• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.40 no.1
• /
• pp.50-56
• /
• 2017

The IRR (internal rate of return) is often used by investors for the evaluation of engineering projects. Unfortunately, it is widely known that it has serial flaws. Also, External rate of returns (ERRs) such as ARR (Average Rate of Return) or MIRR (MIRR, Modified Internal Rate of Return) do not differentiate between the real investment and the expenditure. The PRR (Productive rate of return) is faithful to the conception of the return on investment. The PRR uses the effective investment instead of the initial investment. In this paper, we examined two cases of the engineering project. the one is a traditional engineering project with financing activity, another is the project with R&D. Although the IRR has only one value, it overestimates or underestimate profitabilities of Engineering Projects. The ARR and the MARR assume that a returned cash reinvest other projects or assets instead of the project currently executing. Thus they are only one value of a project's profitability, unlike the IRR. But the ARR does not classify into the effective investment and non-investment expenditure. It only accepts an initial expenditure as for an investment. The MIRR also fails to classify into the investment and the expenditure. It has an error of making a loss down as the investment. The IRR works as efficiently as a NPW (Net Present Worth). It clearly expresses a rate of return in respect of an investment in an engineering project with a loan. And it shows its ability in an engineering project with a R&D investment.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.95-99
• /
• 2015

The IRR(internal rate of return) is often used by investors for the evaluation of engineering projects. Unfortunately, it has serial flaws: (1) multiple real-valued IRRs may arise; (2) complex-valued IRRs may arise; (3) the IRR is, in special cases, incompatible with the net present value (NPV) in accept/reject decisions. The efforts of management scientists and economists in providing a reliable project rate of return have generated over the decades an immense amount of contributions aiming to solve these shortcomings. Especially, multiple internal rate of returns (IRRs) have a fatal flaw when we decide to accep it or not. To solve it, some researchers came up with external rate of returns (ERRs) such as ARR (Average Rate of Return) or MIRR (MIRR, Modified Internal Rate of Return). ARR or MIRR. will also always yield the same decision for a engineering project consistent with the NPV criterion. The ERRs are to modify the procedure for computing the rate of return by making explicit and consistent assumptions about the interest rate at which intermediate receipts from projects may be invested. This reinvestment could be either in other projects or in the outside market. However, when we use traditional ERRs, a volume of capital investment is still unclear. Alternatively, the productive rate of return (PRR) can settle these problems. Generally, a rate of return is a profit on an investment over a period of time, expressed as a proportion of the original investment. The time period is typically the life of a project. The PRR is based on the full life of the engineering project. but has been annualised to project one year. And the PRR uses the effective investment instead of the original investment. This method requires that the cash flow of an engineering project must be separated into 'investment' and 'loss' to calculate the PRR value. In this paper, we proposed a tabulated form for easy calculation of the PRR by modifing the profit and loss statement, and the cash flow statement.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.15 no.26
• /
• pp.159-163
• /
• 1992

The assumption of reinvestment rate leads to the results conflicting with the priority order of investments determined by net present worth. It has been revealed through various studies that the priority order of projects determined by the criteria based on internal rate of return is different from that determined by present worth. This study is to find out how to define reinvestment rate of return influencing the decision-making of the priority order through examining the meanings of reinvestment rate of capital and true rate of return, and to present some examples with a simple mathematical model.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.45 no.4
• /
• pp.167-173
• /
• 2022

Investors must adopt profitable investment opportunities to maximize their wealth. Almost all investment, finance, engineering economics textbooks explain that net present value (NPV) measures the profitability (or value) of investment opportunities in absolute size, and internal rate of return (IRR) measures the profitability of investment opportunities in relative proportions. However, NPV is a measure of the relative size of the return on investment opportunity to do-nothing alternative. Moreover, IRR can occur in multiple investment opportunities and may not exist. To make matters worse, IRR and NPV also have conflicting problems in accept-or-reject decisions. In this study, the reason why NPV and IRR cannot accurately measure the profitability of investment opportunities is identified, and fundamental characteristics that investment opportunity profitability measures should have are presented.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.25 no.5
• /
• pp.9-14
• /
• 2002

A capital investment problem is essentially one of determining whether the anticipated cash inflows from a proposed project are sufficiently attractive to invest funds in the project. The net present value(NPV) criterion and internal rate of return(IRR) criterion are widely used as means of making investment decisions. A positive NPV means the equivalent worth of the inflows is greater than the equivalent worth of outflows, so, the project makes profit. Business people are familiar with rates of return because they all borrow money to finance ventures, even if the money they borrow is their own. Thus they are apt to use the IRR in preference to the NPV. The IRR can be defined as the discount rate that causes the net present value of a cash flow to equal zero. Why the project are accepted if the project's IRR is greater than the investor's minimum attractive rate of return\ulcorner Against the NPV, the definition cannot distinctly explain the concept of the IRR as decision criterion. We present a new definition of the IRR as the ratio of profit on the invested capital.

• Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning
• /
• v.9 no.3 s.20
• /
• pp.17-23
• /
• 2003

This paper aimed at identifying rural amenities valuable in terms of marketed value and economic analysis of green tourism so as to develop policy instruments for new rural communities. We conducted the case study on Jik-Dong rural community in Taejeon city and estimated income effects of green tourism and internal rate of return of investment for rural amenity facilities. The research results are as followings; (1) green tourism participant will spend the worth of 50,392 won per person, (2) earnings from green tourism amounts to about 2,471 thousand won per household, (3) internal rate of return of green tourism investment is estimated as 7%. The strategies far green tourism is suggested as follows; (1) rural amenities should be well maintained for green tourism infrastructure (2) measures to internalize the value of rural amenities should be developed for market oriented peen tourism (3) effective program for inducing visitors with purchasing power should be designed.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.74-79
• /
• 2008

The reinvestment assumption of the internal rate of return(IRR) method may not be valid in an engineering economy study. This situation, coupled with the computational demands and possible multiple interest rate associated with the IRR method, has given rise to other rate of return methods, such as the external rate of return(ERR) method, that can remedy some of these weaknesses. But ERRs are not used generally. We present another rate of return including all attributes of the minimum attractive rate of return(MARR).

• Journal of applied mathematics & informatics
• /
• v.34 no.1_2
• /
• pp.75-84
• /
• 2016

The objective of this work is to perform a geometric analysis of the net present value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR), defining analytics and in verifying the relationship between geometric properties of such functions. For this simulation, was used the values of the cash flows for each period identical and equal to US$ 200.00 cash, the initial investment US$ 1,000.00 and investments of each identical and equal to US$ 50.00 period. In addition, the discount rate and time were considered a maximum of 2 years (24 months) at a rate between 0 and 100%. The geometric analysis of the characteristics obtained from the expressions of the Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return possible to observe that besides the analytical dependence between these quantities , the geometric relationships are relevant when studied in relation to the zero NPV and expressed a great contribution the sense of a broad vision for the administrator in the analysis of analytical variables that in uences the balance sheet of the company.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.1092-1098
• /
• 2015

Fishing population has been increasing with national income improvement and the five-day workweek in Korea. Recently commercial fishing facilities like pay fishing pond are emerging as demand of saltwater fishing increases, unlike the past when inland fishing was prominent. In order to do businesses, economic analysis should be done in advance. This study aimed to make an Economic analysis of Uljin pay-fishing place by estimating the cost and benefit, and calculating the rate of economic return. The results show the Uljin pay-fishing place's net present value of 3.5 billion won, internal rate of return of 14%, and benefit cost ratio of 1.16 at 5.5% social discount rate.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.41
• /
• pp.43-67
• /
• 2000

The main source in financing the National Pension benefits is the contribution raised from the insured's earnings. So, Most of the insured take a great interest in the questions of what return on the payment of contribution National Pension benefits provide and whether there be the difference in return according to earnings level. The Purpose of this study is to assess money's worth of National Pension and to answer the above questions. There are two basic types of money worth analysis, empirical and hopothetical. This study basically belongs to the former in terms that it is based on actual earnings and insured term. For performing money's worth analysis, four different measures which are referred as the "break-even period", the "benefit/tax ratio", the "net lifetime transfer", the "internal rate of return" are used and they all involve the way in which the relationship between the present value of contributions and the present values of benefit is present. The results which evaluate average money's worth of accrued rights before 1999 are le as follows. Break-even period is about 43 months, benefit/tax ratio being 4.9, net lifetime transfers being about 37 mil1ion won, internal rate of return being 33.2%. This verifies that money' worth of National Pension is much higher than actuarially fair. In the mean while, money' worth is proved to be very different according to earnings level. The progressivity relationship between earnings level and rate of return is found in all measures but net lifetime transfer.