Gross rental multiplier method. Total capitalization ratio
Within the framework of the market approach to the appraisal of the value of real estate objects, either the gross rental multiplier or the capitalization ratio is often used to compare analogous objects and the object of appraisal.
The gross rental multiple (GRM) is the ratio of the selling price of a property to the income from that property. It is understood that if there are differences in amenities or location between the property being valued and comparable properties, then these are already reflected in the sales prices and in the rental rates.
The calculation of the total capitalization ratio (R) is based on the direct capitalization of income earned from operating a comparable property by dividing it by the selling price of the comparable property. The use of this method for appraising real estate objects allows us to eliminate the disadvantages inherent in the method of gross rent multiplier, because in this case, comparable objects are selected, characterized by an income stream similar in risk and duration to the income stream of the evaluated object.
Appraisers usually carry out the appraisal of a real estate object by all three methods considered (cost, profitable and market). The final cost of the property is determined as a result of the agreement, i.e. analysis of alternative conclusions about the value of the appraisal object, obtained on the basis of various approaches in order to determine the final appraisal of the value.
The approval criteria are:
The suitability of each approach for the purpose of using the assessment;
Accuracy of information and calculations performed for each approach;
The validity and consistency of the evidence carried out in the course of applying each of the approaches.
Based on the analysis performed, the evaluator gives weight to each approach. Therefore, the final cost estimate is a weighted average of the cost.
The results of the evaluation work are usually presented in the form of a report. Wherein international standards require such a report to be called a “Valuation Report” or “Valuation Certificate”.
Uniform classification of assessment reports at the level international organizations not yet developed. However, there are various classifications of reports at the national level and at the level of individual government departments and commercial companies.
The most numerous are classifications of reports according to the depth of study of the material and the degree of detail in the presentation of the main facts and conclusions. For example, consider the following classification used by the Appraisal Institute (USA): oral report; report in the form of a letter; short report; full report.
The oral form of evaluation reports is usually used when the client is satisfied with the most superficial and unconfirmed preliminary information. An oral assessment report may be used in cases where subsequent references to it are excluded. The transfer of the assessment results to the customer can take place in person or by phone. The announcement of the appraiser's expert opinion in court is also considered an oral appraisal report. Each oral report must include a description of the property being valued, factual information, assumptions made and the rationale behind the conclusion about value.
The report in the form of a letter contains General characteristics the property being valued and the value of the value obtained as a result of the analysis. In this case, two situations are possible - the assessment was carried out in an abbreviated version and the assessment was carried out in a full version.
In the first option, the letter should indicate all the limitations within which the assessment was carried out, and also mention that the result is preliminary. In the second option, the letter should indicate that the assessment was carried out in full, and reference should be made to the location of the full version of the report. In practice, such letters are most often used in the form of notifying the client about the completion of the assessment.
The short form of the report is widespread in specialized organizations dealing with insurance and mortgage lending. Like a letter report, a summary report can reflect either the results of a limited assessment or the results of a full assessment. If the assessment was carried out in accordance with the terms of reference for the assessment in an abbreviated version or in the presence of significant restrictions, such facts should be indicated both in the report and in all references to it. If the summary report reflects the results obtained in the full report, then reference should be made to the completeness of the study and the location of the full report.
The summary records can be done either in narrative form or in the form of specially designed forms and tables.
Finally, the last type of assessment reports, in the classification under consideration, is the full report, which is Full description initial information, its analysis and conclusions about the value of the cost.
Let's consider in more detail the typical content of a full report on the assessment of market value.
At its core, a complete assessment report is a freeform document. However, experience practical activities shows that a certain structuring and standardization of the presentation of the material greatly simplifies both the writing and the study of such a document. Recommended standard form a complete market valuation report contains the following main sections.
Title page
On the title page the name and address of the appraisal object, the date of appraisal, the name of the client and appraiser are indicated.
A cover letter addressed to the client will precede the report. It confirms the fact of completion of the appraisal work, provides the main characteristics of the appraisal object and the value of the property obtained as a result of the appraisal.
Summary of key facts and findings
V this section The report lists the following items:
Basic Provisions terms of reference for assessment;
Additional information materially related to the value of the cost;
The main results obtained in the analysis and processing of the initial information.
The material in this section is intended to quickly familiarize the client with the main points of the work performed.
Basic premises, assumptions and limitations
A listing of the assumptions, assumptions and limitations used by the appraiser is a mandatory element of the report. At the same time, particular emphasis is placed on the positions indicated by the client and not coinciding with the standard approaches in the assessment.
The indicative list of prerequisites, assumptions and limitations in assessing market value contains the following items.
The appraisal report is only valid in its entirety. The use of certain provisions and conclusions outside the context of the entire report is incorrect and may lead to distortion of research results.
The results and content of the report are reliable only for the purpose of the assessment specified in the terms of reference.
In order to avoid misinterpretation of the assessment results, any references to the report materials, as well as translation of the report into foreign languages without the appropriate edition and permission of the appraiser are not allowed.
Work on the technical examination of the object of assessment was carried out in the amount agreed with the client. (If, in the opinion of the evaluator, the depth of research is insufficient, which may affect the result obtained, this fact must be indicated). For the presence of hidden defects, the detection of which is impossible by visual or non-destructive methods, the evaluator does not accept responsibility.
Special studies of the environmental situation are not provided for in the terms of reference for the assessment. (If provided, then to what extent.)
No expert examination of the legal aspects of property rights has been carried out. The property being evaluated is considered free from all claims from third parties, except as specified in the report.
The opinion of the appraiser regarding the value obtained is valid only as of the date of the appraisal. The appraiser does not accept responsibility for changes in the situation after the date of appraisal, which may affect the value of the appraisal item.
The result of the assessment depends entirely on the adequacy and accuracy of the information used and on the assumptions made. As a result, the obtained value of the market value is probabilistic in nature with certain dispersion parameters, regardless of whether it is expressed in one number, or in the form of a range.
The appraisal report contains the appraiser's professional opinion regarding the value of the property for the appraisal purpose specified in the terms of reference and is not a guarantee that the appraisal item will be sold on the free market at a price equal to the value obtained in this report.
Along with general positions, in this list should include additional items, which, in the opinion of the appraiser, significantly affect the result. For example: if the assessment was carried out without sufficient amount of necessary information, if the client did not disclose the purpose of the assessment, etc. In such cases, the evaluator should clearly indicate whether Additional Information and research for a final conclusion on cost. Separately, specify the client's specific instructions for evaluation.
List of conditions allowing publication of assessment results or reference to them
If, in accordance with the contract for the assessment, the publication of the assessment results or an open link to them is planned, then simultaneously with the submission of the report, the assessor must submit a draft material for publication or reference. This project should contain minimum necessary information, which will avoid misinterpretation of the assessment results. In addition, the evaluator must declare in writing that, before giving consent, he must familiarize himself with and study the draft form and content of the proposed publication. The appraiser must receive a signal copy before going to press and sign it.
Name, qualifications and status of the appraiser;
Date and base of the assessment;
An indication of the standards against which the assessment was made;
Special assumptions and deviations from the standards adopted during the assessment;
Limitations and instructions of the client in the course of this assessment.
Date and scope of technical examination
The date or period during which the technical examination was carried out, the names and qualifications of experts or appraisers, the volume and depth of the work performed are given. If in the process of assessment facts are revealed that indicate the need for a deeper technical expertise, the opinion of specialists is given regarding the impact of additional data on the value of the object.
If, for any reason, access to the object or to individual elements of the structure was difficult, you must indicate this fact.
Determination of the assessment base
Is given full definition and relevant comments on the assessment base agreed in the terms of reference.
Analysis of the socio-economic situation in the region
This section of the report examines the market situation in the following areas:
Short description natural and climatic features of the region;
Key macroeconomic indicators;
Key indicators by sectors of the economy, the dynamics of their change and the impact on the positioning of the subject of assessment in the market;
Basic indicators social development, the dynamics of their change and influence on the positioning of the subject of assessment in the market;
Main characteristics of the real estate market;
Conclusions on the section by substantiating the current and prospective positioning of the subject of assessment in the market, determining the most likely typical buyer and his investment motivation.
As an illustration, a map of the region is shown showing the location of the assessment object.
Analysis of the location of the object of assessment
Based on the specific characteristics of the location, positive and negative factors are identified that significantly affect the cost:
The nature of the surrounding land use type;
Transport accessibility;
Engineering networks and public services;
Social infrastructure;
Economic location;
The ecological state of the area;
Social reputation;
Criminogenic situation.
A map of the area showing the location of the assessment object is provided as an illustration.
Description of the object of assessment
A detailed description of the land plot, buildings and structures is provided. The space-planning and constructive solutions, engineering support of the object are detailed. As an illustration, plans, cartograms, photographic materials are given.
The Appendix to the report contains an act of technical examination of the object with defective statements.
Analysis of the best and most effective use
Depending on the composition of the terms of reference, an analysis is made of the best and most effective use of the land plot as free and / or property with available improvements.
"Determination of cost by the cost method",
"Determination of value by the market method",
"Determination of value by the income method"
Reconciliation of assessment results
On the basis of the performed analysis and calculations, and taking into account all the conclusions obtained, the opinion of the appraiser is formulated regarding the market value of the appraisal object.
Appraisal certificate
In this section of the report, the evaluator:
Informs about professional standards on the basis of which the work was performed;
Confirms compliance when assessing standards professional ethics;
Declares his status in the performance of work, that is, whether he is an internal, external or independent appraiser;
Provides the value obtained as a result of the appraisal, indicating the date of the appraisal;
He puts his signature and stamp.
List of used literature
Provides a list of normative, technical, special literature and printed sources used in the assessment.
General information about appraiser
Indicated educational institutions, including professional, the dates of their graduation, the name of the received specialties and qualifications, academic degrees and titles, membership and qualifications in professional societies, a list of completed appraisal work and other information that allows the client to get an opinion on the appraiser's professionalism and experience.
Applications
The application contains:
Information about analogue objects, indicating the sources of information;
Calculations and information that were used in the performance of the work, indicating the sources;
Graphic and photographic materials illustrating the subject of assessment.
Developed competencies:
know
- what is the procedure for agreeing the results of the assessment of technical objects obtained using the methods of various approaches (in particular, costly and comparative);
- what is the system of criteria for the selection of weighting factors;
be able to
- justify the coefficients selected for weighing, the sufficiency of the data array used for the assessment;
- identify and analyze the contradictions in the analytical conclusions on which the evaluative decisions are based;
own
- methods of expert assessments;
- by the method of analysis of hierarchies for carrying out the procedure for agreeing the results of the assessment.
Approval procedure as the final stage of the assessment report
The final stage of the assessment is the reconciliation of the results obtained by different methods within the framework of the approaches used. The purpose of this agreement is to obtain the final final value of the cost. The final cost of the appraised machine represents the expert, impartial and well-grounded judgment of a qualified, professional appraiser about one or another form of the appraised value of the appraisal object, recorded in the appraisal assignment. In accordance with the requirements of the Federal Security Service for the report, the value of the appraised value is given in the form of a single ruble amount, representing the point value of the appraisal.
Coordination - analysis of alternative conclusions obtained by applying three different approaches to valuation in order to determine a single (agreed) value of the assessed value.
The appraiser should not simply average the three cost metrics. The final appraised value is never recognized as a result of the averaging, i.e. cannot be obtained by summing all the estimated values and then dividing that amount by the number of approaches used. Averaging the results of different methods does not guarantee the correct conclusion about the assessment, since in this case it is assumed that when performing the assessment, each approach gave an equally reliable result, which is extremely rare in practice.
On the ideal (open and competitive) market, all three classical approaches should lead to the same amount of value. However, most markets are imperfect, supply and demand are not in equilibrium. Potential users can be misinformed and manufacturers ineffective. For these and other reasons, these approaches can give different indicators of value, which the evaluator compares with each other, carrying out the approval procedure.
The evaluator should take into account that the client usually requires an explanation of the reasons for the discrepancy between the results and the justification for the reconciliation process. Professional appraisers in the United States consider a 10% range of values obtained using different approaches to be acceptable. If, when agreeing, any of the cost indicators differs significantly from the others, then the appraiser must find out why. If the cause is not math or other errors that can be corrected, then the assessment report should indicate what led to the discrepancy and, possibly, rely less on the result of this approach when agreeing.
The most preferable option for carrying out the procedure for agreeing the results obtained in order to obtain the final value of the cost is considered weighted averaging. The appraiser weighs the extent to which this or that approach corresponds to the purpose of evaluating the object under consideration, whether the calculations carried out are supported by market data, whether they do not contradict them. At the final conclusion, he largely relies on the cost indicator, which is obtained on the basis of the approach that is most adequate to the task at hand. The solution to the question of which cost estimates should be given more weight and, as a result of this or that approach, weighed against the results of other approaches is key at the final stage of the assessment.
The appraiser must prove that the dataset used is sufficient to carry out the appraisal from the point of view of all market participants.
The calculation of the final value of the cost should be preceded by a comprehensive control of the valuation procedure. The evaluator needs to ensure that the information used, analytical methods, assumptions and logic of justification made it possible to obtain adequate and comparable results of the cost of the machine (equipment, vehicle). Analysis techniques must correspond to the purpose of the assessment, defined) "type of cost, method and stage of cost calculation.
The appraiser is obliged to identify and analyze the contradictions in the analytical conclusions on which the appraisal decisions and calculations in various approaches to the appraisal are based, in order to eliminate the discrepancies. For determining specific gravity(in percent or fractions of a unit) for each result of applying any approach, a quantitative and qualitative analysis considering the following factors:
- purpose of the assessment and the intended use of its results:
- type (standard) of value (for example, reasonable market value or investment value);
- the nature of the estimated share of ownership;
- quantity and quality of data supporting this approach;
- the level of control of the considered share of ownership;
- the level of its liquidity.
Taking into account all factors allows weighing and ultimately drawing a final conclusion.
Appraisers usually carry out the appraisal of the property by all the methods considered. Depending on the purpose of the assessment and the information available, each of the three assessment methods is applicable to a greater or lesser extent, and gives a more or less reliable result. These differences should be taken into account when consolidating the conclusions obtained by these methods into a single integrated assessment of the real estate object.
In developed markets, close to the equilibrium of supply and demand, all three values of estimates obtained different methods should be close to each other. In such markets, the proximity of the estimates obtained serves as an indirect confirmation of their correctness and reliability. But in the conditions of undeveloped and / or unbalanced real estate markets, which are typical for modern Russia, estimates obtained by different methods can differ significantly from each other. But the result should be a unified assessment of the object.
The final stage of the assessment involves deciding on the discrepancies in the results of the three different approaches.
Typically completing this task involves:
An indication of the values of the object's value, calculated using each of the three approaches;
A brief description of the procedure for performing calculations, the quantity and quality of the information used, adopted
assumptions and constraints and their conformity with typical market conditions;
Establishing the relative strength and weakness of each of the approaches used in relation to this type of real estate and to a specific object;
Judgment on this basis as to how much weight should be given to the result of each of the approaches used.
The results agreement model is expressed by the following formula:
C = (C1 * K1+ C2 * K2 + C3 * K3) / (K1+ K2 + K3),
WITH- the final value of the assessment of the object;
C1- assessment by comparison of sales;
C2- assessment by capitalization of income;
C3- cost estimation;
K1; K2 and K3 corresponding weights
(usually as a percentage: Kl + K2 + K3 = 100 ).
At the same time, special attention is paid to the factors influencing "the determination of the specific weight of each method (approach). Giving weights or the degree of confidence to each method, appraisers determine based on the quantity and quality of information obtained by these methods, the level of liquidity of the object, the purpose of the appraisal.
The comparison of the obtained values is also made taking into account the factors of internal and external influence on the value of the object, physical and functional wear and tear of the object, standard price, types of value, element-by-element comparison of costs, and taking into account marginal deviation the level of assessment of the object in accordance with the "Standard for the analysis of relative indicators of value" adopted by the IAAO.
Then the choice of the final value of the object value can be carried out in three ways: as an arithmetic mean, mathematical weighing and subjective weighing of the assessment results.
Mathematical weighing of the assessment results consists in giving certain weights (in percent) to each result of the assessment of the object's value and calculating the weighted average value, which will be the final value of the object's value. Subjective weighting of the assessment results consists in the intuitive weighting of the used assessment methods by analyzing their advantages and disadvantages, giving certain weights to the assessment results obtained by various methods, and choosing on this basis the final value of the value of the property. The accuracy and reliability of the assessment result in this case depends on the qualifications and experience of the expert - the assessor.
At the same time, as a rule, the arithmetic mean of the three assessment results is not derived and one of them is not selected as the final one (these are admissible, but rare special cases of the general model for matching estimates by three methods). Usually, according to this model, the final value of the assessment is chosen somewhere between them.
In general, the best approximation to the conditions of an unbalanced market is provided by the sales comparison method, since the information used by it automatically takes into account the balance of supply and demand for objects similar to the object being evaluated, as well as the entire set of factors affecting their market prices. If there is a sufficient amount of reliable information, and the sale and purchase market is more developed than the rental market (for example, as for the apartment market in Moscow), then it should be preferred over other methods.
For those types of objects where the rental market predominates (for example, warehouses in Moscow), and there is relevant information on rent, but on sale and purchase it is limited, the greatest weight should be given to the method of capitalization of income "(in any of its implementation). In cases where there is no developed land market (as in Moscow) and the imbalance between supply and demand for real estate is typical for modern Russia, it is advisable to give low weight to the cost method.
If the market for this type of objects is not developed either for sale or for rent, and the corresponding market information is almost unavailable, then, by necessity, the cost method receives a lot of weight, and the other two have less weight. However, it should be understood that the obtained estimate may not correspond to the effective demand, and the transaction price on the market may differ significantly from the one obtained by the cost-based assessment method.
Generally speaking, the more developed the market, the higher its stability and balance, the closer the transaction price will be to the market value of the property.
Harmonization of the results obtained on the basis of various approaches and methods is the last stage in determining the value of the property being evaluated. The final result of the assessment can be presented in the form of one monetary value or the range of the most probable values of the value, represented by the minimum and maximum value.
At this stage of the assessment, first of all, it is necessary to check the results obtained in order to identify mathematical and logical errors that increase the degree of discrepancy between the results of the income, cost and comparative approaches.
The procedure for agreeing the verified results is determined by the content of the assessment task, the approaches and assessment methods used, the completeness and reliability of the information used, the identification of the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used.
The determining criteria for the hierarchy of each result is the ability to reflect the actual intentions of a potential seller or buyer, the quality of information on the basis of which the analysis is carried out, the ability of each method and approach to take into account market fluctuations. market and specific pricing features of the object, such as location, size, potential profitability.
Taking into account the above, the evaluator accepts the coefficients of the weight of the intermediate results obtained on the basis of the use of various approaches. The weight value of each approach can be calculated using both expert and mathematical methods.
FINAL ARRANGEMENT OF RESULTS
The final element of the assessment process is to compare the results obtained using different approaches and bring them to a single cost. The alignment process takes into account the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, determines how much they significantly affect the objective reflection of the market in the assessment. The process of comparing the results of applying the approaches leads to the establishment of the final cost, which achieves the goal of the assessment. The final cost is professional judgment of the appraiser regarding the value of the appraisal object.
The last stage in determining the value of the appraised business is the procedure for agreeing the results obtained by the appraiser when implementing various approaches and methods (enshrined in international and Russian standards appraisal activities) in relation to one object within one process (assignment for assessment). The final cost is the professional judgment of the appraiser regarding the value of the item being appraised.
The need for this procedure is due to the fact that in most cases the implementation of different approaches and methods gives unequal cost results (sometimes the difference reaches up to 50%). The reason for this is that most markets are imperfect, potential users can be misinformed, and manufacturers can be ineffective. For these and a number of other reasons, the use of different approaches gives a different value of the cost.
Reconciliation of assessment results- this is obtaining the final assessment of the object by weighing and comparing the results obtained using different approaches to assessment.
The total value of the value of the object of assessment- this is the most probable value of the value of the object of appraisal, obtained as a result of the generalization of the results of calculations of the value of the object of appraisal by the appraiser using various approaches and methods of appraisal. It can be presented in the form of a single monetary value or a range of the most probable value values.
Usually, one of the approaches is considered basic, the other two are necessary to adjust the results obtained... This takes into account the significance and applicability of each approach in a specific situation. Due to the underdevelopment of the market, the specificity of the object or the lack of available information, it happens that some of the approaches in a specific situation cannot be applied.
GENERAL FORMULA FOR THE FINAL ASSIGNMENT OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS
where is the total cost of the object of appraisal, p .; - the cost, determined respectively by the profitable, comparative and cost-based approaches, p .; - the appropriate weighting factors chosen for each assessment approach,
The weighting factors for reconciling the results obtained in the total cost are rounded to the nearest 10% (less often to 5%). Rounding is necessary due to the fact that unrounded weights give the customer of the report an erroneous idea of the accuracy of the result obtained.
When agreeing, it is necessary to take into account:
1) completeness and accuracy of information;
2) the conformity of the assessment procedure to the purposes of the assessment;
3) the advantages and disadvantages of approaches in a particular situation.
Thus, the total value of the value is only the most probable price of the estimated business.
METHODS FOR DETERMINING WEIGHT COEFFICIENTS AND CONSIDERING THE ASSESSMENT RESULTS
The methods differ in the use in the final data reconciliation of unequal methods of choosing the weights assigned to the assessment results obtained by different approaches. If in the first method only logical analysis is used, then in the rest it is logical and mathematical, that is, the evaluator imposes his logical reasoning on some rating scale, then, based on the chosen calculation method, a preliminary value of the weight coefficients is determined; the resulting values are rounded.
LOGICAL ANALYSIS METHOD
Logical analysis method consists in the choice of weighting factors when agreeing the results of the assessment expertly , based on the logical analysis carried out by the evaluator, taking into account all relevant parameters. This method is the most common in appraisal practice.
EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF THE LOGICAL ANALYSIS METHOD
1. Determine the final value of the appraisal of the cost of JSC "Samara Plant", carried out in order to further purchase the business.
2. Determine the final value of the appraisal of the cost property complex JSC "Samara Plant".
CRITERIA MATCHING METHOD
To determine the weight coefficients of various approaches, this method uses four objective criteria , chosen at the discretion of the appraiser, which describe individual advantages or disadvantages of the applied calculation method, taking into account the peculiarities of the appraisal of a particular business.
The calculation of "weights" by this method is carried out in several stages:
1) a matrix of factors is built in which each approach is assigned four types of points in accordance with four criteria (there are more criteria, therefore, there are more points);
2) the sum of the points of each approach is determined, then - the approaches used;
3) in relation to the sum of the points of this approach to the sum of the points of all the approaches used, the calculated weight of the approach is determined, as a percentage;
4) the estimated weights of approaches are rounded to the nearest 10%, less often - 5%.
EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF THE MATCHING CRITERIA METHOD
Determine the total value of the value of the appraisal object by the method of matching criteria.
| An approach | Profitable | Comparative | Costly |
| Calculated cost, rub. | 5 000 000 | 3 000 000 | 2 000 000 |
| Criterion | Points | ||
| 1. The ability to reflect the actual intentions of a potential investor and seller | |||
| 2. Reliability and sufficiency of the information on the basis of which the analysis and calculations were carried out | |||
| 3. The ability of the parameters of the methods used to take into account market fluctuations | |||
| 4. Ability to take into account the specific features of the object that affect its value | |||
| TOTAL SCORE FOR THE APPROACH | |||
| The approach was applied | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Points total | |||
| Approach weight,% | 40 | 34,3 | 25,7 |
| Approach weight, rounded,% | |||
| Approach value taking into account weighing, rub. | 2 000 000 | 900 000 | 600 000 |
| AGREED VALUE OF COST, rub. | 3 500 000 | ||
| TOTAL MARKET VALUE OF THE OBJECT ROUNDUP, RUB | 3 500 000 |
METHOD FOR ANALYSIS OF HIERARCHIES
Hierarchy analysis method(MAI) is a systematic procedure for the hierarchical representation of the elements that define the essence of any problem. It consists in dividing (decomposing) the problem into simpler components and further processing the evaluator's sequential judgments by pairwise comparisons.
In MAI, the main goal of the study and all factors that, to one degree or another, affect the achievement of the goal, are distributed by levels depending on the degree and nature of the influence. At the first level of the hierarchy, there is always one top - the goal of the research being carried out. The second level of the hierarchy consists of factors that directly affect the achievement of the goal. In this case, each factor is represented in the hierarchy under construction by a vertex connected to a vertex of the 1st level. The third level is made up of the factors on which the tops of the second level depend. Etc. This process of building a hierarchy continues until all the main factors are included in the hierarchy, or until it is impossible to directly obtain the necessary information for at least one of the factors of the last level. At the end of the construction of the hierarchy, for each parent vertex, an assessment of the weight coefficients is carried out, which determine the degree of its dependence on the vertices influencing it by more than low level... In this case, the method of pairwise comparisons is used.
Pairwise comparison method (T. Saaty's version).
In this modification, as in the classical version of the paired comparison method, the studied factors are compared with each other. Moreover, in this method, the factors are compared in pairs in relation to their impact ("weight", or "intensity") on a common characteristic for them.
| A1 | A2 | … | An | Let A1, A2, ..., An be the main factors determining the composition of the object. Then, to determine the structure of the object, a matrix of pairwise comparisons is filled. If we denote the fraction of the factor Ai by w i, then the element of the matrix a ij = w i / w j. Thus, in the proposed application of the method of paired comparisons, not the magnitude of the differences in the values of the factors are determined, but their ratio. Moreover, it is obvious that a ij = 1 / a ji. Therefore, the matrix of pairwise comparisons in this case is a positive definite, inversely symmetric matrix with rank equal to 1. | |
| A1 | a 12 | … | a 1n | ||
| A2 | a 21 | … | a 2n | ||
| … | … | … | |||
| An | a n1 | a n2 | … |
To conduct subjective pairwise comparisons, T. Saaty developed a scale of relative importance.
In an ideal market, all three approaches should lead to the same amount of value, but in practice, the values obtained by different methods can differ significantly (from 5 to 50% or even more, especially when evaluating a business). For example, in the analysis of a financially unstable enterprise, the profit of which is insignificant (if any), the value obtained on the basis of the income approach is very small, but the enterprise has significant tangible assets and obtained using costly approach the value of the cost can exceed the previous value by tens and hundreds of times.
In accordance with the legislation, unless otherwise stipulated in the appraisal agreement, the total value of the appraisal object must be expressed in rubles as a single value.
The total value of the value of the object of assessment- the value of the value of the object of appraisal, obtained as a result of the generalization of the results of calculations of the value of the object of appraisal by the appraiser using various approaches to appraisal and methods of appraisal.
To bring together the disparate values of the value obtained by classical approaches to valuation, the results are reconciled.
Reconciliation of assessment results- This is obtaining a final assessment of the property by weighing and comparing the results obtained using different approaches to valuation.
As a rule, one of the approaches is considered basic, the other two are necessary to adjust the results obtained. This takes into account the significance and applicability of each approach in a specific situation. Due to the underdevelopment of the market, the specificity of the object or the lack of available information, it happens that some of the approaches in a specific situation cannot be applied.
To agree on the results, it is necessary to determine the "weights", in accordance with which individual previously obtained values will form the final market value of the property, taking into account all significant parameters based on the expert opinion of the appraiser.
The reconciliation of the results obtained by different assessment approaches is carried out according to the formula
S IT = S ZP × K 1 + S DP × K 2 + S SP × K 3, (4.3)
where IT- the total cost of the object of assessment;
With ZP, With DP, With SP- costs determined by cost, income and comparative approaches;
K 1, K 2, K 3- the appropriate weights chosen for each assessment approach.
In relation to these coefficients, the equality is fulfilled:
K 1 + K 2 + K 3 = 1.
The weights chosen for each assessment approach are rounded to the nearest 10% (less often to 5%) in order to use these weights for reconciliation. Rounding is necessary due to the fact that unrounded weights give the reader of the report an erroneous idea of the accuracy of the result obtained. The total cost is only the most likely price.
On the basis of the rounded weights, the agreed value of the property being valued is calculated by multiplying the result obtained with each approach by the rounded approach weight calculated for the purpose of the reconciliation of values. The resulting value is rounded.
When agreeing, the following are taken into account:
1) completeness and reliability of information;
2) compliance with the goal;
3) the advantages and disadvantages of approaches in a particular situation.
For example, the advantages of the method of discounting cash flows - taking into account the expectations of the administration of the enterprise regarding future profits, expenses, capital investments... But these are just predictive estimates that may change in reality. Nevertheless, this method shows the amount that the investor is willing to pay, focusing on expectations regarding the results of the enterprise, taking into account the required return on investment.
The comparative approach is the only one that takes into account the market situation; it presents an estimate based on real data on stock quotes and sales of similar companies. Its main disadvantage is the need to adjust for the closeness of the company (capital market method). In addition, everyone, even small businesses, have significant differences, which require complex adjustments. In addition, this approach is based on retrospective information that does not take into account the prospects for the development of the enterprise.
