A company with a corporate real estate asset of great strategic relevance sought to monetize the asset without losing its operational use, structuring the transaction through a Sale & Lease-Back: sale of the property, remaining as a tenant through periodic rent and, in the end, different alternatives (extension, repurchase through residual value or return of the asset).

The challenge was not to “put a price”, but to understand what was really being bought: not only a property, but a financial package of future flows conditioned by the contract (rents) and by the final option (residual value). To this end, we identified the three pillars that explain the economics of the Sale & Lease-Back: intrinsic value of the asset free of encumbrances, purchase price under contract and agreed rent (which should be linked to the contract price, not to the “theoretical” free value).

In addition, the contract incorporated key market sensitivities, especially inflation, which determined the evolution of rents under specific rules. This made the operation an ideal case for applying a market risk (inflation) and liquidity risk (discount for speed of sale) approach, avoiding simplifications that often distort the value in assets with complex contractual structures.

Our methodology started from a powerful idea: to value the asset as a financial instrument, that is, to discount future rents and add the residual value at maturity. This approach, aligned with common practices in financial valuations of assets with a contract, made it possible to translate the contract into a robust model of flows and risk.

To realistically estimate future rents, we modeled inflation by simulating scenarios (Monte Carlo), generating multiple trajectories and applying the contractual rules (including limits that affect payment in certain sections). With this, martinsdelima provided traceability, consistency and stress capacity: not a single “pretty” number, but a framework that explains why the value is what it is.

Finally, we constructed a discount rate consistent with the nature of the risk: a market reference linked to the issuer, adjusted for duration and complemented with a liquidity spread dependent on the reasonable time of sale of the asset. In parallel, we estimated the residual value at the end of the contract with a long-term real estate logic (rent in perpetuity with growth and discount), later integrating it into the present value. The result was a defensible, actionable and decision-quality-oriented valuation, giving the company a solid value range and a clear roadmap to negotiate and manage the operation with excellence.