IRR showed #NUM!

I am trying to use IRR function for my string of cash flows for 10 years:
Year | Cash Flows
2009 | -272,895,028,812
2010 | -207,524,139,910
2011 | -185,716,940,803
2012 | -9,306,121,279
2013 | 326,372,394,532
2014 | 245,782,146,138
2015 | 501,268,808,310
2016 | 497,663,783,563
2017 | 493,577,645,807
2018 | 488,974,344,794

The formula I am using is simply:
=IRR("Range of Data")

I am getting the #NUM! error...any assistance please?

Thanks!

bakbuk -

With the years in A2:A11 and the cash flows in B2:B11, in another cell
=IRR(B2:B11) returns 34%.

- Mike Middleton
http://www.DecisionToolworks.com
Decision Analysis Add-ins for Excel



"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I am trying to use IRR function for my string of cash flows for 10 years:
Year | Cash Flows
2009 | -272,895,028,812
2010 | -207,524,139,910
2011 | -185,716,940,803
2012 | -9,306,121,279
2013 | 326,372,394,532
2014 | 245,782,146,138
2015 | 501,268,808,310
2016 | 497,663,783,563
2017 | 493,577,645,807
2018 | 488,974,344,794

The formula I am using is simply:
=IRR("Range of Data")

I am getting the #NUM! error...any assistance please?

Thanks!

It worked? oww...I wonder why mine didn't...
I'll try to troubleshoot then, thanks for the result

"Mike Middleton" wrote:

bakbuk -

With the years in A2:A11 and the cash flows in B2:B11, in another cell
=IRR(B2:B11) returns 34%.

- Mike Middleton
http://www.DecisionToolworks.com
Decision Analysis Add-ins for Excel



"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I am trying to use IRR function for my string of cash flows for 10 years:
Year | Cash Flows
2009 | -272,895,028,812
2010 | -207,524,139,910
2011 | -185,716,940,803
2012 | -9,306,121,279
2013 | 326,372,394,532
2014 | 245,782,146,138
2015 | 501,268,808,310
2016 | 497,663,783,563
2017 | 493,577,645,807
2018 | 488,974,344,794

The formula I am using is simply:
=IRR("Range of Data")

I am getting the #NUM! error...any assistance please?

Thanks!

I still have the problem with this matter. I tried it at my friend's computer
and the result is still the same (#NUM!). I also tried by creating a new
excel file but contain the same value, and it happened again. Both of us use
Office2007, saved and tried the file in .xls and .xlsx format. Is there
something wrong? thanks again.

"bakbuk" wrote:

It worked? oww...I wonder why mine didn't...
I'll try to troubleshoot then, thanks for the result

"Mike Middleton" wrote:

bakbuk -

With the years in A2:A11 and the cash flows in B2:B11, in another cell
=IRR(B2:B11) returns 34%.

- Mike Middleton
http://www.DecisionToolworks.com
Decision Analysis Add-ins for Excel



"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I am trying to use IRR function for my string of cash flows for 10 years:
Year | Cash Flows
2009 | -272,895,028,812
2010 | -207,524,139,910
2011 | -185,716,940,803
2012 | -9,306,121,279
2013 | 326,372,394,532
2014 | 245,782,146,138
2015 | 501,268,808,310
2016 | 497,663,783,563
2017 | 493,577,645,807
2018 | 488,974,344,794

The formula I am using is simply:
=IRR("Range of Data")

I am getting the #NUM! error...any assistance please?

Thanks!

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get 26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I still have the problem with this matter. I tried it at my friend's
computer
and the result is still the same (#NUM!). I also tried by creating a new
excel file but contain the same value, and it happened again. Both of us
use
Office2007, saved and tried the file in .xls and .xlsx format. Is there
something wrong? thanks again.

"bakbuk" wrote:

It worked? oww...I wonder why mine didn't...
I'll try to troubleshoot then, thanks for the result

"Mike Middleton" wrote:

bakbuk -

With the years in A2:A11 and the cash flows in B2:B11, in another cell
=IRR(B2:B11) returns 34%.

- Mike Middleton
http://www.DecisionToolworks.com
Decision Analysis Add-ins for Excel



"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I am trying to use IRR function for my string of cash flows for 10
years:
Year | Cash Flows
2009 | -272,895,028,812
2010 | -207,524,139,910
2011 | -185,716,940,803
2012 | -9,306,121,279
2013 | 326,372,394,532
2014 | 245,782,146,138
2015 | 501,268,808,310
2016 | 497,663,783,563
2017 | 493,577,645,807
2018 | 488,974,344,794

The formula I am using is simply:
=IRR("Range of Data")

I am getting the #NUM! error...any assistance please?

Thanks!

Oh I see...so the problem is that the numbers are big...
I followed your step but divide by 1000...yup, it returned 26.43%. They're
big because they're in IDR currency. This really helped me, thanks a lot!
Now, I have better knowledge to handle big numbers. Phew...case closed then.
Thanks again, really!

Best Regards,

"Niek Otten" wrote:

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get 26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

"bakbuk" wrote in message
...
I still have the problem with this matter. I tried it at my friend's
computer
and the result is still the same (#NUM!). I also tried by creating a new
excel file but contain the same value, and it happened again. Both of us
use
Office2007, saved and tried the file in .xls and .xlsx format. Is there
something wrong? thanks again.

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:37:44 +0100, "Niek Otten" wrote:

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get 26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

Niek,

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which I get
also in Excel 2007).

I thought Excel uses an iterative technique to solve for IRR, finding the
interest rate for which the NPV is zero.

It must have something to do with the way Excel calculates IRR internally, but
....

I set up to solve the IRR iteratively.

I used the OP's original data in B2:B11

E3 will be my "guess" for the IRR.

I then set up these formulas:

E3: 10%
G2: =B2
G3: =B3*(1/(1+$E$3)^ROWS($1:1))

Fill down to G11

G13: =SUM(G2:G11)

I then used Goal Seek to set G13 to 0 by varying E3. And that comes up with
the proper answer. The answer is the same as the IRR answer to 15 decimals.

In other words, implementing what I thought was the IRR technique in a
different way did not result in any error, and returned the correct answer.
--ron

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which

Hi. Here is my guess.
IRR has two limitations. 20 Tries, and a change of .00001

When I use Goal Seek, and a start value of 10%, I get an answer close to
zero of .0005. Goal Seek does not have to be that accurate. Although
not documented in Excel 2007(afaik) I believe Goal Seek is able to
iterate more than 20 times. (I thought it was documented in earlier
versions??)

I used a math program, and the Newton method to arrive at a full
precision value of 0.264282301113724
However, when I plug this into the original equation, I'm left with a
difference from zero of .00006. This is outside IRR's .00001 limit.
Therefore, I believe the #Num error is due to not converging below
..00001 within 20 tries.

What has me puzzled is if I enter this "guess" value into the IRR
equation, I still get a #Num error.
The Derivative of the NPV formulas shows a slope of about -2.4*10^12
near the solution. This is very high.

Therefore, I believe IRR's troubles here is a combination of Excel's
method of calculating a high derivative, a little loss of precision of
the underlying numbers, and a limit of only 20 tries.

= = =
Dana DeLouis




Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:37:44 +0100, "Niek Otten" wrote:

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get 26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

Niek,

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which I get
also in Excel 2007).

I thought Excel uses an iterative technique to solve for IRR, finding the
interest rate for which the NPV is zero.

It must have something to do with the way Excel calculates IRR internally, but
....

I set up to solve the IRR iteratively.

I used the OP's original data in B2:B11

E3 will be my "guess" for the IRR.

I then set up these formulas:

E3: 10%
G2: =B2
G3: =B3*(1/(1+$E$3)^ROWS($1:1))

Fill down to G11

G13: =SUM(G2:G11)

I then used Goal Seek to set G13 to 0 by varying E3. And that comes up with
the proper answer. The answer is the same as the IRR answer to 15 decimals.

In other words, implementing what I thought was the IRR technique in a
different way did not result in any error, and returned the correct answer.
--ron

Thanks, Dana!

--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

"Dana DeLouis" wrote in message
...
Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which

Hi. Here is my guess.
IRR has two limitations. 20 Tries, and a change of .00001

When I use Goal Seek, and a start value of 10%, I get an answer close to
zero of .0005. Goal Seek does not have to be that accurate. Although not
documented in Excel 2007(afaik) I believe Goal Seek is able to iterate
more than 20 times. (I thought it was documented in earlier versions??)

I used a math program, and the Newton method to arrive at a full precision
value of 0.264282301113724
However, when I plug this into the original equation, I'm left with a
difference from zero of .00006. This is outside IRR's .00001 limit.
Therefore, I believe the #Num error is due to not converging below .00001
within 20 tries.

What has me puzzled is if I enter this "guess" value into the IRR
equation, I still get a #Num error.
The Derivative of the NPV formulas shows a slope of about -2.4*10^12 near
the solution. This is very high.

Therefore, I believe IRR's troubles here is a combination of Excel's
method of calculating a high derivative, a little loss of precision of the
underlying numbers, and a limit of only 20 tries.

= = =
Dana DeLouis




Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:37:44 +0100, "Niek Otten"
wrote:

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get
26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

Niek,

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which I
get
also in Excel 2007).

I thought Excel uses an iterative technique to solve for IRR, finding the
interest rate for which the NPV is zero.

It must have something to do with the way Excel calculates IRR
internally, but
....

I set up to solve the IRR iteratively.

I used the OP's original data in B2:B11

E3 will be my "guess" for the IRR.

I then set up these formulas:

E3: 10%
G2: =B2
G3: =B3*(1/(1+$E$3)^ROWS($1:1))

Fill down to G11

G13: =SUM(G2:G11)

I then used Goal Seek to set G13 to 0 by varying E3. And that comes up
with
the proper answer. The answer is the same as the IRR answer to 15
decimals.

In other words, implementing what I thought was the IRR technique in a
different way did not result in any error, and returned the correct
answer.
--ron

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 09:13:07 -0500, Dana DeLouis wrote:

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which

Hi. Here is my guess.
IRR has two limitations. 20 Tries, and a change of .00001

When I use Goal Seek, and a start value of 10%, I get an answer close to
zero of .0005. Goal Seek does not have to be that accurate. Although
not documented in Excel 2007(afaik) I believe Goal Seek is able to
iterate more than 20 times. (I thought it was documented in earlier
versions??)

I used a math program, and the Newton method to arrive at a full
precision value of 0.264282301113724
However, when I plug this into the original equation, I'm left with a
difference from zero of .00006. This is outside IRR's .00001 limit.
Therefore, I believe the #Num error is due to not converging below
.00001 within 20 tries.

What has me puzzled is if I enter this "guess" value into the IRR
equation, I still get a #Num error.
The Derivative of the NPV formulas shows a slope of about -2.4*10^12
near the solution. This is very high.

Therefore, I believe IRR's troubles here is a combination of Excel's
method of calculating a high derivative, a little loss of precision of
the underlying numbers, and a limit of only 20 tries.

= = =
Dana DeLouis



OK, in Excel 2007, when I use Goal Seek, after having set up my worksheet as
below, I get a result of:

26.4282301113724%

If I use the array formula:

=IRR(B2:B11/10)

I obtain the same answer to Excel's 15 digit precision level

They are slightly different, perhaps 5.33E-16

but close enough for gov't work g.
















Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:37:44 +0100, "Niek Otten" wrote:

I get #NUM too.
Your numbers are quite big. If I divide all numbers by 100, I get 26.43%.


--
Kind regards,

Niek Otten
Microsoft MVP - Excel

Niek,

Why do you think these "large" numbers result in the #NUM error (which I get
also in Excel 2007).

I thought Excel uses an iterative technique to solve for IRR, finding the
interest rate for which the NPV is zero.

It must have something to do with the way Excel calculates IRR internally, but
....

I set up to solve the IRR iteratively.

I used the OP's original data in B2:B11

E3 will be my "guess" for the IRR.

I then set up these formulas:

E3: 10%
G2: =B2
G3: =B3*(1/(1+$E$3)^ROWS($1:1))

Fill down to G11

G13: =SUM(G2:G11)

I then used Goal Seek to set G13 to 0 by varying E3. And that comes up with
the proper answer. The answer is the same as the IRR answer to 15 decimals.

In other words, implementing what I thought was the IRR technique in a
different way did not result in any error, and returned the correct answer.
--ron
--ron