Does anyone know why MATLAB's IRR function gives a different answer from Excel's IRR? This is the cash flow I am interested in computing the internal rate of return for:
-$0 initial investment -the following investments over the following 46 years: [-$1,959.68, -$2,176.69, -$2,572.15, -$3,332.49, -$4,071.79, -$4,005.07, -$4,426.26, -$4,853.17, -$5,078.16, -$5,259.00, -$5,719.65, -$5,778.16, -$5,778.78, -$6,709.74, -$6,406.67, -$6,061.45, -$6,162.63, -$7,278.67, -$8,162.80, -$8,043.16, -$7,873.71, -$8,514.61, -$8,895.17, -$8,871.94, -$10,229.43, -$9,468.29, -$10,131.22, -$9,839.06, -$9,430.92, -$10,078.02, -$10,711.78, -$10,997.18, -$11,463.98, -$11,059.54, -$10,232.35, -$11,112.26, -$11,150.95, -$10,579.02, -$10,990.76, -$11,256.92, -$11,982.57, -$10,209.69, -$10,858.31, -$11,420.19, -$11,180.92, -$9,809.15] -the following payouts after the above investments: [$20,038.39, $20,163.46, $20,289.30, $20,415.93, $20,418.00, $20,420.07, $20,422.14, $20,424.21, $20,426.28, $20,424.21, $20,422.14, $20,420.07, $20,418.00, $20,415.93, $20,357.94, $14,448.15]
so amalgamating the above vector gives us
vec=[0.00, -1959.68, -2176.69, -2572.15, -3332.49, -4071.79, -4005.07, -4426.26, -4853.17, -5078.16, -5259.00, -5719.65, -5778.16, -5778.78, -6709.74, -6406.67, -6061.45, -6162.63, -7278.67, -8162.80, -8043.16, -7873.71, -8514.61, -8895.17, -8871.94, -10229.43, -9468.29, -10131.22, -9839.06, -9430.92, -10078.02, -10711.78, -10997.18, -11463.98, -11059.54, -10232.35, -11112.26, -11150.95, -10579.02, -10990.76, -11256.92, -11982.57, -10209.69, -10858.31, -11420.19, -11180.92, -9809.15, 20038.39, 20163.46, 20289.30, 20415.93, 20418.00, 20420.07, 20422.14, 20424.21, 20426.28, 20424.21, 20422.14, 20420.07, 20418.00, 20415.93, 20357.94, 14448.15];
and then computing the irr:
ans =
The answer is an infinte ROR! Plugging this into Excel and using their IRR function, however, gives an IRR of -0.58%.
Why is there this discrepancy? I'd imagine MATLAB is numerically solving the equating the discounted sum of initial investment plus discounted cash flows to zero, but maybe it's not properly searching for the zero of the associated function to compute the IRR.
Is this the case and if so, is there a way to rectify this?
3 Comments
jean claude (view profile)
Direct link to this comment
https://in.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/361055-internal-rate-of-return#comment_492486
superkevin2009 (view profile)
Direct link to this comment
https://in.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/361055-internal-rate-of-return#comment_492489
jean claude (view profile)
Direct link to this comment
https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/361055-internal-rate-of-return#comment_492495
Sign in to comment.