Journal of Business Ethics 44 (4):327 - 341 (2003)

This article questions the continued use and application of EVA® (economic value added) because it is epistemologically a non-sequitur, fails to satisfy the requirements of sound research methodology in terms of being a reliable and valid metric, and is unlikely to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. In the light of these insufficiencies, the continued use of EVA® is ethically questionable, and moreover in time is likely to result in class actions.
Keywords CAPM  cost of capital  empirical failure  EVA®  reliability  rules of evidence  validity  valuations
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1023692518377
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,268
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Irrational Exuberance.Robert J. Shiller - 2005 - Princeton University Press.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
54 ( #195,628 of 2,444,959 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #457,173 of 2,444,959 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes