[edit] Problems with using IRRAs an investment decision tool,...

[edit] Problems with using IRR
As an investment decision tool, the calculated IRR should not be used to rate mutually exclusive projects, but only to decide whether a single project is worth investing in.


Two mutually exclusive projectsIn cases where one project has a higher initial investment than a second mutually exclusive project, the first project may have a lower IRR (expected return), but a higher NPV (increase in shareholders' wealth) and should thus be accepted over the second project (assuming no capital constraints).

IRR makes no assumptions about the reinvestment of the positive cash flow from a project. As a result, IRR should not be used to compare projects of different duration and with a different overall pattern of cash flows. Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR) provides a better indication of a project's efficiency in contributing to the firm's discounted cash flow.

The IRR method should not be used in the usual manner for projects that start with an initial positive cash inflow (or in some projects with large negative cash flows at the end), for example where a customer makes a deposit before a specific machine is built, resulting in a single positive cash flow followed by a series of negative cash flows (+ - - - -). In this case the usual IRR decision rule needs to be reversed.

If there are multiple sign changes in the series of cash flows, e.g. (- + - + -), there may be multiple IRRs for a single project, so that the IRR decision rule may be impossible to implement. Examples of this type of project are strip mines and nuclear power plants, where there is usually a large cash outflow at the end of the project.

In general, the IRR can be calculated by solving a polynomial equation. Sturm's Theorem can be used to determine if that equation has a unique real solution. Importantly, the IRR equation cannot be solved analytically (i.e. in its general form) but only via iterations.

A critical shortcoming of the IRR method is that it is commonly misunderstood to convey the actual annual profitability of an investment. However, this is not the case because intermediate cash flows are almost never reinvested at the project's IRR; and, therefore, the actual rate of return (akin to the one that would have been yielded by stocks or bank deposits) is almost certainly going to be lower. Accordingly, a measure called Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR) is used, which has an assumed reinvestment rate, usually equal to the project's cost of capital.

Despite a strong academic preference for NPV, surveys indicate that executives prefer IRR over NPV. Apparently, managers find it easier to compare investments of different sizes in terms of percentage rates of return than by dollars of NPV. However, NPV remains the "more accurate" reflection of value to the business. IRR, as a measure of investment efficiency may give better insights in capital constrained situations. However, when comparing mutually exclusive projects, NPV is the appropriate measure.

In addition if the NPV of one project is higher than another and the other project has a higher IRR, then the cross over point method can be used to solve this dispute.

Cross Over Point > IRR = Accept project with higher NPV and if the Cross Over Point < IRR = Accept project with higher IRR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_rate_of_return