Leveraged Recapitalization Model?

Last summer I worked at a small boutique bank that worked primarily with small private companies (the lower end of middle market). Interestingly enough, the MD (one of two MDs at the entire office) said that they have primarily been using leveraged recapitalization models as opposed to DCF model or other valuation practices (precedent transaction/comparable comps) to determine the value of the companies they worked with.

They said that the primary reason for this is that clients understand it much better, and it's much simpler and more transparent compared to the DCF. They also cited common pitfalls of the DCF (unpredictability of cash flows, sensitivity in choosing the discount rate, etc).

I suppose it makes sense, but I really could not find any information on leveraged recapitalization models in use for valuation... could anyone offer more insight? I will be having interviews soon and I am sure they will ask about this.

12 Comments
 
CHItizen

You sure he didn't say lbo model?

same thing
"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper
 

I see what you mean. For clarity's sake, just gonna note that LBO implies change in control; leveraged recap does not.

For OP: if you look around for LBO concepts, advantages, and disadvantages, I think you should find better answers already posted than I could sum up quickly. Ultimately, an lbo model will tell you "how much can I pay" vs. a DCF, which will tell you the theoretical valuation of an asset.

 
Best Response

It depends on how it is structured. If the new equity buys out the existing shareholder as a secondary, then nothing happens to the fully diluted ownership of the rest of the holders. Then, if they issue debt and use those proceeds to buy back some more of the existing equity, ownership of the other shareholders increases, all else being equal (makes sense, since you have lower shares outstanding, so each investor's % ownership increases).

But, if you're doing an equity raise, then doing a debt raise, and then doing a buyback later on, it gets slightly more complicated. Here is a very simplified example.

Assume I have 100 shares in a company, investor A owns 80%, Investor B owns 20%. I do a follow-on, and bring in Investor C, to whom I sell 25 shares, so he owns 20% of the pro forma company.

25 investor C shares / 100 shares outstanding pre offering + 25 shares from follow on

At this point, Investor A owns 64% of the pro forma company, and investor B owns 16% (20% dilution).

Investor A: 80 / 125 pro forma shares outstanding = 64% Investor B: 20 / 125 pro forma shares outstanding = 16%

If I issue debt and use that cash to buy back some of Investor B, position, the fully diluted ownership of the rest of the shareholders should increase. Let's say I buy back 10 shares from investor B.

Investor B: 10 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 9%

Investor A: 80 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 70% Investor C: 25 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 21%

This is a very simplified example, but hopefully it's helpful in how to think through the math.

 
CaliBankerSFIt depends on how it is structured. If the new equity buys out the existing shareholder as a secondary, then nothing happens to the fully diluted ownership of the rest of the holders. Then, if they issue debt and use those proceeds to buy back some more of the existing equity, ownership of the other shareholders increases, all else being equal (makes sense, since you have lower shares outstanding, so each investor's % ownership increases).

But, if you're doing an equity raise, then doing a debt raise, and then doing a buyback later on, it gets slightly more complicated. Here is a very simplified example.

Assume I have 100 shares in a company, investor A owns 80%, Investor B owns 20%. I do a follow-on, and bring in Investor C, to whom I sell 25 shares, so he owns 20% of the pro forma company.

25 investor C shares / 100 shares outstanding pre offering + 25 shares from follow on

At this point, Investor A owns 64% of the pro forma company, and investor B owns 16% (20% dilution).

Investor A: 80 / 125 pro forma shares outstanding = 64% Investor B: 20 / 125 pro forma shares outstanding = 16%

If I issue debt and use that cash to buy back some of Investor B, position, the fully diluted ownership of the rest of the shareholders should increase. Let's say I buy back 10 shares from investor B.

Investor B: 10 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 9%

Investor A: 80 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 70% Investor C: 25 / 115 pro forma shares outstanding = 21%

This is a very simplified example, but hopefully it's helpful in how to think through the math.

What do you mean by, "25 investor C shares / 100 shares outstanding pre offering + 25 shares from follow on"? Thanks.

 

Ullam repudiandae dolore dolores vel quae doloribus ratione. Reiciendis voluptatem inventore aliquid in. Dolores quis ipsa enim aut. Accusamus et rerum ut repudiandae rerum. Est voluptate dolorem iusto ipsum excepturi odio sequi doloremque.

Exercitationem laudantium eius ratione sit. Numquam animi et et consequatur cupiditate corrupti. Id fugiat dolores ullam ut. Impedit dolorem vel omnis distinctio. Voluptatem unde natus aliquid. Iure tempora quidem laboriosam delectus.

Omnis porro veritatis quibusdam. Est mollitia qui sit ratione sed aut itaque. Expedita exercitationem magnam cumque sit. Fugiat distinctio id aut adipisci. Ut quo tempore iste.

Voluptate voluptatem qui veritatis ipsa doloremque. Molestias repellat ducimus aut necessitatibus aut veniam.

"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”