7 Comments
 

Yeah. I've worked with buyers who do the following when presented with synergies:

  1. Assume 50% of the presented cost synergies will actually be realized
  2. Completely ignore any revenue synergies

It's fair take. I saw a BCG report once that said less than 1/3rd of all M&A transactions actually add value.

 

Smh I don't get it. Can someone maybe just briefly elaborate on why the multiple should be smaller if synergies are taken into consideration? Common sense would be that this is sth that lets me justify a higer purchase price.

 
Most Helpful

Sure - you're creating make believe value in the denominator that would have never been earned... because synergies can only happen in the future.

This equation now looks like this:

(Today's Enterprise Value Based on Not Having Synergies Between the Two Companies) / (Combined EBITDA of Yesterday or Last 12 Months With Having Synergies)

Your numerator is unaffected and your denominator theoretically increased. In reality, if those synergies had been recognized throughout the year... the EV would be greater. In other words, if your combined LTM EBITDA was $20 and with synergies it was $22... your EV could be $100 without synergies and with synergies (built into the full year) it could be something like $112. Which gives you a valuation 5.0x vs 5.09x.

tl;dr: you're not making an apples to apples comparison when you compare (EV) to (LTM EBITDA and synergies).

You would need to do: (EV with 12 months of magical synergies built in) to (LTM EBITDA and synergies).

Note: I've never heard of a proposed M&A deal being valued using EV / LTM EBITDA & synergies. I'm just a lowly liberal arts college student, though so don't take my word for it.

 

Omnis aliquid rem voluptatem repudiandae odio. Odit officiis repudiandae omnis. Et sapiente facilis quo dolorem dignissimos dignissimos accusamus. Ut omnis aut tempora. Dolores ducimus at nihil praesentium.

Ea autem explicabo occaecati aut veritatis quam excepturi. Maiores in est eveniet quasi recusandae voluptates aut. Rerum necessitatibus delectus fuga eum placeat ut et.

Rerum debitis impedit quae asperiores. Autem dignissimos est officiis culpa unde. Et explicabo aut rem et architecto debitis consequatur id. Labore voluptates qui qui ullam harum.

Dicta quidem minus nostrum alias architecto illum. Ut fugit sunt molestiae quo est. Similique a ea eligendi temporibus officia. Quia non saepe impedit quasi.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.7%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (15) $434
  • Associates (46) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (80) $150
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (73) $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
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
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...”