Returns what a series of future payments, or a future lump sum, is worth now.
PV answers the question at the heart of finance: money later is worth less than money now, so how much less? Given a rate, a number of periods and a payment, it discounts everything back to today and tells you what the whole arrangement is worth at this moment.
The practical uses are comparing options that pay out differently. A supplier offering £500 a month for ten years and one offering £45,000 up front are not obviously comparable until you discount the first back — PV is how you find out which is actually better at your cost of capital.
It shares PMT's two conventions exactly. The result is negative because paying in is an outflow, and the rate must describe the same period as nper: monthly payments need the annual rate divided by twelve and the years multiplied by it. Getting that wrong gives an answer that looks reasonable and is out by an order of magnitude.
=PV(rate, nper, pmt, [fv], [type])ratenperpmtfvtypeHeaders in row 1, data in A2:E5. Rates are annual.
| A | B | C | D | E | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Plan | Deposit | Annual rate | Years | Target |
| 2 | Reserve fund | 500 | 0.045 | 10 | 75000 |
| 3 | Equipment pot | 250 | 0.032 | 5 | 16000 |
| 4 | Expansion | 1200 | 0.061 | 8 | 150000 |
=PV(C2/12, D2*12, -B2)Result: 48158.44
What ten years of £500 monthly deposits is worth today at 4.5%. The deposit is entered negative so the present value comes back positive.
=PV(C2, D2, 0, -E2)Result: 48283.51
Valuing the £75,000 target alone, with no payments — a single future amount discounted back ten years.
=PV(C3/12, D3*12, -B3)Result: 13836.61
The smaller plan. Note the rate and term are both converted to months to match each other.
=PV(C2/12, D2*12, -B2) > 45000Result: TRUE
The comparison that makes PV useful: the payment stream beats a £45,000 lump sum today.
Reading about a formula is not the same as writing one. Open this function's exercise and type it into a real grid — you get instant feedback on exactly which cell is wrong and why.
Why it happens: Excel's cash-flow convention. If pmt is positive (money coming in), PV is negative (what you would pay for it).
How to fix it: Enter the payment as a negative number, or negate the whole function. Do not do both.
Why it happens: The annual rate was used with a monthly term or vice versa.
How to fix it: rate and nper must describe the same period. This is the single most common error across the whole finance family.
Why it happens: An argument is text — often a rate typed with a % sign into a text cell.
How to fix it: Rates must be numeric. 4.5% is 0.045, or 4.5% in a percentage-formatted cell.
Why it happens: The arguments describe something impossible, such as a negative nper.
How to fix it: Check the term is a positive number of periods.
PV assumes a constant payment every period. NPV takes a range of individually specified cash flows, which can differ from period to period. Use PV for regular instalments and NPV for a project with varying yearly returns.
The cash-flow convention: inflows and outflows carry opposite signs. If you enter the payment as a positive number, PV returns a negative one to show it is the amount you would pay to receive that stream. Enter the payment negative to get a positive present value.
Pass 0 for pmt and put the amount in fv: =PV(rate, nper, 0, -amount). With no periodic payment, the whole calculation is discounting that one figure back to today.
Longer reads where this function does real work in a real sheet.