NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA): Our Calculation of Intrinsic Value

Johnny HopkinsDCF Analysis2 Comments

As part of a new series, each week we typically conduct a DCF on one of the companies in our screens. This week we thought we’d take a look at one of the stocks not in our screens, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA).

Profile

NVIDIA Corporation is a global leader in graphics processing units (GPUs), artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure, and data center solutions. It operates in two primary segments: Graphics (45% of revenue) and Compute & Networking (55%), the latter of which powers the company’s rapid growth in AI, cloud computing, and autonomous vehicles. NVIDIA’s flagship products include the GeForce GPU lineup, the NVIDIA RTX platform, and its AI-centric NVIDIA H100 and Grace Hopper chips. The company has a dominant market share in gaming GPUs and has emerged as the leading provider of AI accelerator chips used by hyperscalers like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google.


Inputs

Discount Rate: 12%
Terminal Growth Rate: 4%
WACC: 12%

Forecasted Free Cash Flows (FCFs) in billions

Year FCF ($B) Present Value ($B)
2025 60.85 54.34
2026 66.94 53.40
2027 72.29 51.54
2028 76.63 48.73
2029 80.46 45.59

Total Present Value of FCFs = 253.60 billion

Terminal Value Calculation

Terminal Value = (FCF_2029 × (1 + g)) / (r – g)
= (80.46 × 1.04) / (0.12 – 0.04)
= 83.68 / 0.08
= 1,046.00 billion

Present Value of Terminal Value

PV of Terminal Value = Terminal Value / (1 + WACC)^5
= 1,046.00 / (1.12)^5
= 1,046.00 / 1.7623
= 593.58 billion

Enterprise Value Calculation

Enterprise Value = PV of FCFs + PV of Terminal Value
= 253.60 + 593.58
= 847.18 billion

Net Debt Calculation
Net Debt = Total Debt – Total Cash
= 10.27 – 43.21
= -32.94 billion (Net Cash Position)

Equity Value Calculation

Equity Value = Enterprise Value + Net Cash
= 847.18 + 32.94
= 880.12 billion

Per-Share DCF Value

Per-Share DCF Value = Equity Value / Shares Outstanding
= 880.12 / 24.4
= $36.07


Conclusion

DCF Value Current Price Margin of Safety
$36.07 $110.42 -67.34%

Based on the DCF valuation, NVIDIA appears overvalued. The estimated intrinsic value of $36.07 per share is significantly lower than the current market price of $110.42, resulting in a -67.34% Margin of Safety.

This suggests that while NVIDIA is a top-tier AI infrastructure provider, its current valuation still implies extremely optimistic assumptions well beyond our fundamental cash flow forecasts.

For all the latest news and podcasts, join our free newsletter here.

FREE Stock Screener

Don’t forget to check out our FREE Large Cap 1000 – Stock Screener, here at The Acquirer’s Multiple:

unlimited

2 Comments on “NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA): Our Calculation of Intrinsic Value”

  1. Here’s the revised version with your new line included:

    Been following The Acquirer’s Multiple for a while now, but this DCF seriously makes me question your strategy and service. I say this with all due respect—but is this meant to be taken seriously?

    You’ve projected NVDA’s intrinsic value at $36 per share, yet the model doesn’t even state a pre-terminal growth rate. It looks like your pre-terminal growth rate is only ~7% for five years?

    From 2010 to 2022, NVIDIA grew free cash flow at a 25% CAGR—long before the current AI boom. That kind of consistent compounding doesn’t just vanish overnight. Why would you assume growth drops to low single digits next year with no explanation?

    I’m not an accountant or CFA, but this is basic logic. If I’m missing something, I’d genuinely appreciate clarification.

    1. Hey Todd.

      Totally fair points—and I appreciate the respectful pushback.

      To clarify, in my DCF I used a 12% discount rate (equal to WACC), a 4% terminal growth rate, and a conservative ~7% FCF growth for 5 years. The intent wasn’t to predict NVIDIA’s actual trajectory, but to stress-test valuation under more cautious assumptions.

      NVIDIA’s historical 25%+ FCF growth is undeniable, but given its current size, AI hype premium, and macro uncertainty, I chose to dial expectations down to avoid overfitting to the past.

      That said, I agree this should have been better explained.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.