Planning Exit Timing And Strategy

---
name: planning-exit-timing-and-strategy
language: en
description: Evaluates exit alternatives (strategic sale, IPO, secondary, continuation) with market conditions, buyer universe, and return optimization. Use when planning exits, evaluating exit timing, or comparing exit routes.
tags:
  - planning
  - private-equity
metadata:
  author: casemark
  practice_areas:
    - Private Equity
    - Leveraged Buyouts
    - Growth Equity
  document_types:
    - Plan Document
  skill_modes:
    - Planning
---
# Planning Exit Timing And Strategy

Evaluates exit alternatives (strategic sale, IPO, secondary, continuation) against current market conditions, buyer/investor appetite, and fund return requirements to recommend optimal exit timing and route.

## When To Use

- Fund is approaching target hold period and the investment committee needs a formal exit readiness assessment
- A portfolio company has hit operational milestones (revenue threshold, margin target, platform build-out) that trigger exit planning
- Market conditions shift materially (M&A multiples expand, IPO window opens/closes, credit markets tighten)
- GP receives inbound interest (strategic inquiry, secondary buyer approach) and needs a structured response framework
- LP advisory committee requests an exit timeline update or the fund is nearing end-of-life

## Inputs To Gather

- **Investment thesis recap**: original entry multiple, underwriting case, value-creation plan status
- **Current financials**: trailing and projected EBITDA/revenue, net debt, capex requirements, working capital trends
- **Fund-level context**: vintage year, fund life remaining (including extension options), cost basis, accrued preferred return, GP carry waterfall position
- **Comparable transaction data**: recent precedent transactions in the sector, public comp trading multiples, relevant IPO pricings
- **Buyer universe mapping**: identified strategic acquirers, financial sponsors with sector focus, known secondary/continuation fund buyers
- **Market conditions snapshot**: credit availability (leverage multiples, spreads), M&A volume trends, IPO backlog, sector-specific demand drivers
- **Company-specific readiness**: management depth, audit quality, carve-out complexity, regulatory approvals needed [VERIFY jurisdiction-specific regulatory requirements]

## Workflow

1. **Assess current return profile** — Calculate gross and net MOIC and IRR at current fair market value. Model returns at a range of exit multiples (e.g., 8x–12x EBITDA) and dates (next 6, 12, 18, 24 months). Identify the multiple and timing needed to hit fund return targets (e.g., 2.5x gross MOIC, 20%+ net IRR).

2. **Evaluate each exit route**:
   - **Strategic sale**: Size the buyer universe (tier by strategic fit, ability to pay, and regulatory risk). Estimate achievable premium over financial buyer pricing. Assess whether a bilateral negotiation or broad auction maximizes value.
   - **Sponsor-to-sponsor sale**: Identify PE firms with active sector mandates and dry powder. Model leverage assumptions at current credit market terms. Evaluate whether continuation fund or GP-led secondary is more efficient.
   - **IPO/direct listing**: Assess public market receptivity (sector comps trading multiples, recent IPO performance). Evaluate company readiness (financial reporting, board composition, S-1/F-1 preparation timeline). Factor in lockup period drag on realized IRR.
   - **Continuation/hold**: Model incremental value creation from additional hold (bolt-on M&A pipeline, margin expansion, organic growth). Quantify GP carry implications of extending hold period. Address LP liquidity preferences.
   - **Dividend recapitalization**: Assess leverage capacity for a recap. Calculate DPI improvement and impact on residual equity IRR. Evaluate lender appetite and covenant headroom.

3. **Score and rank alternatives** — Build a decision matrix weighting: achievable valuation, execution certainty, time to close, tax efficiency [VERIFY applicable tax structures — Section 1202, blocker corp considerations, state-level differences], management alignment, and LP preference.

4. **Develop timing recommendation** — Map each exit route against market windows. Identify triggers that would accelerate or delay execution (e.g., "if trailing EBITDA exceeds $50M by Q3, initiate dual-track process"). Flag dependencies such as audited financials, regulatory pre-clearance, or management incentive plan restructuring.

5. **Draft exit roadmap** — Sequence preparatory workstreams: vendor due diligence, management presentation, data room build-out, advisor selection (investment bank, legal counsel), and board/LP communication plan.

## Output

The deliverable is a structured exit planning memo containing:

- **Executive summary**: Recommended exit route, target timing window, and expected return range
- **Return sensitivity table**: MOIC/IRR matrix across exit multiples and timing scenarios
- **Exit route comparison**: Pros, cons, execution risk, and estimated net proceeds for each alternative
- **Buyer universe overview**: Tiered list of likely acquirers or investors with rationale
- **Market conditions assessment**: Key macro and sector indicators supporting or cautioning against near-term exit
- **Preparatory action plan**: Sequenced workstream timeline with owners and milestones
- **Risk register**: Key risks to exit execution (regulatory, market, operational) with mitigation steps

## Quality Checks

- Return calculations tie back to audited or management-confirmed financials — no stale or placeholder numbers
- Comparable transaction multiples are sourced and dated; exclude outliers without explanation
- Buyer universe reflects current market participants, not recycled lists from entry diligence
- Tax and structural assumptions are flagged with [VERIFY] where jurisdiction-dependent
- Fund-level math (carry waterfall, DPI, TVPI) is consistent with LPA terms
- Timing recommendations account for realistic execution timelines (e.g., 4–6 months for a sell-side process, 6–9 months for an IPO)
- Dual-track optionality is addressed where appropriate rather than defaulting to a single path