How to set NWC target in M&A for negative NWC business

I am working on a sell-side auction of a private healthcare company, and the target has negative NWC consistently over the last few years. With further business expansion, NWC becomes even more negative as deferred revenue increases.

In your experience, how would both sides typically negotiate the NWC target in such situations? Understood that this is typical for consumer business like those in retail, media, publishing and etc. Thanks very much in advance.

2 Comments
 
Best Response

Have seen it a few ways:

  1. Set it at the trailing average (3 month/6 month/12 month) as your normally would. As long as the calculation methodology remains consistent and the buyer knows what he's getting, a negative peg is fine. If they have been expanding rapidly lately, it might be better to set the peg at the 3 month or 6 month average rather than 12. That being said, if the target is declining due to big increases in deferred revenue, that may get removed from adjusted NWC anyway. If I'm a buyer, I'm going to argue that deferred revenue represents cash that the seller received for services that I have to perform and therefore, that cash should be left in the business.

  2. Set the peg at $0 and have the seller leave as much cash as necessary with the business to get to $0. For example, if NWC on the closing date comes to negative $1M and the purchase price is $100M, the "true" purchase price will be $99M in order to get NWC to $0. I've seen this a few times recently and I think a lot of people prefer it because it's easy and clean and you don't have to try to figure out what a reasonable peg should be. Obviously this doesn't seem as attractive from the seller's standpoint, but it's a negotiation point and the original purchase price in the LOI may have to be altered to come to a common ground.

 

Repellat ut quas occaecati ipsam accusantium. Qui sint nulla et dolor. Quibusdam aut ex debitis tempore nemo maxime nulla. Nesciunt dicta unde deserunt cupiditate deleniti est impedit.

Alias aut quisquam vel quia sint. Veritatis ea explicabo ab. Reprehenderit alias sed vitae libero harum. Enim architecto molestiae aspernatur et dolores. Et quas et voluptatum est corrupti odit et.

Ut delectus autem non illo quis tempore porro molestias. Qui corrupti laudantium voluptatem iusto corrupti et mollitia magnam. Qui dolorem eveniet quos ut. Veniam aut accusantium eligendi et repellat.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • Guggenheim Partners No 97.2%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.3%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.2%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.2%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (46) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (23) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (14) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (81) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
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...”