{
  "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21",
  "docSlug": "a4e612631d07709f",
  "documentTitle": "A&M Valuation Insights March 2024",
  "authorId": "AlvarezMarsal",
  "authorName": "A&M",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.333,
  "pageNumber": 5,
  "pageCount": 11,
  "prevPage": 4,
  "nextPage": 6,
  "slideType": "comparison_table",
  "function": "compare_peers",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 24,
  "notes": "The chart uses a custom range-bar visualization to compare transaction multiples (red) against trading multiple ranges (blue).",
  "elementsJson": [
    "headline_text",
    "bar_chart_horizontal",
    "bullet_list",
    "footnote"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21/5",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21#slide-5",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "The highest prices were paid in Healthcare and Information Technology, with transaction multiples above the range of trading multiples.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-a675-704b-b9ab-da78a864d179",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.45,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.18
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "Comparison of LTM transaction and LTM trading multiple pricing levels (EV/EBITDA) by industry in Europe (S&P Europe 350)",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bar-horizontal",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "d9d94c70-55db-460d-92f6-18efc4a52870",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.2,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.7
      },
      "kind": "list",
      "text": "We compare Last-Twelve-Month (LTM) EV/EBITDA multiples paid in European M&A transactions with LTM European trading pricing levels (S&P Europe 350). The light blue bar represents the range of trading multiples during the observation period. The highest prices were paid in Healthcare and Information Technology, with transaction multiples above the range of trading multiples. Within Consumer Products prominent brands exhibit notably high trading multiples, exemplified by Hermès (34.1x) and L'Oreal (28.0x). Transaction, in turn, predominantly involve lesser-known brands, such as “The Restaurant Group”, leading to transaction multiples beneath the range of trading multiples. In the Industrials sector, transaction multiple also fall below trading multiples, mostly due to the size of observed transactions.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bullet",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "5b930548-1c70-4d54-b742-1497aee5be4e",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "EV/EBITDA: 23,7x",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-a675-704b-b9ab-df442b134f90",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.9
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "Note: Transaction pricing levels are defined as Last-Twelve-Months (LTM) EV/EBITDA at closing and consist of all closed M&A transactions in Europe with sufficient data availability. Transactions clustered by industry for the January 2023 to December 2023 period. Trading pricing levels are based on LTM EV/EBITDA trading multiples for all S&P Europe 350 firms, clustered by industry. The trading pricing range is comprised of the minimum and maximum value as of December 31, 2022, June 30, 2023, and December 31, 2023. Source: S&P Capital IQ, A&M Analysis.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "1a1c5ef4-8075-4082-b73d-2faa93507c25",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.1,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.05
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Prices paid in European M&A transactions imply premia to trading prices in the healthcare and technology industry",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "af989a44-4552-4a4e-acf7-ff7104cebfa9",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [
    {
      "metricRaw": "EV/EBITDA",
      "numberRaw": "23,7x",
      "numberKind": "multiplier",
      "actionTitle": "Prices paid in European M&A transactions imply premia to trading prices in the healthcare and technology industry",
      "calloutText": "The highest prices were paid in Healthcare and Information Technology, with transaction multiples above the range of trading multiples.",
      "numberScale": null,
      "numberValue": 23.7,
      "metricFamily": "margin_return",
      "numberCurrency": null
    }
  ],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Action Titles",
      "slug": "action-titles",
      "agent": "Architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1055-74e0-a95d-47c08ddb8159",
      "evidence": "Title states M&A premia for Healthcare and Tech",
      "confidence": 90
    },
    {
      "name": "Annotation",
      "slug": "annotation",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1055-74e0-a95d-520305a48b47",
      "evidence": "Each multiple value labelled (6.2x, 7.2x, 23.7x, etc.) and # of transactions on right",
      "confidence": 80
    },
    {
      "name": "Contrast Principle",
      "slug": "contrast-principle",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1055-74e0-a95d-4df54104e54c",
      "evidence": "Strategic red-vs-blue contrast emphasizes premium gap",
      "confidence": 75
    },
    {
      "name": "So What? Test",
      "slug": "so-what-test",
      "agent": "Architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1055-74e0-a95d-56fda68bce87",
      "evidence": "Four-bullet block translates chart into per-industry implications",
      "confidence": 75
    },
    {
      "name": "Von Restorff Effect",
      "slug": "von-restorff-effect",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1055-74e0-a95d-4b4a1ae13bf7",
      "evidence": "Red transaction-multiple boxes pop against blue trading-range bars",
      "confidence": 80
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "Range Bar Comparison (Trading vs Transaction Multiples)",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1ca5-70bb-bba0-f677b0801d2e",
      "evidence": "Light-blue bars show trading-multiple range; red boxes mark transaction multiples",
      "confidence": 60
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 5,
      "from": 4,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e35-c6e9650709e0",
      "arcName": "The Onion",
      "arcSlug": "onion",
      "beatName": "Deeper Layer",
      "beatSlug": "onion-deeper-layer",
      "evidence": "Cross-geography (US vs CDAX) and trading-vs-transaction premia",
      "position": 3,
      "confidence": 70,
      "parentBeatName": "Development",
      "parentBeatSlug": "development"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 5,
      "from": 2,
      "name": "Pattern Hunter",
      "slug": "02-pattern-hunter",
      "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3e-c7e0a75b62fd",
      "evidence": "Sequential charts (MRP, EV recovery, US-vs-CDAX, M&A premia) accumulate evidence about valuation dynamics",
      "position": 1,
      "objective": "Build a market-valuation pattern from four evidence pieces",
      "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion",
      "confidence": 70,
      "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}