Why NPV Wins Every Argument With IRR
IRR is the number executives quote. NPV is the number that is right when they disagree.
What each measure actually says
NPV discounts every cash flow to today at your cost of capital and adds them up. A positive result means the project creates value beyond what the money could earn elsewhere. It is denominated in currency, so it accounts for scale.
IRR is the discount rate at which NPV equals zero — the project's own break-even return. It is a percentage, which makes it intuitive and comparable across projects of any size, and that is also its weakness.
Net present value
NPV = Σ CFₜ ÷ (1 + r)ᵗ
- t = 0 is today and is not discounted
- IRR is the r that makes this sum zero
The reinvestment problem
IRR quietly assumes every interim cash inflow is reinvested at the IRR itself. For a project showing 45%, that means assuming you have an endless supply of other 45% opportunities to park the cash in. You do not.
MIRR fixes this by separating the assumptions: inflows compound forward at a realistic reinvestment rate, outflows discount back at your financing rate. It is always closer to the truth than IRR, and it is single-valued.
Watch the two figures in the tool. When the reinvestment rate is well below the IRR, the gap is large — and the IRR is the one flattering the project.
When IRR breaks entirely
Descartes' rule of signs bounds the number of positive roots by the number of sign changes in the cash flow series. A conventional project — one outflow followed by inflows — has exactly one sign change and one IRR.
A project with a later outflow — a mine that must be decommissioned, equipment needing mid-life replacement — has two or more sign changes and can have several mathematically valid IRRs. The calculator flags this. When it does, IRR is meaningless and NPV is the only reliable answer.
Scale, and why ratios mislead
A project returning 80% on $10,000 has a magnificent IRR and adds $8,000 of value. One returning 12% on $10 million adds $1.2 million. IRR prefers the first; NPV prefers the second; the shareholders prefer the second.
Where NPV and IRR rank two mutually exclusive projects differently, take NPV. The academic consensus on this is unusually unanimous.