EBITDA From Net Income, Explained
The question
Walk me through EBITDA mechanically from net income, then explain why 'Adjusted EBITDA' exists and why it's a non-GAAP number with no fixed rulebook.
MarketsInterview question
General educational practice only. This is not an actual, confidential, leaked, or firm-provided interview question. Check important technical details against primary learning materials.
The answer
- I start with net income and add back interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. That gives me reported EBITDA, but the number that actually drives a deal is Adjusted EBITDA.
- To get to Adjusted EBITDA, management adds back items they argue are non-recurring, non-cash, or not representative of ongoing operations, like restructuring charges, stock-based comp, or transaction costs. The logic is that a buyer purchasing future cash flows shouldn't be penalized for expenses that won't repeat.
- Adjusted EBITDA exists precisely because EBITDA itself is a non-GAAP measure. There is no GAAP rulebook that defines which adjustments are allowed or how they must be calculated, so sellers are free to construct their own version. That construction always tilts upward to make the business look more profitable.
- Because there is no fixed standard, every add-back is contested. Buy-side diligence pressure-tests each one, and in a credit agreement, Adjusted EBITDA becomes a defined term with pages of permitted add-backs and specific caps. So the mechanical walk goes from net income to reported EBITDA, then through a judgment layer of adjustments to a number that is always a negotiated construction, not a fact.
Income statement
| Revenue | 1,000 |
| COGS | (600) |
| Gross profit | 400 |
| SG&A | (180) |
| EBITDA | 220 |
| D&A | (40) |
| EBIT | 180 |
| Interest expense | (20) |
| Pre-tax income | 160 |
| Taxes | (40) |
| Net income | 120 |
Illustrative figures
Also asked as
- List the main legitimate categories of EBITDA add-backs (non-recurring, non-cash, normalizations) with an example of each, and name the two categories a buy-side diligence team is most skeptical of and why.
- A company reports net income $30M, interest $10M, taxes $9M, D&A $22M, plus a $5M one-time restructuring charge and $7M of stock comp. Compute reported EBITDA and management's Adjusted EBITDA, then state which add-back a QofE team would likely disallow and why.
- Explain why EBITDA is not cash flow. For two businesses with identical $100M EBITDA (one software, one heavy manufacturing), describe how their cash conversion differs and what number you'd look at instead.
- Argue both sides of adding back stock-based compensation to EBITDA, then state where a sophisticated diligence team lands and why. What does it signal about a business if it only looks profitable after adding SBC back?
- A seller markets a business at 8.0x Adjusted EBITDA of $95M. Diligence disallows $6M of serial 'non-recurring' charges and $9M of unrealized synergies. Compute the corrected enterprise value, the price swing, and the change in debt capacity at 5.0x maximum leverage.
- What is a Quality of Earnings analysis, who runs it and for whom, and why do its adjustments to seller EBITDA frequently run downward? Give three specific findings a QofE process commonly surfaces.
- Elite: A target's EBITDA grew from $60M to $84M over three years (+40%), but cumulative operating cash flow was roughly flat at ~$26M/year. Cumulative working-capital change was -$45M and cumulative capex was -$42M over the period. Compute cumulative cash conversion, explain what's driving the gap between EBITDA growth and flat cash, and state your verdict on earnings quality.
- Elite: A seller presents Adjusted EBITDA of $110M at 9.0x. Your findings: disallow $12M SBC add-back; disallow $8M restructuring that recurred; add back $6M of above-market owner comp a new owner won't pay; and move $15M of unproven pro forma synergies to an earn-out. Build the defensible EBITDA, the corrected upfront enterprise value versus the ask, and structure the earn-out (max value and expected value at 40% realization).
- Elite: Explain how 'EBITDA add-back creep' in a credit agreement can make reported leverage look healthy while the underlying credit deteriorates. Then, for a borrower reporting 4.0x leverage on Adjusted EBITDA of $200M that includes $40M of capped synergy and one-time add-backs you don't believe, compute the 'true' leverage if those add-backs are stripped, and explain the covenant implication.
Practice this topic with rubric-grounded grading inside IB Atlas.
Start freeGet all 125 practice prompts as one PDF.
General educational prompts with study explanations for offline review. They are not firm-provided or confidential questions.
Keep going
The rest of this topic
Multiples: which pairs with which
Why is EV/EBITDA considered capital-structure neutral, while P/E is not?Why is Equity Value/EBITDA never a valid multiple? Use the claimholder-matching logic to explain, not just 'it's not done.'Why do you normalize a peer's EBITDA for one-time items before computing its multiple? Give two specific examples of items you'd adjust for.Trading Comps vs Precedent Transactions, ExplainedDefine control premium and write the formula. Against which share price should it be measured, and why?Valuation Multiples by Sector, ExplainedExplain why an LBO ability-to-pay analysis typically forms the floor of a football field. What two constraints cap the sponsor's price?