📚 PASS Research Analyst Certification Examination Difficulty: Intermediate ℹ️ Info   ~5 min read
📌 Chapter 10.5 — Discounted Cash Flows Model for Business Valuation

Imagine you are drafting an initiation report for a mature FMCG company listed on the NSE. You have projected dividends for the next five years, but for the terminal value, you rely on the Gordon Growth Model (GGM). While the calculation is mathematically elegant, your valuation is tethered to a set of rigid assumptions that, if violated, can render your entire report misleading. Understanding these underlying constraints is what separates a mechanical calculator from a professional analyst.

The most critical assumption of the GGM is that the dividend payout ratio is constant and that the growth rate (g) remains perpetually stable. In the real world, companies go through cycles of capital expenditure and balance sheet restructuring that rarely align with a permanent, unchanging growth rate. If you assume a growth rate of 6% for a legacy textile firm that is currently facing stiff competition from agile, e-commerce-focused startups, your model will fundamentally overstate the terminal value and provide an inaccurate ‘buy’ recommendation.

Furthermore, the model assumes that the Cost of Equity (Ke) is strictly greater than the perpetual growth rate. If your calculation results in a scenario where ‘g’ approaches or exceeds ‘Ke’, the denominator in the formula shrinks toward zero, causing the stock’s value to inflate to an unrealistic level. This limitation reminds us that the GGM is intended specifically for firms in a ‘steady state’ of their lifecycle.

For companies still experiencing rapid expansion or those with high cyclicality, the GGM is often the wrong tool, and a multi-stage DCF model is a much safer, more robust choice.

Consider the case of an established private sector bank. If you use the GGM to value its shares while the bank is undergoing a massive digital transformation phase, you are ignoring the volatility in its capital requirements and payout policy. A professional analyst must validate that the chosen growth rate is sustainable within the context of the broader Indian macroeconomic outlook, typically keeping ‘g’ conservative and in line with long-term GDP expectations.

When the assumptions fail to match the reality of the business lifecycle, the valuation serves as a trap rather than a map.

Nuance

⚠️ Nuance
Candidates often fall into the trap of using the GGM for companies with volatile or zero-dividend histories simply because the math is convenient. The model’s most subtle pitfall is the ‘constant growth’ fallacy; analysts frequently forget that a growth rate higher than the nominal GDP growth of India is rarely sustainable for any firm over the long run. If your terminal growth rate exceeds the economy’s long-term growth rate, you are effectively implying that the firm will eventually become larger than the entire economy, which is a structural impossibility that invalidates your terminal value.

Check Your Understanding

Practice Question 1

An analyst is valuing a stable utility company using the Gordon Growth Model. Which of the following scenarios would make the application of this model mathematically invalid or conceptually inappropriate?

Practice Question 2

Which of the following best describes the core limitation of using the Gordon Growth Model for a high-growth technology startup?

This is a companion read for Section 10.5 — Discounted Cash Flows Model for Business Valuation from PASS Research Analyst Certification Examination by Akhilesh Gururani, available on Amazon Kindle.

Copyright © 2026 Akhilesh Gururani. All rights reserved.