Exit Caps

How are you guys underwriting exit caps for assets that are trading 50-100bps higher today than ~2 years ago. For example, I am underwriting a single story MOB at 6.50% when last year comps were around 5.50%-6%. I would get crushed if I assume a 5.50% exit on the basis rates are going to "normalize". The deal still yields an acceptable LIRR at a 6.50% but idk I feel completely lost right now. Rather be conservative than get a deal approved on a poor/aggressive exit assumption. Am I being stupid here or what?

8 Comments
 

When you say you'd get crushed do you mean your superiors would be pissed if you underwrote a 5.50% at exit? There's literature out there that discusses what happens to treasuries and credit spreads after peaks during rate hike cycles or other recessionary periods - they always normalize. It always feels aggressive to underwrite a tighter cap at exit than at acquisition, but this feels like one of those times you could do it. That being said, what I'd probably do is UW the same going in and exit caps, and then sensitize for tighter exits, and support it with the literature/data. At the end of the day you want your deal to make sense from a cash flow perspective and not just capital appreciation. 

Side note, a 6.5% LIRR on an MOB deal is acceptable, and that's with assuming no exit cap compression? Is this thing like NNN leased to a billionaire doctor for 15 years? 

 

Crushed meaning exactly how you defined it above. Lower exit cap, than stabilized. I put a few exit cap sensitivities together and showed the future upside if rates "normalized". I hear you on the cash flow part. We typically model 4 year holds with a sale at stabilization so little interim income to judge. We never look at 10 year cash flows...

And apologies, the LIRR is ~15% - I meant acceptable LIRR on a 6.5% exit!

 
Most Helpful

Playing devil's advocate a bit here, but not underwriting compression just because no one ever has is lazy.

The 5 year treasury forward curve has rates stabilizing at 3.40% which is 60 bps inside of where it is today ~4.00%. Why would an investor's risk premium remain 60 bps wide when other capital will compressing spreads over the treasury? Over the last cycle, when we had a "normal" yield curve, and rates were near 0, it made sense to always underwrite cap rate expansion, because rates can only go up (i guess technically not if you are the ECB). Not only that, but forward curves historically have a tendency to be conservative. You shouldn't not do something just because it hasn't been the status quo for eleven years - and again, there's plenty of literature to support the idea that spreads will meaningfully come in. I'm not saying it's going to happen, but I'm just providing a fresh perspective :) 

 

Right cause the forward curve has NEVER been wrong (hint - it's almost always wrong by a material margin, and being conservative from a historical perspective is looking at it as a whole and not during downturns as a standalone which is more relevant today).

I'm not saying don't underwrite any compression, but 100bps is fucking insanity and a violation of any quality firm's risk parameters. You're asking to get screwed.

 

Because everyone's risk premium today already incorporates the fact that the yield curve is going down in the future. Everyone is looking at the same curves to come to their conclusion on where they need to get their deal's yield to in the next 3-4 years to make sense and using that to back into what cap rate they can pay today. 

Also as noted above, those things have never been right (go look at the curve you used in a model 2 years ago), so you don't want your deals returns to hinge on betting that yields/cap rates are coming down. 

 

Aut quidem architecto accusantium in. Et velit nulla et architecto consequatur molestiae. In ut dolorem exercitationem facilis corrupti cumque. Odit deleniti quas voluptate unde alias.

Est maxime impedit sit rerum fuga et. Explicabo omnis autem officiis dolor. Voluptas ad ipsa veritatis error.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.3%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (44) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (78) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (72) $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
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
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...”