EBITDA Multiple Calculator (EV/EBITDA)
From enterprise value and EBITDA, compute the EV/EBITDA multiple — a relative valuation benchmark.
輸入資料
計算結果
重點速覽：EV/EBITDA = enterprise value / EBITDA. EV = market cap + net debt; EBITDA is core operating earnings. Using EV (not equity) and EBITDA (not net income) makes it capital-structure neutral and comparable across tax/depreciation — ideal for cross-border/cross-industry M&A. Lower = cheaper. WARNING: EBITDA ≠ cash flow (ignores capex, working capital); multiples vary hugely by industry; EV口径 must be consistent; compare with peers/history and P/E/FCF. Education, not advice.
計算公式
EBITDA 倍數 = 企業價值 (EV) ÷ EBITDA。
$$\text{EV/EBITDA} = \dfrac{EV}{EBITDA}$$$$EV = \text{市值} + \text{淨債務}$$使用說明
- Enter enterprise value (market cap + net debt).
- Enter EBITDA.
- View the EV/EBITDA multiple and compare with peers.
固定 EBITDA = HK$100,000,000，在不同企業價值 (EV) 下的 EV/EBITDA 倍數
| 企業價值 EV | EBITDA | EV/EBITDA | 隱含回本年期 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HK$500,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 | 5.00 倍 | 約 5 年 |
| HK$600,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 | 6.00 倍 | 約 6 年 |
| HK$800,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 | 8.00 倍 | 約 8 年 |
| HK$1,200,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 | 12.00 倍 | 約 12 年 |
| HK$1,800,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 | 18.00 倍 | 約 18 年 |
理財情境案例
案例一：用 EV/EBITDA 評估收購代價
一家私募基金考慮收購某製造企業，其企業價值 (市值 + 淨債務) 為 HK$800,000,000，年 EBITDA 為 HK$100,000,000。EV/EBITDA = 800,000,000 ÷ 100,000,000 = 8.00 倍。
這 8 倍代表：若 EBITDA 維持不變，理論上約 8 年的 EBITDA 便可『回本』整家公司的收購代價。基金拿這 8 倍與同業近期併購倍數 (假設約 9–10 倍) 及歷史區間比較，發現略低於行業平均，估值面看似合理。不過他們也提醒自己：EBITDA 未扣維持營運所需的龐大資本開支，因此還會進一步用自由現金流檢視這 8 倍是否真的划算，而非只憑倍數低就出手。
案例二：為何 EV/EBITDA 比 P/E 更公允
兩家 EBITDA 同為 HK$100,000,000 的公司：A 公司幾乎零負債，EV 為 HK$600,000,000 (EV/EBITDA = 6.0 倍);B 公司大量舉債，EV 為 HK$900,000,000 (EV/EBITDA = 9.0 倍)。
若只看市盈率，B 公司因利息支出令淨利潤偏低、P/E 可能被扭曲得難以比較;但 EV/EBITDA 同時在『利息之前』(EBITDA 未扣利息、EV 涵蓋股債)，能公平呈現：B 公司 9 倍明顯貴於 A 公司 6 倍。這正是 EV/EBITDA 的價值——在比較負債程度差異大的公司時，它比 P/E 更能反映真實的相對估值，避免被資本結構誤導。
常見問題
How is EV/EBITDA better than P/E?
Two advantages. (1) Capital-structure neutral: P/E uses market cap and net income (interest already deducted, so debt affects it); EV/EBITDA uses EV (equity+debt) and EBITDA (pre-interest), both pre-interest, so fairer for firms with different debt. (2) Cross-tax/cross-depreciation comparable: EBITDA strips tax and depreciation, enabling same-ruler comparison across jurisdictions/policies — great for cross-border M&A. P/E is closer to shareholder return; use both.
What multiple is cheap?
No absolute standard — depends on industry and growth. Mature low-growth (utilities, manufacturing) may be 5-8x; high-growth high-margin tech/brands 15-20x+. Compare with peers and the firm's own history; clearly below suggests cheap/undervalued, but watch for fundamental deterioration. Cross-industry comparison is meaningless.
What are the traps of EBITDA valuation?
Biggest: treating EBITDA as cash flow. It adds back depreciation/amortisation, but those assets need replacement — for capital-intensive firms (telecom, airlines, manufacturing) capex is huge, so EBITDA overstates real cash and makes EV/EBITDA look low when it isn't. It also ignores working-capital changes and actual interest/tax. Always check free cash flow and capex needs.
How should I compute EV?
Commonly: EV = equity market cap + total debt - cash & equivalents (market cap + net debt). Sometimes add minorities, preferreds, subtract long-term investments, per purpose. 'Net debt' not 'total debt' because cash can repay part of the debt, reducing the acquirer's net cost. Note EV has multiple口径 — keep consistent across firms. Use this site's enterprise-value calculator first if needed.
How to combine EV/EBITDA with P/S and P/B?
They each show a facet. EV/EBITDA looks at core operating earnings vs the whole firm (capital-structure neutral, cross-tax comparable) — good for mature, positive-EBITDA firms. P/S or EV/Sales looks at revenue scale — good for unprofitable, negative-EBITDA high-growth firms. P/B looks at book assets — good for banks, property. Use several to cross-check: if EV/EBITDA is low but EV/Sales high, it may reflect margin/quality differences worth digging into. One multiple alone is partial.
相關工具
參考資料
內容審核：香港計算器財經團隊。計算邏輯與公式參考香港金融管理局（HKMA）及投資者及理財教育委員會（IFEC）之個人理財計算指引，結果僅供參考，實際以相關機構公佈為準。