Comparable companies, precedent transactions, SDE and EBITDA multiples, WACC and DCF, with small private company adjustments.
Valuation answers three different questions that are often confused. What is it worth? is an estimate of value based on cash flows and risk. What will it sell for? is a market question about what buyers pay. What can I pay? is a financing question about what debt and equity can support and still earn a return. In a small acquisition the third question usually binds first: a lender will not fund beyond the cash flow can carry. Good analysis states all three and explains the gaps. Numbers on this page are illustrative unless a source is named.
See also: modeling fundamentals (DCF mechanics), LBO modeling, M&A basics, the glossary, and the community guides.
Enterprise value (EV) = value of the operating business to all capital providers
Equity value = EV - debt (bank loans, SBA loans, seller notes, capital leases)
- debt-like items (unpaid taxes, deferred revenue obligations, earnout
liabilities, unfunded owner loans)
+ cash not needed to run the business
Purchase price on the term sheet is usually quoted on a "cash-free, debt-free"
basis with a normal level of working capital delivered.Multiples of EBITDA or SDE produce enterprise value. When you compare quotes, confirm whether the price includes working capital, real estate, vehicles, and any cash; deals with the same headline price can differ by 10% once these are counted.
| Measure | Definition | Best used for | Weakness |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | Sales | Businesses with little profit; software and recurring-revenue deals | Ignores margin; two companies with equal sales can have very different profit |
| SDE | Pre-tax profit + one owner's pay and benefits + interest + D&A + one-time and personal costs | Owner-operated businesses sold through brokers | Assumes the buyer replaces the owner; overstates earnings if you must hire a manager |
| EBITDA | Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, after a market-rate manager | Businesses with management; lender and investor analysis | Ignores capex and working capital |
| EBITDA less capex | EBITDA minus maintenance capex | Capital-intensive businesses | Needs a view on maintenance versus growth capex |
| Free cash flow | EBITDA less taxes, capex and working capital investment | DCF and debt capacity | Sensitive to timing assumptions |
BizBuySell's definition of seller's discretionary earnings starts with pre-tax net profit and adds back one owner's compensation, benefits, depreciation and amortization, interest, and personal or one-time costs. EBITDA, by contrast, assumes the business pays a professional manager. Always convert before you compare: if the seller's SDE is $1.16M and a replacement manager costs $160K loaded, EBITDA is $1.0M. A 3.0x multiple of SDE is then 3.5x EBITDA. The lender and your investors will look at EBITDA.
The idea: companies with similar risk and growth trade at similar multiples. Steps:
Hypothetical example (invented companies, $ millions):
| Company | Enterprise value | EBITDA | EV/EBITDA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Company A | 4,200 | 600 | 7.0x |
| Company B | 3,000 | 500 | 6.0x |
| Company C | 9,100 | 1,300 | 7.0x |
| Company D | 2,400 | 400 | 6.0x |
| Company E | 6,500 | 1,000 | 6.5x |
| Median | 6.5x |
Applied to a target with $1.0M of EBITDA that is 6.5x or $6.5M. A small private company is less liquid, usually less diversified and dependent on fewer people, so analysts apply a discount. If you apply an illustrative 30% discount, the value is $4.55M. The size of the discount is judgment; show a range and explain it. For small businesses, public comps are context only: the companies are far larger, so precedent transactions carry more weight.
The idea: what did buyers pay for similar businesses? This is the main method for small companies. Sources and their limits:
Adjust for date (rates and sentiment move), size, growth, margin, customer concentration, and structure: a 5.0x price with a large seller note is not the same as 5.0x all cash. Put each comparable in a table with the source, date and what the price includes.
Covered with a numeric example on modeling fundamentals. The key points for valuation: forecast unlevered free cash flow; pick a discount rate that matches risk; compute a terminal value; discount; subtract debt. Because the terminal value is often most of the answer (62.8% in that example), run a table of discount rate against terminal growth and present the range.
Cost of equity = risk-free rate + beta x equity risk premium + size premium + company-specific premium Cost of debt = the rate the lender quotes (SBA 7(a) caps at Prime + 3.0% above $350K) WACC = E/(D+E) x cost of equity + D/(D+E) x cost of debt x (1 - tax rate) Illustration: cost of equity 18%, pre-tax cost of debt 9.75%, 60% equity / 40% debt, tax 21% (C corporation): 0.6 x 18% + 0.4 x 9.75% x 0.79 = 13.9%.
Aswath Damodaran's free datasets (NYU Stern) provide industry betas, risk premiums and cost-of-capital inputs, updated each January. Treat the size and company-specific premiums as judgment and show how value changes if they move.
Work backward from what a lender will fund. Illustration with invented inputs:
If the seller wants 5.0x, you have a gap of about $0.7M. Options: a seller note (on full standby, it counts toward the injection but not toward debt service), an earnout, more equity, a lower price, or walking away. This arithmetic often explains why prices in a market cluster at a particular multiple.
Professionals show a "football field": a bar for each method showing its range, then a proposed price range. A small deal version, with invented numbers:
| Method | Low | High | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public comparables, discounted 30% to 40% | $3.9M | $4.6M | Context only |
| Precedents, 4.0x to 5.0x EBITDA | $4.0M | $5.0M | Local brokers and lenders |
| DCF, discount rate 13% to 16% | $3.8M | $5.2M | Wide range; shows sensitivity |
| Ability to pay at 1.25x coverage | $4.0M | $4.3M | Binds first |
The overlap, $4.0M to $4.3M, is the defensible range. Offer inside it, with structure (a modest seller note and an earnout on the large customer) to bridge the gap to the ask.
These describe different populations and years, so compare with care; see industry reports for how to read them.
Six hypothetical small-business transactions (invented) in the same industry:
| Deal | EBITDA | Price | Multiple | Cash at close | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $0.8M | $3.0M | 3.8x | 70% | Customer concentration |
| 2 | $1.1M | $4.4M | 4.0x | 85% | Owner stayed 12 months |
| 3 | $1.0M | $4.2M | 4.2x | 90% | Recurring contracts |
| 4 | $1.5M | $6.6M | 4.4x | 80% | Growth 15% |
| 5 | $1.2M | $5.4M | 4.5x | 75% | Seller note 15% |
| 6 | $2.0M | $10.2M | 5.1x | 95% | Larger, management team in place |
Sorted, the multiples are 3.8, 4.0, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 5.1x; the median is 4.3x. A target with $1.0M of EBITDA, recurring contracts and one large customer might be placed between deals 1 and 3: about 4.0x to 4.3x, or $4.0M to $4.3M. The deals with more cash at close and larger size sit at the high end, which is why you adjust for structure and size, not just average.
| EBITDA \ Multiple | 4.0x | 4.5x | 5.0x |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.9M | $3.6M | $4.05M | $4.5M |
| $1.0M | $4.0M | $4.5M | $5.0M |
| $1.1M | $4.4M | $4.95M | $5.5M |
The grid shows why a QoE that cuts EBITDA by 10% matters: at 4.5x it removes $450K of value. Price moves by the multiple times the earnings change.
1. Company and request (two lines) 2. Earnings basis: reported, normalized EBITDA, SDE, with the bridge 3. Approach 1: precedents (table, median, adjustments, range) 4. Approach 2: DCF (assumptions, discount rate range, value range) 5. Approach 3: ability to pay (debt capacity at 1.25x, equity, price) 6. Football field: ranges and the overlap 7. Risks that move value: concentration, owner dependence, quality of earnings 8. Recommendation: offer range, structure (cash, note, earnout), conditions 9. What would change my view 10. Sources: every number linked
Keep it to two pages. Lenders and investors read the first paragraph and the football field.
A broker lists a landscaping company at SDE of $900K and asks $2.7M (3.0x SDE). Invented numbers, to show the steps a buyer takes.
| Step | $ | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| Listed SDE | 900,000 | Includes one owner's pay and benefits |
| Less replacement general manager, loaded | (150,000) | Salary, payroll tax, benefits, vehicle |
| EBITDA before diligence | 750,000 | |
| Less add-backs not supported in diligence | (60,000) | Personal items without receipts |
| Adjusted EBITDA | 690,000 | Basis for the multiple; use one definition and say which |
| Less maintenance capex above depreciation | (40,000) | Fleet is aging |
| EBITDA less excess capex | 650,000 | A cash-flow view for the lender conversation |
The ask of $2.7M is 3.0x SDE, 3.6x the $750,000 EBITDA, 3.9x the $690,000 adjusted EBITDA and 4.2x the $650,000 after excess capex. A buyer who compares to precedents quoted on EBITDA must use the EBITDA basis. The lender will see the supported number too: under SOP 50 10 8.1 the lender must use the QoE earnings in the debt service test for acquisitions of $3M or more; this deal is under that threshold, but a lender will still test the numbers against tax returns.
Modeling Fundamentals · LBO Modeling for Small Deals · M&A Basics and Diligence · Excel Resources · Interview Questions · Career Paths and Recruiting · Internships & Breaking In · Industry Reports · Learning Resources · Resume Review · Salary & Compensation Guides · Designations Guide · Glossary
Longer written answers live in the community guides.