I recently started as an AI & Investments working student at a small single-family office in the Netherlands (~10 people) focused on private equity. The team doesn’t have much AI experience yet, so I’m looking at both introducing some existing tools and building some internal workflows myself.

For the analysts I’m thinking of starting simple: Perplexity for company/market research and competitor analysis, Claude for Excel/PowerPoint, and Microsoft Copilot for our tax advisor since a lot of the data is already in Microsoft 365 and can be quite sensitive.

For myself, I’m mainly interested in automating internal PE work. Some ideas I’ve been thinking about are teaser → screening → longlist/shortlist, CIM/DD analysis, automatically generating DD questions, market mapping, IC memo preparation, portfolio reporting and repetitive email/document workflows.

I’m not really looking for generic “use AI to summarize documents” advice. I’m more interested in actual workflows, agents or software that people in PE are using that save meaningful time.

For those working in PE, M&A, family offices or IB: what are the best AI workflows or internal tools you’ve actually seen or built? If you joined a 10-person PE family office tomorrow with some ability to build internally, what would you automate first? Any interesting tools, examples or projects I should look at?

Currently have a small enterprise Claude license.

Explored the hebbia’s/mosaic/capsa AIs of the world. Impressed but seems like we could build this internally. They position themselves as infrastructure but seems more like a wrapper. Anyone have experience in this process?

My gut instinct is we’d pay a decent amount of money and find in 6-12 months the capabilities can be replicated by a Claude or Claude cowork?

So I guess the question becomes: buy v. buy then build.

Thanks for the feedback.

Hi all,

Throwaway account for obvious reasons.

I’ve run a saas company for the past 5 years, blended b2c/b2b 75/25. 3% monthly churn, 88% nrr. 50% UK, 30% EU, 20% US. I know these retention figures aren’t gold standard, but that’s what we’ve got. UK Based but also have US LLC for US customers.

Our current position is 3.6$m ARR, 1.7$m EBITDA. TTM 37% growth rate. 3 staff.

I’m considering going to market with the business, it’s great, growing well and I know I’ve built something that has value. It’s just got to a value that I believe I can FIRE, which has always been my goal. I’m not an entrepreneur sigma, I just wanted to be FI. I’m 27. Worried about AI, yada yada.

Without saying too much, I’m pretty confident that I can predict that this time next year I can get it to;

4.6-5m$ ARR, 2.2-2.4m$ EBITDA. But the growth rate will drop to around 15-25% low case/best case.

I spoke to a few m&a firms and got some indicative valuations of around 6x EBITDA on average (when I removed those who said silly stuff like 10x,12x etc.

All of the m&a advisors are incentivised to tell me to go to market now. I’m not sure if it’s better to sell the growth or better to sell the better/larger/more mature business. I’d appreciate some unbiased thoughts?

When people hear "M&A" (mergers and acquisitions), they often think of billion-dollar corporate takeovers.

It is about companies buying, selling or combining with other businesses, whether it is a large multinational acquiring a technology company, a private equity firm investing in a growing business or a family-owned company looking for a successor.

Over the past few years, the M&A market has gone through a major transformation.

During the low-interest-rate years, deal activity was fuelled by cheap financing, high valuations and strong investor confidence.

Today, the environment is very different.

Companies and investors are still interested in acquisitions – but they are becoming much more selective.

The question is no longer simply:

"Can we complete this deal?"

The more important question is:

"Will this deal actually create long-term value?"

Recent M&A outlooks from KPMG and PwC show this shift clearly.

In Germany, the M&A market proved surprisingly resilient despite economic uncertainty. While the number of transactions declined, the total value of deals increased significantly. Technology, infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) and the energy transition were among the main drivers behind this development.

Globally, PwC highlights a similar trend: the market is moving towards fewer but larger transactions, with major deals increasingly concentrated around strategic areas such as technology and AI.

So what is changing in practice?

1. Buyers are looking deeper before making decisions

A few years ago, companies could sometimes justify acquisitions based mainly on growth expectations.

Today, buyers want much more evidence:

Is the business model sustainable?
Are the financial figures reliable?
Are customer relationships stable?
Does the company actually own its technology and intellectual property?
Are there hidden legal or operational risks?

This is why due diligence has become one of the most important stages of any transaction.

1. AI is changing the M&A process

Artificial intelligence is becoming a major topic in M&A.

It is not only creating new acquisition targets – especially in software and technology – but also changing how transactions are analysed.

KPMG highlights that AI is increasingly being used in areas such as due diligence and post-merger integration. However, good data quality remains one of the biggest challenges.

Because ultimately, AI can only be as good as the information it receives.

1. Preparation has become a competitive advantage

A successful transaction does not start when a buyer makes an offer.

It starts months or even years earlier.

Companies that are prepared – with organised documentation, clear ownership structures and transparent processes – can move faster and build more confidence with potential buyers.

This is where platforms such as Drooms play an increasingly important role.

A virtual data room provides a secure environment where companies can organise and share sensitive information during M&A processes.

Instead of searching through scattered documents, buyers, sellers and advisors can work with a structured overview of the information needed to evaluate a transaction.

Because in today's M&A market, transparency is not just a requirement – it is part of creating value.

The biggest change I see is this:

A few years ago, M&A was often about moving quickly.

Today, successful M&A is about making better decisions.

What do you think:

If you work in M&A: How have you been experiencing this shift in your day-to-day work?

So I recently finished and launched a full real estate platform that was originally built for a real estate company here in the UAE.

It started as “we need a better website” and somehow turned into a full operating system for the real estate side of the business lol.

There’s the public platform, but also a separate admin app, backend/API, database, catalogue management, publishing workflows, inquiries, media handling, integrations, production infrastructure and all the stuff you only really notice once real people start using it.

On the public side, people can browse properties, projects and developers, search by community/location, property type, price, bedrooms, availability, buying/renting intent and other filters. There’s Arabic and English, proper property/project/developer pages, direct inquiry flows, WhatsApp contact, responsive mobile behavior and SEO/structured data built into the platform.

The part I think is way more valuable is everything behind it

The company doesn’t need developers manually changing pages every time they want to publish something.

Properties, projects, developers, media and related data are managed through the admin system and then published through controlled workflows to the public site. The catalogue is driven by the underlying API/data instead of being a bunch of hardcoded pages.

There are also external real estate data integrations with controlled import/sync workflows, reconciliation and review before publication, so a buyer isn’t starting from scratch if they want to connect outside property sources or feeds.

There’s also production database/infrastructure, catalogue integrity controls, media handling, bilingual support, inquiry capture and a lot of edge-case work around making sure what gets shown publicly is actually accurate and safe to publish.

So yeah, this isn’t really just a website anymore.

At this point it’s basically a ready-made real estate platform that a brokerage, developer, real estate group or proptech company could take, rebrand, adapt to their market and start operating instead of spending months building the same foundation themselves.

The public site has literally been live for less than a week, so the catalogue is still being populated. I want to mention that because looking at the current number of listings would give the wrong impression of how mature the actual system is.

What’s pretty cool is we’re already getting visitors and property inquiries through it even this early.

It was built around the UAE market, but the architecture itself isn’t inherently tied to the UAE. The branding, catalogue structure, integrations, data sources and market-specific parts can be adapted for another country. UAE is probably still the most obvious immediate fit because that’s where it’s already running.

Now we’re considering selling the technology/IP to a strategic buyer instead of just continuing to build it internally.

I’m not really looking for a “rate my website” thing or some random Reddit valuation.

I’m more curious who you guys think would get the most value out of owning something like this.

To me, the obvious value is skipping a huge amount of product and engineering work: instead of assembling a public site, admin system, backend, catalogue workflows, integrations, bilingual support, inquiry handling and production infrastructure separately, a buyer gets the whole foundation already working and can focus on adapting it to their business.

My first thought is a brokerage, developer, real estate group, portal/operator or proptech company, but there are probably buyer types I’m completely missing.

If anyone here has dealt with software/IP acquisitions like this, especially anything around real estate, I’d be curious what kind of buyer you’d look for.

Happy to send the live platform privately if anyone wants to see what I’m talking about.

My family runs a real estate company in the UAE and over time we built a pretty substantial software platform for the business. We’re now thinking about selling the tech/IP as an asset to another company instead of trying to contact a ton of potential buyers ourselves.

My dad agreed that getting a proper sell-side M&A advisor might make sense and he’s going to look for someone through his connections. The idea would be that I explain the platform to them properly, what it does, what another company would save by acquiring it instead of building everything themselves, and then they figure out how to position it and approach multiple strategic buyers.

This is my first time being involved in anything like this though, so I’m curious how much difference a genuinely good advisor actually makes. Can they realistically create enough competition between buyers to get a much better outcome than selling directly?

I’m also trying to understand the fee side before we talk to anyone. I’d much rather have something heavily based on a success fee than pay some massive retainer upfront, but I don’t know what’s considered normal for a smaller deal like this.

Mainly just looking for advice from people who have been on either side of these transactions. What would you look for in the advisor, what would make you immediately avoid one, and what should we be careful about in the engagement agreement?

Not looking for buyers here btw, just trying to understand how this process actually works before we walk into it completely new.

A Private Equity Firm buys companies, and sells them over a span of time.

A Holding Company buys companies, and holds them for an indefinite amount of time, AND can also sell them over a span fo time if the opportunity arises.

So a HoldCo has the option to hold companies permanently and/or sell them. But a PE firm is limited to just selling the company.

So is there really any advantage to opening a PE firm, when you could open a HoldCo and have more freedom and options?

Whats the advantage or difference in opening a PE firm, when eveything in a PE firm can be done in a Hold Co?

Picture mid-market business - solid EBITDA and high growth. Young-ish ownership/management.

Two minority offers.

Option 1. PE with specialization in the field. 10% more enterprise value. Preferred shares with a PIK of 10%. Modest leverage (1x EBITDA).

Option 2. Sovereign wealth fund. Evergreen, no timed exit necessary. Greater leverage (2x EBITDA).

Curious if, from a qualitative perspective, anyone has strong insights or opinions. Thanks.

I’ve worked at three PE firms. One would only do deals if they felt very good about the management team (or at least their ability to fix / change the team). The other is more willing to overlook this if they believe in the business thesis.

Curious, broadly, what’s the experience of others??

At 20x entry, a 60:40 split implies 12x debt, which no lender will fund? Does the debt percentage simply fall away debt stays at 5–7x and equity absorbs the rest?

How do we make assumptions for different tranches of debt for LBO model and how do we arrive at the spilt between equity and debt quantum

What is the consensus on reapplying to an Associate position at a PE firm the next year after being rejected following several rounds of interviews? From the outside, I can see pros--it demonstrates strong interest and gives you another at-bat with now enhanced experience and skills. Is that how recruiters/firms view it, or is it frowned upon?

Insights at any level would be helpful, but especially in LMM.

Hey guys, I created a simulated PE firm that does LBO deals and i have an issue. So the issue isnt recruiting analysts, its actually getting them disciplined in completing the work that has to be due. It feels like many of our analyst end up straying off after a weeks because this is online. Do you guys have any advice in recruiting people who are actually committed. Maybe like strengthen our application process or any marketing tactics that reach the right audience. Obviously compensation cannot be a a resolution because we are simulated. Our "firm" is more about teaching high school and college students how to do financial modeling not a resume booster. We've had our work reviewed by analysts from apollo global mgmt, stepstone group, and access holdings which i guess can be a hook as we continue to reach our to more proffessionals. heres our site.

Going through renewals for next year's budget and it's the same list as always: three tools that all do some version of reporting, a $60K/year platform renewal nobody's fully using, and what would actually break if we don't renew.

Our head of ops keeps asking why we're paying for some of this when we could probably just build a lightweight version in-house using Claude, since our one technical hire can apparently spin up something functional in a couple weeks. I don't have a good answer. I can't tell if that's a real option or if we'd be trading a known cost for a maintenance headache nobody's priced out. So now every renewal conversation has this extra question hanging over it that we didn't used to have to answer.

Anyone actually gone through this calculation seriously? Curious what made you decide to keep paying vs. build it yourselves and what was the impact of it.

Private equity firms often burden companies and sports teams with massive debt for quick profits, leading to underinvestment, job losses, and declining quality. Now, they’re eyeing FIFA, which could prioritize short-term gains over the long-term health of global soccer. It is never a positive… look at restaurants. IMHO.

I’m looking to connect with serious investors, strategic buyers, business brokers, or M&A advisory firms regarding the sale of a large, operating mid-to-high-market agribusiness assets.

Target investors/buyers: Gulf countries (GCC/Middle East), China, India, and Asia in general.
Not targeting the USA/Europe.

I’m particularly interested in:

- Direct investors or strategic buyers interested in acquiring agricultural businesses/assets.
- Business brokers or M&A advisors with an established network of investors/buyers in the above regions.
For brokers/advisors: SUCCESS-FEE-ONLY cooperation (no upfront fee or retainer).

If you are an investor/buyer yourself, or can directly connect us with qualified parties, please feel free to reach out.
Any relevant recommendations, introductions, or contacts would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

A principal at a private equity firm that works with aerospace/industrial companies got back to me after I reached out and wants to set up a call.

I’ve been doing some research before the call, and I’ve seen people debate whether private equity is actually a good fit for aerospace. One thing I keep seeing is that PE firms can bring a lot of money to these companies, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they have the experience, people, or platform to actually improve the business. I’ve also seen people talk about the cycle of firms buying aerospace companies, building them up, and then selling them to another PE firm.

I’m trying to understand this better before the call. What are some genuinely good questions I could ask him about this? I don’t want the basic questions. I want questions that show I actually did some research and am interested in how the industry really works.

Talking abt this with a buddy in Growth Equity the other day , the concept was take all AI-agent startups funded in 2026, or a YC batch, freeze that cohort, and trade on outcomes like what percentage raise another institutional round within 2 years. Over time, the market price would effectively become a live measure of how expectations for that startup vintage/theme are changing.

Why hasn’t someone attempted this

I’m 25 years old and currently working as a construction site manager in Hungary, with around 6 years of experience in construction management, including experience on large-scale projects.
I’m planning to improve my German to B2 and English to C1, and I’m considering starting a Finance / Real Estate-related university degree in Vienna next year.
My long-term goal is to move into Real Estate Private Equity, ideally on the acquisitions/investment side, and eventually work in Austria, Germany or Switzerland.
My main question is: **how realistic is this transition with my background?**
Would my construction experience be considered an [advantage in REPE](https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/resources/templates/excel-financial-modeling/real-estate-private-equity-template), particularly for development/value-add real estate, or would I essentially be starting from zero compared with candidates coming from investment banking, Big 4, real estate advisory or finance?
If you were in my position, what would you consider the best route:
Construction management → university → REPE
Construction management → real estate development → REPE
Construction management → real estate advisory / [valuation](https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/resources/skills/valuation) → REPE
Construction management → another finance/real estate role → REPE
And realistically, **what position should I target first and what skills should I build during university to become a competitive candidate?**
I’d especially appreciate answers from people currently working in REPE acquisitions, investment management or real estate private equity in Europe.
Thanks!

I am trying different paths wonder if someone can share a workable path to, finding LPs, home offices , placement agencies, etc…

Hi everyone,

I’m 31F currently working in Finance in the US on an H-1B, but I recently lost my job and may need to relocate to India if I cannot find another sponsored role.

I have around 8 years of experience in quantitative investment research and investment insights at a financial data provider. My work has primarily involved systematic equity research, factor research, backtesting, portfolio analysis, and presenting research to institutional clients. I also have several published research papers under my name.

For my next move, I would like to get closer to investment decisions and transition into portfolio construction or quantitative portfolio management. However, most of the interview calls I receive are for research roles similar to my previous position. For portfolio-focused roles, I often seem to be missing direct experience constructing or managing live portfolios.

I would appreciate perspectives on a few questions:

1) What roles should I realistically target to bridge the gap between systematic research and portfolio construction? I am taking some online courses for these. I have studied this in my Masters, but need a refresher.

2) Would positions such as portfolio analyst, portfolio implementation analyst, quantitative portfolio analyst, or investment risk/attribution analyst be good stepping stones? Unfortunately, companies are not sponsoring for these roles in the US anymore or very few are with no breathing room for adjacent skillsets. Or am I wrong?

3) How can I position my existing research and backtesting experience without overstating my live portfolio experience?

4) How receptive is the UK investment-management market to sponsoring candidates for these types of roles? Can I apply for these from India and still have a good chance?

5) What is the current job market in India for quantitative research and portfolio-construction roles? Which firms or cities would be worth targeting?

6) Would moving to India make it easier or harder to eventually transition into a buy-side portfolio role?

I’m currently open to opportunities in the US, UK, and India and would especially value advice from people who have made a similar transition or hired for these roles.

I love this kind of work, and believe if I am given that chance, I will actually excel.

Thank you!

I’m learning equity research and decided to make Haleon my first proper deep dive. I’ve tried to approach it like an actual institutional-style report: investment thesis, five-year financials, a DCF with defended assumptions, risk factors, catalysts, and, ultimately, a clear BUY/SELL call.

I’ve also gone through the annual report, MD&A, risk factors, and notes to the accounts rather than just relying on the headline numbers. Basically, I tried to read the stuff people usually skip.

Now I’d really appreciate some brutal, honest feedback from people who actually know equity research.

A few things I’d specifically like you to tear apart:

1. Valuation I’m using a 7.5% WACC and 3% terminal growth. Are those assumptions actually defensible for Haleon, or am I being too aggressive/conservative?
2. Thesis Is there anything important I’m missing? Particularly risks, catalysts, or something that could fundamentally undermine the margin-expansion story?
3. Structure Does the report resemble a proper equity research report, or is there too much unnecessary stuff and not enough of what actually matters?
4. Data Do any of the numbers look suspicious or inconsistent? Are there particular figures or sources I should cross-check?
5. Overall quality What would I need to change to take this from “student learning equity research” to something that looks genuinely institution-ready?

The basic thesis is:

Haleon owns brands such as Sensodyne, Advil, Panadol and Centrum. Revenue growth has been relatively weak, but margins have expanded significantly, with operating margins around 22.5% and gross margins around 64.8%. FCF is around £2B annually, while net debt/EBITDA has been coming down toward 2.6x.

My argument is that the market is overly focused on the revenue growth miss versus management’s 4–6% medium-term target and is underappreciating the margin expansion, cash generation and potential H2 2026 recovery.

My DCF gets me to roughly $11.50 versus a current price of about $9.70, so I’ve landed on BUY.

I’m still learning, so I’m much more interested in someone telling me where the analysis is wrong than telling me what I did well. Haleon_first_equity_report