---
name: "finance-corporate-val"
category: "finance"
maturity: "stable"
version: "1"
description: "Corporate valuation — DCF, multiples, sum-of-parts, scenario analysis — with explicit assumptions, sensitivity, and cross-checks."
license: "MIT"
capabilities: ""
outputs: ""
sideEffects: []
dependencies: []
stopCondition: "Corporate valuation complete; required sections present; completion criteria checked."
risk: "low"
trustTier: "1"
maxIterations: "6"
promptVersion: "2.0"
artifactType: "finance"
modelTier: "reasoning"
evaluators: ["behavioral", "regression"]
fixturesPath: ""
diataxis: "how-to"
tags: ["finance"]
compatibility: []
approvalRequired: "false"
approvalFor: []
---

## Contract

- Input: skill invocation with the user's request and available context.
- Output: a structured artifact or guidance aligned to the skill's declared outputs.
- Scope: stay within the skill's declared boundaries; do not broaden without explicit direction.
- Rule: follow the skill's completion criteria and stop condition exactly.

## Provenance

| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is the source of truth? | The user's request, originating spec/issue, and the skill's declared outputs |
| What is in scope? | Work covered by the skill's acceptance criteria and completion rules |
| What is explicitly out of scope? | Files, behaviors, and decisions outside the skill's declared boundary |
| Who or what consumes this artifact afterward? | The next skill in the workflow or the user |
| What evidence proves it is done? | Completion criteria met, artifact saved, validation passed |
| What risk remains? | Subjective judgment calls, missing context, or external dependency failures


## Artifact

Emit `FinanceCorporateValArtifact` as both:
- JSON: `.agents/skills/platform/artifacts/finance-corporate-val/{identifier}.json`
- Markdown view: same filename with `.md` extension


# 
# 
# Corporate Valuation

Compute a **corporate valuation** — not a price target, but a disciplined range with assumptions exposed — using DCF, multiples, and scenario analysis.

## When to use

- The user wants to value a company, business unit, or asset.
- A deal, M&A, or investment decision depends on a valuation range.
- A back-of-envelope valuation needs to be made defensible.

## Process

### 1. Define scope

Name: the company / unit, the valuation date, the purpose (fair market value, strategic value, liquidation), and the currency / currency-adjusted scenario.

**Completion criterion:** scope, valuation date, purpose, currency all explicit.

### 2. Choose methods

Select at least two independent methods:

- **DCF:** forecast free cash flow, terminal growth, WACC.
- **Multiples:** P/E, EV/EBITDA, EV/Revenue, P/B — with comparable company selection criteria.
- **Sum-of-parts:** for conglomerates; each segment with its own method.
- **Asset-based / liquidation:** for distressed cases.

State why each method fits.

**Completion criterion:** at least two methods named with selection rationale.

### 3. Make assumptions explicit

Every number comes from a source or an explicit assumption:

- **Forecasts:** revenue growth, margins, capex, working-capital — with a source (management, analyst, industry).
- **WACC / discount rate:** risk-free rate, beta, equity risk premium, debt cost, capital structure.
- **Terminal growth:** not automatically 3%; tie to GDP / inflation / sector.
- **Multiples:** how comparables selected; adjustments for size, growth, profitability.

**Completion criterion:** every major assumption is either cited or explicitly stated.

### 4. Run the numbers

Compute each method. For DCF, report:

- Projected FCF by year.
- Terminal value and terminal-value-to-enterprise-value ratio.
- Sensitivity table (WACC ±2%, terminal growth ±1%).

For multiples, show the comparable list and adjustments.

**Completion criterion:** computation executed; sensitivity table present for DCF.

### 5. Cross-check and reconcile

Compare methods:

- Is the DCF range consistent with the multiples range?
- If they diverge, which assumption drives it?
- Scenario analysis: base / optimistic / pessimistic case.
- Sanity against market price: premium / discount to current price, and why.

**Completion criterion:** at least two methods compared; divergence explained.

### 6. Deliver

Markdown artifact with: scope, methods, assumptions (with sources or notes), computation, cross-check, scenario analysis, and a **valuation range** with a narrative about its reliability.

**Completion criterion:** range delivered; reliability note included; sources cited.

## Completion

- the skill's completion criteria are explicitly checked
- the artifact is saved and validated
- any blockers or skipped validations are documented
- the next consumer is identified or the work is handed off
---
@include .agents/skills/platform/contract-base.xml