Structures precedent transaction analysis with deal multiples, premium calculation, and transaction characteristic comparison. Use when analyzing M&A precedents, calculating transaction multiples, or benchmarking deal terms.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add CaseMark/skills --skill analyzing-comparable-transactions --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Analyzing Comparable Transactions?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/casemark-analyzing-comparable-transactions)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: analyzing-comparable-transactions
language: en
description: Structures precedent transaction analysis with deal multiples, premium calculation, and transaction characteristic comparison. Use when analyzing M&A precedents, calculating transaction multiples, or benchmarking deal terms.
tags:
- analysis
- investment-banking
metadata:
author: casemark
practice_areas:
- Investment Banking
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Corporate Finance
document_types:
- Analysis Report
skill_modes:
- Analysis
---
# Analyzing Comparable Transactions
## When To Use
- Building a precedent transactions analysis for a sell-side or buy-side pitch book
- Benchmarking a proposed offer price or premium against historical M&A deals
- Supporting a fairness opinion with transaction-based valuation evidence
- Evaluating deal structure trends (cash vs. stock, earnouts, termination fees) across a sector
- Providing a board or special committee with market context on comparable deal terms
## Inputs To Gather
- **Target description**: Industry, sub-sector, size (revenue, EBITDA, assets), geographic focus, and business model
- **Transaction universe parameters**: Date range (typically 5–10 years), sector/SIC/NAICS codes, minimum deal size threshold, geographic scope
- **Deal data per transaction**: Announcement and close dates, acquirer identity, transaction type (merger, asset purchase, tender offer, take-private), total enterprise value (TEV), equity value, consideration mix (cash/stock/mixed), premium to unaffected price (1-day, 30-day VWAP)
- **Financial metrics for targets**: LTM and NTM revenue, EBITDA, EBIT, net income, total assets, book value — sourced at announcement date
- **Deal-specific qualitative factors**: Strategic vs. financial buyer, competitive auction vs. negotiated sale, hostile vs. friendly, regulatory hurdles, break-up fee as % of TEV
- **Source priority**: SEC filings (merger proxies, 14D-9, S-4), Capital IQ, Bloomberg, Refinitiv, PitchBook; note if any metric is derived rather than disclosed [VERIFY]
## Workflow
1. **Define the screening criteria** — Set sector, size, date range, deal type, and geography filters. Start broad, then narrow. Document every filter applied and the rationale for inclusion/exclusion thresholds.
2. **Build the transaction universe** — Pull all deals matching the screen. Record acquirer, target, announcement date, close date, TEV, equity value, and consideration type. Exclude withdrawn/terminated deals unless specifically relevant to the analysis narrative.
3. **Normalize financial metrics** — For each target, collect LTM and NTM revenue, EBITDA, and EBIT as of the announcement date (not close date). Adjust for non-recurring items, stock-based compensation, or restructuring charges only where disclosed and material. Flag any calendarization assumptions [VERIFY].
4. **Calculate deal multiples** — Compute TEV/Revenue, TEV/EBITDA, TEV/EBIT, and P/E for each transaction. If EBITDA is negative or unavailable, exclude that deal from EBITDA-based metrics rather than imputing. Present mean, median, 25th and 75th percentiles for each multiple.
5. **Calculate premiums** — Compute premium to unaffected share price at 1-day, 1-week, and 30-day prior to announcement (or first leak date if pre-announcement run-up occurred). Use VWAP where possible. Note whether price was affected by rumors or sector moves [VERIFY].
6. **Segment and annotate** — Group transactions by meaningful sub-categories: strategic vs. financial buyer, deal size tier, pre- vs. post-regulatory-change periods, auction vs. negotiated. Identify outliers and provide deal-specific context (e.g., distressed sale, competitive bidding, synergy-driven premium).
7. **Derive valuation range** — Apply selected multiples (typically median and interquartile range) to the subject company's financials to produce an implied valuation range. Cross-reference premium analysis against the subject's current trading price.
8. **Contextualize and caveat** — Note market conditions at the time of each precedent (credit environment, sector cycle, index levels). Acknowledge survivorship bias, data gaps, and any transactions where reported multiples may reflect non-public adjustments.
## Output
- **Transaction summary table**: One row per deal — target, acquirer, date, TEV, equity value, consideration type, TEV/Revenue, TEV/EBITDA, TEV/EBIT, premium (1-day, 30-day)
- **Statistical summary**: Mean, median, 25th/75th percentiles for each multiple and premium metric, with and without identified outliers
- **Segmented analysis**: Sub-tables or charts breaking out multiples by buyer type, deal size, time period, or other relevant dimension
- **Implied valuation range**: Table mapping selected multiples to subject company metrics, showing low/mid/high implied TEV and equity value
- **Narrative commentary**: 1–2 paragraphs summarizing key takeaways — where the subject deal sits relative to precedents, what drives the range, and which comparables are most analogous
## Quality Checks
- Every transaction multiple ties back to disclosed or clearly sourced financials — no orphaned numbers
- TEV calculation is consistent across all deals (same treatment of minority interest, preferred, debt, cash) [VERIFY]
- Premium calculations use the correct unaffected date; verify no pre-announcement price distortion
- Mean vs. median divergence is explained if greater than 15–20%
- At least 5–8 transactions in the universe; if fewer, disclose the thin dataset limitation prominently
- NTM estimates use consensus as of the announcement date, not current consensus [VERIFY]
- All excluded transactions are listed with exclusion rationale
- Output distinguishes between LTM and NTM multiples — never mix without labeling
- Implied valuation range is presented on both a TEV and per-share basis where applicable
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!