Skip to content

Whose profit it is, and whose book value

One audited set of accounts, and a stock that is either at 21 times earnings and 3 times book or at 33 times and 4.1 times, depending on which of two figures you divide by. Then the group buys out the minority shareholders: earnings per share rises seventeen per cent, book value per share falls thirty-five, and no business is bought.

Fundamental AnalysisAdvanced15 min read
Browse Fundamental Analysis(125)

Two screeners, the same company, the same audited annual report, and two price-to-earnings ratios: 21.4 and 33.3. Neither has made an arithmetic error. The consolidated profit statement of a group with partly owned subsidiaries does not end in one number; it ends in two, and the gap between them is the whole of the discrepancy. The same split runs down the balance sheet, where it decides book value per share, and into return on equity, where taking one half from the top statement and the other from the bottom one produces a figure nearly seven percentage points too flattering. None of this is buried. It is on the face of both statements, two lines from the bottom.

Think of it like this
The joint family's one set of books

Three brothers run a shop together and the eldest keeps a single set of books for the whole of it. At the bottom of the year he writes the profit: ₹7 lakh. Your share is a third. Telling your wife "the shop made ₹7 lakh" is entirely true. Planning next year's spending on ₹7 lakh is a mistake, and it is not a mistake anybody made in the books — it is a mistake about which line at the bottom of them is yours.

In the market

A consolidated profit statement is the eldest brother's book. Because control rather than ownership decides what goes in, all of a partly owned subsidiary's revenue and profit is in there. The last two lines then divide the profit: attributable to owners of the parent, and attributable to non-controlling interests. Only the first of them belongs to the shares that have a price on the screen.

One group, read twice

Worked example
Four ratios, two answers each
Group G — 50 crore shares at ₹300, with a 55%-owned listed subsidiary inside it
Consolidated revenue and EBITDABoth include 100% of the subsidiary, because consolidation does not apportion₹9,000 cr and ₹1,500 cr
Consolidated profit for the yearThen split on the face of the statement: ₹250 crore to non-controlling interests, ₹450 crore to the owners of the parent₹700 cr
Earnings per shareInd AS 33 computes it on profit attributable to owners of the parent. ₹700 crore over the same shares is ₹14.00, and ₹14.00 is what the cheaper-looking screener is carrying₹450 cr ÷ 50 cr shares = ₹9.00
Price to earnings at ₹300The entire difference between the two figures is other people's profit33.3 times, not 21.4
Consolidated total equityOf which ₹1,300 crore is non-controlling interests — sitting inside equity, on its own line, and not a liability₹5,000 cr
Book value per sharePrice to book 4.1 times at ₹300. Computed on total equity it reads ₹100 a share and 3.0 times₹3,700 cr ÷ 50 cr = ₹74
Return on equity, read consistentlyOwners' profit over owners' equity. The group's own return — ₹700 crore over ₹5,000 crore — is 14.0% and answers a different and also legitimate question₹450 cr ÷ ₹3,700 cr = 12.2%
Return on equity, read carelesslyGroup profit over owners' equity — the larger numerator over the smaller denominator, which is why this particular mismatch flatters. That is not a law about mismatches. Turn it round, owners' profit over total equity, and you get 9.0%, below both defensible answers. And where the partly owned subsidiary is loss-making the share attributable to non-controlling interests is negative, so profit attributable to owners is the larger of the two figures and this same mismatch understates instead₹700 cr ÷ ₹3,700 cr = 18.9%
Enterprise value as usually computed11.3 times EBITDA₹15,000 cr market cap + ₹2,000 cr net debt = ₹17,000 cr
Enterprise value against the EBITDA it is divided byThat EBITDA contains all of the subsidiary, so the claim of the other 45% has to be inside the numerator too. The subsidiary is listed and the minority stake is worth ₹2,600 crore in the market, so the multiple is 13.1 times rather than 11.3₹19,600 cr
One audited set of accounts, and a stock that is either at 21.4 times earnings and 11.3 times EBITDA or at 33.3 times and 13.1 times. The rule underneath all four ratios is one rule: a numerator and a denominator must cover the same set of owners. Profit attributable to owners goes with equity attributable to owners and with the market capitalisation of the parent. Group profit goes with total equity and with an enterprise value that includes the non-controlling claim. Either pair is defensible, and every mixed pair is wrong. The mixed pairs actually in circulation — a parent's share price over group earnings per share, group profit over owners' equity — are the ones that make the company look cheaper and more profitable than it is, and that follows from which figure is the larger rather than from any principle about mixing. Where the partly owned subsidiary loses money the non-controlling share of profit is negative, profit attributable to owners exceeds group profit, and the identical mismatch runs the other way and makes the stock look dearer. What survives both cases is the rule itself: match the owners.
Loading interactive demo…

The leverage term in this decomposition is assets divided by equity. In a group there are two candidate denominators — total equity, and the part attributable to owners — and they differ by the whole of the non-controlling interest. Whichever you pick, the profit in the margin term has to be the matching one.

Buying out the minority

A group that already controls a subsidiary sometimes buys the rest of it. The announcement is usually framed as simplification of the structure, and the arithmetic that follows is worth working through in full, because the one number a headline quotes improves sharply while three that are not quoted deteriorate, and nothing at all about the business changes. The accounting matters here: because control does not change, the purchase is not an acquisition. It is a transaction between the owners of the group. No goodwill arises, nothing goes through the profit statement, and the difference between what is paid and the carrying amount of the non-controlling interest removed is charged directly to equity.

Worked example
The other 45%, bought out and funded with debt
Group G, immediately after the figures above
Paid for the 45%The same figure used above as the market value of the minority stake, so that the two examples tie. Note what buying out all of the minority of a *listed* subsidiary actually is: a delisting offer under the SEBI delisting regulations, in which the exit price is discovered by [[reverse book building]] rather than taken off the screen, and which succeeds only if enough shares are tendered to take the acquirer to ninety per cent. The discovered price is routinely above the market price, which is exactly why the range over which earnings per share still improves is worth knowing₹2,600 cr, funded entirely by new borrowing
Revenue, EBITDA and group profitThe subsidiary was already consolidated in full. Nothing has been bought except the extinguishing of the other holders' claimUnchanged
Profit attributable to owners, before the funding costThe ₹250 crore that used to go to non-controlling interests now belongs to the parent's shareholders₹700 cr
Interest on the ₹2,600 cr at 9%A real cost, and the only new one in the entire transaction. The rates are illustrative₹234 cr, or ₹175.5 cr after tax at 25%
Profit attributable to owners, after it₹450 crore, plus the ₹250 crore no longer going elsewhere, less ₹175.5 crore₹524.5 cr
Earnings per shareUp 16.6%, on an unchanged share count and an unchanged business₹10.49, from ₹9.00
The accounting entry₹2,600 crore paid against ₹1,300 crore of non-controlling interest removed. Because control did not change, this is a transaction with owners: no goodwill, no gain, no loss in the profit statementThe ₹1,300 cr excess is charged to equity
Equity attributable to ownersBook value per share ₹48 from ₹74. Price to book at an unchanged ₹300 moves from 4.1 to 6.3 times₹2,400 cr, from ₹3,700 cr
Net debtNet debt to EBITDA from 1.3 times to 3.1 times, on unchanged EBITDA₹4,600 cr, from ₹2,000 cr
Enterprise valueExactly the figure computed in the first worked example once the minority claim was included. Nothing about the value of the business changed — only who holds the claim on it₹15,000 cr + ₹4,600 cr = ₹19,600 cr
Earnings per share up nearly seventeen per cent, book value per share down thirty-five, leverage more than doubled, and not one rupee of additional revenue. A buyout of minorities is a financing decision wearing the clothes of a growth announcement, and it is a good one or a bad one for exactly one reason: whether ₹2,600 crore was less than what that 45% is worth. The earnings-per-share improvement does not answer that question, and it is worth being exact about why rather than waving at it. Earnings per share rises whenever the profit picked up exceeds the after-tax cost of funding it — ₹250 crore against ₹175.5 crore here — and that test is passed at any price up to about ₹3,700 crore, more than forty per cent above what was actually paid. Accretion therefore demonstrates a financing spread and nothing more. It is not unconditional either: pay ₹4,000 crore for the same 45% and earnings per share falls to ₹8.60, and the price could still be the right one if the stake is worth more than ₹4,000 crore. Book value per share falls at any price above the ₹1,300 crore the non-controlling interest is carried at, which is very nearly every price, because that figure is a book amount and the price is a market one. And note the last line, for the reader who values the group on enterprise value: the multiple did not move at all.
Two things a rising non-controlling interest can mean
The benign reading
  • The partly owned subsidiary is profitable and growing, so the minority's share of equity compounds
  • The parent has kept a strategic or financial partner in a business that needs one
  • A listed subsidiary gives you a market price for the minority stake, which makes the enterprise value adjustment exact rather than estimated
  • The statement of changes in equity shows the non-controlling interest rising through retained profit, not through fresh issues
The reading to check
  • The growth in group revenue came from consolidating businesses the group owns only part of, while the profit attributable to you grew far more slowly
  • Fresh stakes in subsidiaries have been sold to fund the group, so the non-controlling interest is rising because your share of the same assets is falling
  • The cash is being generated in the entity with the largest minority, which is the entity whose cash reaches the parent most diminished
  • Screeners and headlines quote consolidated revenue and consolidated profit, both of which grow faster than anything that belongs to you
Check yourself

A group reports consolidated profit of ₹880 crore, of which ₹310 crore is attributable to non-controlling interests, on 40 crore shares. Consolidated total equity is ₹6,000 crore, of which ₹1,600 crore is non-controlling interests. What are earnings per share and a correctly matched return on equity?

Simple bhasha mein
Ek hi kitaab, do PE

Consolidated profit ₹700 crore. Par neeche do line hain: ₹250 crore doosre shareholders ka (55% wali subsidiary ka baaki 45%), aur ₹450 crore aapka. Shares 50 crore, bhaav ₹300. EPS = 450/50 = ₹9, PE 33.3. Jo screener 700/50 = ₹14 leta hai, wahi PE 21.4 dikhata hai — same audited kitaab, do jawab. Wahi khel book value mein: total equity ₹5,000 crore, usme ₹1,300 crore doosron ka, toh aapka ₹3,700 crore = ₹74 per share, P/B 4.1 (na ki 3.0). Aur ROE? 450/3,700 = 12.2% theek hai, 700/5,000 = 14.0% bhi theek hai — par 700/3,700 = 18.9% mila-jula hisaab hai — bada numerator, chhota denominator, isliye yeh wala hamesha achha dikhta hai. Ulta mila do (450/5,000 = 9.0%) toh kam dikhega. Niyam yeh hai: upar aur neeche, dono ek hi maalik ke hone chahiye.

What to remember
  • A consolidated profit statement ends in two figures, and only profit attributable to owners of the parent belongs to the listed shares.
  • Non-controlling interests sit inside equity, so book value per share and return on equity have the same two-answer problem as earnings per share.
  • The rule for all of them: numerator and denominator must cover the same set of owners, and every mixed pair flatters.
  • Consolidated EBITDA includes all of a partly owned subsidiary, so a comparable enterprise value has to include the non-controlling claim.
  • Buying out a minority raises earnings per share whenever the profit picked up beats the after-tax funding cost — true across a very wide span of prices — and cuts book value per share at any price above the non-controlling interest's carrying amount, so neither movement is evidence about the price.
Finished this lesson?

Mark it done to track your progress through the curriculum.