Why Fintellectual — Our Methodology
A valuation you can interrogate, because the reasoning is on the page.
Trust is the product; the report is the artefact — so here is exactly how a number gets built. No black boxes, no borrowed multiples, no assumptions you'll discover only when a reviewer does.
§ 01 — The Three Approaches
Three ways of asking the same question.
Every recognised valuation method belongs to one of three families. Each answers "what is this worth?" from a different vantage point — and each can mislead if applied where it doesn't belong. Knowing when to lean on which is the craft.
Approach A
Income approach
Value the business by the cash it is expected to generate, discounted for time and risk — most commonly a discounted cash flow. It asks: what would a rational investor pay today for tomorrow's earnings?
When it leads: operating businesses with a credible view of future cash flows — the closest thing valuation has to first principles.
When it misleads: when projections are hope dressed as arithmetic. A DCF is only as honest as its assumptions, which is why ours are documented and tested, not buried.
Approach B
Market approach
Value the business by what the market pays for comparable ones — listed-company multiples and actual transaction prices. It asks: what have informed buyers recently paid for something like this?
When it leads: when genuinely comparable companies or deals exist. Real prices carry an authority no model can manufacture.
When it misleads: when "comparable" is stretched — a listed giant benchmarking a regional SME, or a bull-market deal pricing a very different year. We screen comparables for substance, and say so when none exist.
Approach C
Cost approach
Value the business from its balance sheet — assets restated to current values, less liabilities. It asks: what would it cost to assemble this from scratch, or what remains if it is wound down?
When it leads: asset-heavy businesses, holding companies, early-stage ventures with little trading history, and floor-value checks in distress or dispute.
When it misleads: when applied to a going concern whose value lives in earnings, brand or relationships — things a balance sheet was never designed to capture.
§ 02 — Triangulation
One approach gives you a number. Three give you confidence.
Any single method can be argued with. What is hard to argue with is convergence.
We run every applicable approach independently, then reconcile them. Picture three lines drawn from three different starting points — expected cash flows, observed market prices, restated assets — converging on the same region of the chart. Where they meet, and how tightly, tells you as much as the number itself: a narrow band signals a robust conclusion, a wide one signals genuine uncertainty that deserves to be disclosed, not smoothed away.
Weighting is a judgement, and we make it in writing. Each approach earns its weight based on what actually drives value in the specific business — the quality of projections, the honesty of the comparable set, the relevance of the asset base — and the report states the weighting and the reasons for it. If an approach is excluded, the report says why. The concluded output is a defended range with a reasoned point estimate within it, not a single figure conjured to two decimal places.
A valuation that survives scrutiny isn't the one with the cleverest model. It's the one where three independent routes arrive at the same place — and the reasoning for the reconciliation is written down.
§ 03 — The Process
Four steps, one accountable signature.
Every mandate runs the same disciplined path, led end-to-end by the senior valuer who signs the report.
-
Scope
We start by pinning down the purpose, the valuation date, the standard of value and the regulatory lens — because these decide everything downstream. You receive a written scope, a fixed fee and a committed timeline before any work begins, along with a precise information checklist calibrated to what a business of your stage realistically has.
-
Analyse
We get inside the business: financial statements normalised for one-offs and related-party effects, the industry and competitive position mapped, projections stress-tested against history and capacity. Questions surface here, not after delivery — expect a working session, not a data-room silence.
-
Triangulate
Each applicable approach is built independently, then reconciled into a concluded range with documented weightings. For standard mandates, you see an indicative valuation range at this stage — within 5–7 business days — so surprises are discussed before anything is signed.
-
Deliver & Defend
The full signed report follows within 10–15 business days for standard mandates, with every material assumption documented and the plain-English value narrative on top. Defence is part of the engagement: the signing valuer stands behind the opinion through auditor review, regulator queries and counterparty diligence.
§ 04 — Standards
The rulebooks we work under.
Every report is prepared to recognised professional standards and cites the regulatory basis for the purpose at hand — so a reviewer can check our work against the same rulebook we used.
Professional Standard
International Valuation Standards (IVS)
The global benchmark for how valuations are scoped, performed and reported — the framework international investors and reviewers expect to see.
Professional Standard
ICAI Valuation Standards
The Indian professional standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, governing approach selection, documentation and reporting.
Professional Standard
IBBI RVO norms
The conduct and reporting norms applicable to IBBI Registered Valuers — the statutory framework under section 247 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Regulatory frameworks we report under
The purpose of a valuation determines which law governs it. We work across the frameworks Indian mandates most commonly require:
-
Companies Act, 2013
Registered Valuer reports for share issues, mergers, demergers and other corporate actions requiring a section 247 valuation.
-
Income Tax Act
Valuations under the rules governing share issue and transfer pricing for tax — including the provisions commonly triggered on fresh issues and transfers of unquoted shares.
-
FEMA
Pricing-guideline valuations for cross-border share issues and transfers between residents and non-residents.
-
SEBI regulations
Valuations required under SEBI frameworks for listed and to-be-listed contexts, prepared to the disclosure standard those regulations demand.
-
IBC
Registered Valuer estimates of fair value and liquidation value in insolvency and resolution processes under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
-
Ind AS
Fair value measurement, purchase price allocation and impairment testing support under Indian Accounting Standards, built to withstand audit review.
§ 05 — The Deliverable
What every report contains.
A valuation you cannot explain to your own board is only half a deliverable. Every Fintellectual engagement ships with four things:
01
The signed report
A complete valuation report signed by the senior valuer, prepared to IVS and ICAI standards, citing the regulatory basis for the purpose and standing ready for the reviewer it was built for.
02
Documented assumptions
Every material assumption stated, sourced and reasoned — growth, margins, discount rate, comparable screens, weightings. The things reviewers actually challenge, answered in advance.
03
1-page value narrative
A plain-English page explaining why the number is what it is — written for non-finance stakeholders, so the founder, the board and the family shareholder all leave the room with the same understanding.
04
Post-delivery advisory note
A short note on how to use this valuation in your next conversation — with an investor, an auditor, a counterparty or the tax department — including what the number does and does not claim.
§ 06 — Independence
Our only product is an honest opinion.
Fintellectual is a pure-play valuation practice. We do not audit the companies we value. We do not broker the deals our numbers inform. No part of our fee is contingent on a transaction closing or a number landing where someone hoped it would. That is not a policy we adopted — it is the structure of the firm.
It matters because valuation is a judgement business, and judgement bends under commercial pressure unless the structure removes the pressure. A valuer whose firm also earns audit fees, success fees or brokerage from the same relationship has something to protect besides the opinion. We don't. If the analysis supports a number you were hoping not to hear, you will hear it — with the reasoning that lets you act on it.
If the opinion is the only thing we sell, the opinion is the only thing we have to protect.
§ 07 — FAQ
Questions about how we work.
Why do you conclude a range rather than a single number?
Because a single figure implies a precision valuation cannot honestly deliver. The concluded range shows how tightly the three approaches converge; the reasoned point estimate within it serves the filing or negotiation that needs one number. Both are in the report, with the logic connecting them.
What if the three approaches give very different answers?
That divergence is information, not a nuisance. It usually means one approach is resting on a weak input — untested projections, a strained comparable set — and the reconciliation section works out which, adjusts the weightings and explains the judgement in writing rather than averaging the disagreement away.
Can we see the workings, or just the conclusion?
The report is built to be interrogated: assumptions, sources, comparable screens and weightings are all documented, and we walk your board, investor or auditor through the model where useful. The 1-page value narrative gives non-finance readers the same reasoning without the technical apparatus.
What happens if a reviewer challenges the valuation after delivery?
Defence is part of the engagement, not an extra. The senior valuer who signed the report responds to auditor reviews, diligence questions and regulator queries — and the post-delivery advisory note anticipates the most likely challenges before they arrive.
Next Step
See the methodology applied to your numbers.
Tell us the purpose and the deadline. You'll get a written scope, a fixed fee and a committed timeline — and an indicative range within 5–7 business days for standard mandates.