Scénářová analýza
Bull · Base · Bear Scenarios · Probability Weighting
Instead of a single estimate of the future, multiple variants are modeled (typically optimistic, base, and pessimistic) — showing a range of possible outcomes rather than one falsely precise number.
What it is
Scenario analysis replaces a single "precise" estimate (which is always wrong, you just don't know by how much) with a range of variants that differ in key assumptions — typically growth rate, margins, and discount rate.
Three-scenario model (bull/base/bear):
- →Bull — optimistic variant: stronger growth, higher margins, lower risk
- →Base — most probable variant, the anchor of the estimate
- →Bear — pessimistic variant: weaker growth, margin pressure, higher risk
Each scenario is often assigned a probability (e.g. 25% / 60% / 15%) and a probability-weighted value is calculated — the weighted average across scenarios.
Why track it
The spread between bull and bear shows the asymmetry of risk and opportunity — is the distance to the bear scenario smaller than to the bull (limited downside, large upside), or the reverse? This is directly actionable for decision-making, unlike a single point estimate.
Scenario analysis also forces explicit articulation of the assumptions behind each variant — making it easier to check later whether reality is developing closer to bull, base, or bear.
Real-world example
Microsoft DCF: base scenario (WACC 9%, FCF margin 33–36%) gives $376/share, bull ($610, +60%), bear ($168, −56%). The probability-weighted value at 25/60/15% is $403 — a modest upside against the market price of $382, with strong bear protection in the base scenario.
Watch out for
Scenarios are no more reliable than the individual estimates they are built on — if the "bear" scenario is actually mildly optimistic, the entire range is misleading. Differences between scenarios should lie primarily in the development trajectory (years 2–10), not in the immediate starting point, which should be anchored in current data across all scenarios equally.