation ranges
Because it uses market language (multiples), the Relative Valuation Model is often easier to discuss with stakeholders who want a market-based view.
Comparison, Advantages, and Common Misconceptions
Relative vs intrinsic valuation (why both matter)
A Relative Valuation Model reflects current market pricing. Intrinsic valuation reflects fundamentals over time. The two can diverge meaningfully, especially when:
- Interest rates shift quickly
- Risk appetite changes
- A sector becomes crowded or unpopular
- Earnings are at a cyclical peak or trough
Used together, they provide a more robust view: intrinsic valuation frames “what should be,” while the Relative Valuation Model frames “what is being paid for similar risk right now.”
Advantages of a Relative Valuation Model
- Speed and simplicity: With reasonable data, you can build a working model quickly.
- Market realism: Multiples embed what investors currently reward or penalize.
- Comparability: Useful for ranking opportunities within a sector.
- Fewer long-term forecasts: You do not need a 10-year cash flow forecast to create a reference point.
Limitations and pitfalls
- Peer selection risk: The model can be “precise but wrong” if peers are not truly comparable.
- Cyclical distortions: At an earnings peak, P/E can look deceptively low. At a trough, it can look high.
- Accounting differences: Revenue recognition, depreciation policies, and one-time items can reduce comparability.
- Capital structure differences: Equity multiples can mislead when leverage varies widely. EV multiples may be more comparable, but they also have limits.
Common misconceptions (and how to avoid them)
“A low P/E always means undervalued”
Not necessarily. A low P/E can reflect:
- Lower growth
- Higher risk
- Temporary earnings spike
- Structural decline
A Relative Valuation Model works best when you ask: low relative to what, and why?
“Any company in the same industry is a peer”
Industry labels can hide major differences. Two firms may share a sector but differ in:
- Customer concentration
- Geographic exposure
- Margin structure
- Regulatory constraints
- Reinvestment needs
Peer selection is the core of the Relative Valuation Model.
“One multiple is enough”
A single multiple can be fragile. A more resilient Relative Valuation Model triangulates:
- A profitability-based multiple (P/E or EV/EBIT)
- A cash-flow proxy (EV/EBITDA, with capex awareness)
- A top-line anchor (P/S when margins are unstable)
Practical Guide
Build a clean Relative Valuation Model in 60-90 minutes
This section is a workflow you can repeat. It is educational content, not investment advice.
1) Choose peers with a checklist
A practical peer checklist:
- Same core product line and revenue drivers
- Similar size band (market cap or revenue)
- Similar margin range (gross and operating)
- Similar leverage (net debt/EBITDA or debt/equity)
- Similar growth regime (mature vs high-growth)
- Similar accounting and fiscal year timing where possible
If you cannot find perfect peers, prioritize business model similarity over “same sector label.”
2) Decide which metric you can trust
Ask what is “least noisy”:
- If earnings are stable, consider P/E or EV/EBIT
- If leverage differs, prefer EV-based multiples
- If margins are temporarily depressed, use P/S plus a margin discussion
- If the business is asset-driven (e.g., banks), consider P/B with balance-sheet quality checks
3) Normalize and document adjustments
Normalization examples:
- Remove major one-time restructuring charges if clearly non-recurring
- Use a consistent horizon (TTM vs forward) across peers
- Note unusual capital gains, litigation settlements, or asset sales
A Relative Valuation Model is only as credible as its notes.
4) Use ranges, not single-point precision
Instead of “the multiple is 18.7x,” present:
- Median
- 25th-75th percentile band
- A brief explanation of outliers (premium brands, distressed names)
Ranges can reduce false confidence.
Case Study: A simplified peer-multiple valuation (real company names, simplified math)
This example is a hypothetical learning illustration using a well-known U.S. retailer and peers. Figures are rounded and simplified and should be verified with up-to-date filings and market data before any real-world use. It is not a recommendation.
Scenario
You want to frame a Relative Valuation Model for Walmart using large-format retail peers Costco and Target as a rough peer set. Suppose you collect the following illustrative forward P/E multiples and Walmart’s forward EPS estimate from consensus sources (values change over time, treat as placeholders):
- Costco forward P/E: 30x
- Target forward P/E: 16x
- Walmart forward EPS: $6.00 (illustrative)
Compute the peer multiple:
- Median peer forward P/E ≈ 23x (median of 30x and 16x)
Implied Walmart price (illustrative):
- Implied Price ≈ \(23 \times \\)6.00 = $138$
Interpretation (how to think, not what to do)
A Relative Valuation Model output like $138 is not a “correct price.” It is a conditional statement:
- If Walmart were valued at the peer median multiple (23x), and if $6.00 forward EPS is a reasonable earnings anchor, then the implied price would be around $138.
- If Walmart merits a discount (slower growth, lower margin), you might test 18x-22x.
- If Walmart merits a premium (more defensive cash flows, scale advantages), you might test 23x-26x.
Add a second lens: EV/EBITDA cross-check (conceptual)
If leverage differs across the 3 companies, EV/EBITDA can be a helpful second check. You would:
- Compute each peer’s EV/EBITDA (forward or TTM, consistent)
- Take median or percentiles
- Multiply Walmart EBITDA by that multiple to get implied EV
- Convert EV to implied equity value by subtracting net debt
Using 2 multiples can make the Relative Valuation Model more resilient, but it does not remove model risk.
Resources for Learning and Improvement
Books and structured learning
- Corporate finance textbooks that cover multiples, enterprise value, and comparables analysis in a disciplined way
- Equity valuation references focusing on peer selection, normalization, and the relationship between growth, risk, and multiples
Data sources to practice (use more than one)
- Company annual reports (10-K, 20-F equivalents), quarterly reports, and earnings releases
- Investor presentations for segment notes and non-GAAP reconciliations
- Market data platforms that provide EV, EBITDA, and forward estimates (cross-check definitions carefully)
Practice drills that improve your Relative Valuation Model skill
- Peer-set drill: Build 3 peer sets (tight, medium, broad) and compare results.
- Multiple drill: Value the same target with P/E, EV/EBIT, and P/S, then explain differences.
- Normalization drill: Recompute earnings excluding one-time items, and observe multiple sensitivity.
- Cycle drill: Compare multiples at different points in the business cycle, and note when P/E becomes misleading.
FAQs
What is the biggest risk in a Relative Valuation Model?
Peer selection. If the “comparable” companies are not truly comparable in growth, margins, leverage, or risk, the Relative Valuation Model can produce outputs that are not meaningful.
Should I use TTM or forward multiples?
Either can work, but consistency matters. TTM is grounded in reported results but may reflect a cycle peak or trough. Forward multiples use expectations and can be more relevant for fast-changing businesses, but they depend on estimate quality.
Why do professionals prefer EV/EBITDA over P/E in some cases?
Because EV/EBITDA can reduce distortions from different capital structures. Two companies with similar operations but different debt levels can look very different on P/E, while EV/EBITDA may be more comparable (though it still has limitations).
Can a Relative Valuation Model be used for unprofitable companies?
Yes, but you typically shift toward revenue multiples like P/S and then explicitly analyze unit economics, margins, and a plausible path to profitability. Otherwise, the Relative Valuation Model may reward revenue scale without assessing quality.
Does a low multiple mean the market is wrong?
Not automatically. A low multiple can be a rational price for higher risk, lower growth, weak balance sheets, or declining fundamentals. The Relative Valuation Model indicates “cheap relative to peers,” not “mispriced.”
How many peers do I need?
There is no fixed number. A small but high-quality peer set can be more useful than a large but inconsistent one. Many analysts use 5-15 peers when possible, then rely on median and percentile bands to reduce outlier influence.
What makes a multiple “fair” in a Relative Valuation Model?
A “fair” multiple is one that compares like with like. It aligns companies with similar expected growth, profitability, reinvestment needs, and risk, using a metric (earnings, EBITDA, sales, or book value) that is meaningful for that business.
Conclusion
A Relative Valuation Model is a widely used tool in investing because it translates market information into a structured comparison using multiples like P/E and EV/EBITDA. Its usefulness comes from speed and market anchoring, but its credibility depends on disciplined peer selection, careful metric normalization, and using ranges rather than single-point outputs. When combined with a clear narrative about business quality, growth, risk, and financial structure, the Relative Valuation Model can help explain what the market is paying for similar companies, and why.
