
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.298218
In this paper, we quantify shareholder value creation for 276 American companies. We provide the created shareholder value for each and every company for years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001. The market value of the 276 companies was 8,716 billion dollars in 2001 and 9,729 billion dollars in 2000. We define created shareholder value and provide the ranking of created shareholder value for the 276 companies. In 2001 Microsoft was the leading shareholder value creator and, on the other end of the spectrum, Cisco was the top shareholder value destroyer. We also calculate the cumulative created shareholder value of selected American companies during the four-year period 1998-2001. Wal-Mart Stores was number one in created shareholder value during the four-year period 1998-2001. We also claim that EVA does not properly measure Wealth Creation. We have compared the EVA calculated by Stern Stewart and Co with the created shareholder value of 269 companies. The correlation of EVA with created shareholder value was only 17.66%. 60 companies had negative EVA and positive created shareholder value. 64 companies had positive EVA and negative created shareholder value. On average, the difference of shareholder value creation minus EVA was -434% of EVA. The absolute value of the difference of shareholder value creation minus EVA was 8972% of EVA. With this evidence, we conclude that EVA does not properly measure Wealth Creation
shareholder value creation; created shareholder value; equity market value; shareholder value added; shareholder return; required return to equity; EVA;, jel: jel:M21, jel: jel:G31, jel: jel:G12
shareholder value creation; created shareholder value; equity market value; shareholder value added; shareholder return; required return to equity; EVA;, jel: jel:M21, jel: jel:G31, jel: jel:G12
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
