Overlap band

Stack the valuation ranges from several methods against a common axis and the interesting region is where they intersect. That band is the part of the answer with more than one independent argument behind it, which is why a recommendation is normally drawn from it rather than from the widest or the highest bar.

Reading it requires knowing what each bar measures. A precedent range sitting above the band is not a competing opinion about the business, it is the price of control plus whatever share of the synergies the sellers extracted, so it belongs above by construction. An ability to pay band sitting below is a constraint on one type of buyer rather than a view on value.

The case worth learning is the absence of a band. Bars that do not overlap at all is the most informative thing the exhibit can produce, and each specific gap points somewhere: comparables entirely above a discounted cash flow suggests your growth or margin assumptions sit below what the market is pricing, a discounted cash flow entirely above the precedents suggests heroic terminal assumptions or a market that has derated since those deals, and an ability to pay band above the comparables is telling you about the debt market rather than about the company.

The temptation in that situation is to widen the bars until they touch, which converts a finding into a formatting exercise. The alternative is better and easier to defend: show the gap, name the likely cause, and say what would have to be true for the method you are not following to be right.