Evaluates exit scenarios including IPO, M&A, secondary sale, and recapitalization with timing and return analysis. Use when planning exits, comparing exit routes, or modeling exit outcomes for portfolio companies.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add CaseMark/skills --skill preparing-venture-exit-analyses --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Preparing Venture Exit Analyses?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/casemark-preparing-venture-exit-analyses)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: preparing-venture-exit-analyses
language: en
description: Evaluates exit scenarios including IPO, M&A, secondary sale, and recapitalization with timing and return analysis. Use when planning exits, comparing exit routes, or modeling exit outcomes for portfolio companies.
tags:
- preparation
- venture-capital
- portfolio
metadata:
author: casemark
practice_areas:
- Venture Capital
- Seed/Series Investing
- Startup Ecosystems
document_types:
- Preparation Document
skill_modes:
- Preparation
---
# Preparing Venture Exit Analyses
Evaluates exit scenarios — IPO, strategic M&A, secondary sale, and recapitalization — with timing, return multiples, and stakeholder impact analysis for venture-backed portfolio companies.
## When To Use
- Fund is approaching end-of-life and GP must evaluate liquidity paths for remaining portfolio
- Portfolio company hits inflection point (revenue milestone, market shift, inbound acquisition interest)
- LP requests updated exit outlook or MOIC/IRR projections for specific holdings
- Comparing strategic sale vs. IPO readiness vs. continuation fund or secondary transaction
- Board-level discussion on exit timing and route selection
## Inputs To Gather
- **Cap table**: Current ownership breakdown including all preferred series, common, options/warrants, SAFEs, and convertible notes with conversion terms
- **Liquidation preferences**: Participating vs. non-participating, caps, seniority/pari passu stacking order
- **Financial data**: Trailing 12-month revenue, EBITDA/burn, growth rate, gross margin, net retention (for SaaS)
- **Comparable transactions**: Recent M&A deals and IPO valuations in the company's sector and stage
- **Fund parameters**: Fund vintage, remaining term, carry structure, GP commitment, current MOIC/IRR across the fund
- **Company-specific factors**: IP portfolio, key customer concentration, regulatory exposure, management team retention risk
- **Market conditions**: Current IPO window status, sector M&A appetite, interest rate environment, public comp multiples
## Workflow
1. **Build the waterfall model**
- Map the full cap table with all preference stacks and conversion triggers
- Model liquidation waterfall at multiple exit valuations (e.g., 0.5x, 1x, 2x, 4x, 8x current post-money)
- Calculate per-share proceeds for each stakeholder class at each valuation tier
- Identify conversion break-even points where preferred holders benefit from converting to common
2. **Model each exit scenario**
- **IPO**: Estimate offering price range using public comps, apply typical IPO discount (15-25%), model lock-up period impact, underwriter fees (6-7%), and secondary offering timeline. Assess S-1 readiness (audited financials, SOX compliance, board composition) [VERIFY: current IPO window and SEC processing times]
- **Strategic M&A**: Identify likely acquirer categories (strategic vs. financial), model purchase price using relevant multiples (EV/Revenue, EV/EBITDA), account for earnout structures, escrow holdbacks (typically 10-15%), and rep & warranty insurance. Factor in deal timeline (3-6 months typical)
- **Secondary sale**: Model GP-led secondary, LP-led secondary, or direct secondary at current fair market value with typical discounts (5-20% depending on liquidity and information access). Consider continuation fund structure if applicable
- **Recapitalization**: Model dividend recap or structured recap scenarios, assess debt capacity, and calculate impact on remaining equity upside
3. **Calculate return metrics for each scenario**
- Gross and net MOIC for the fund's position in each exit path
- Gross and net IRR (time-weighted, accounting for entry date and projected exit date)
- DPI contribution to overall fund returns
- Sensitivity analysis: show returns across a valuation range (+/- 30% from base case)
4. **Assess timing and execution risk**
- Rank scenarios by probability-weighted expected return
- Map execution requirements and timeline for each path (e.g., IPO = 6-12 months prep, M&A = 3-6 months)
- Identify key risks: market window, management alignment, regulatory approvals, buyer financing contingencies
- Flag drag-along / tag-along rights or consent thresholds that affect execution [VERIFY: governing documents and shareholder agreement provisions]
5. **Prepare the comparative analysis**
- Side-by-side comparison table: exit route, valuation range, net proceeds to fund, MOIC, IRR, timeline, probability, key risks
- Recommendation with supporting rationale tied to fund lifecycle and LP expectations
- Sensitivity matrix showing how returns change with valuation and timing shifts
## Output
The exit analysis document should contain:
- **Executive summary**: Recommended exit path with headline return metrics and timeline
- **Cap table and waterfall**: Visual waterfall showing proceeds distribution at target valuation for each scenario
- **Scenario detail sheets**: One section per exit route with valuation methodology, return calculations, execution steps, and risk factors
- **Comparative matrix**: Side-by-side table with all scenarios ranked by probability-weighted return
- **Sensitivity analysis**: Grid showing MOIC/IRR across valuation and timing assumptions
- **Action items**: Concrete next steps to advance the recommended exit path (e.g., engage banker, begin S-1 drafting, solicit IOIs)
## Quality Checks
- Waterfall math reconciles — total proceeds distributed equals total exit value minus fees/expenses at every tier
- Liquidation preferences are correctly stacked and participation caps are properly modeled
- IRR calculations use actual investment dates, not approximations
- Comparable transactions are recent (within 18 months), relevant by sector/stage, and sourced from verifiable databases [VERIFY: comp data currency]
- All tax implications flagged but not computed (QSBS eligibility, long-term vs. short-term gains, state-level considerations noted for specialist review) [VERIFY: current QSBS thresholds and holding period requirements]
- Anti-dilution provisions and option pool impacts are reflected in share counts
- Management carve-out or retention bonus assumptions are stated explicitly if included in M&A scenarios
- Document clearly labels base case vs. upside vs. downside assumptions throughout
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!